APPENDIX 6
Memorandum by the Police Federation
INQUIRY INTO CONTROLS OVER FIREARMS
INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Police Federation of England and
Wales welcomes the decision of the Select Committee to examine
this issue. It is one of great importance both to public safety
and the general perception of it. The confidence of the public
in the controls over the possession and use of Firearms has been
badly shaken by the events and tragedies of recent years; further
instances of failure will undoubtedly call into question the controls
put into place by Parliament and their enforcement by the Police
Service.
1.2 It is our understanding that following
recent legislative changes, there was a very large reduction in
the number of firearms held on certificate. Since then, however,
there has been a marked increase in some areas (a trend that we
anticipate is nationwide) in applications for alternative firearms,
especially those with a militaristic appearance. This reinforces
our belief that it is debatable if those recent enactments have
had any significant impact upon the "gun culture" which
we would contend has been gaining ground since the passing of
the last major item of legislation, namely the Firearms Act 1968.
1.3 Whilst this contention is not easily
evidenced and relies heavily upon anecdote, it is well recognised
by those who deal with the enforcement of firearms legislation
on a permanent basis. It takes many forms, the most common of
which is the desire to own/possess large numbers of weapons, the
desire of some to continually test the boundaries of what will
and will not be accepted by Certification Authorities and the
growth in shooting disciplines, that owe more to the replication
of military tactics and skills than simple target shooting or
the genuine sporting use of firearms, whether they be those to
which Section I applies, or shotguns.
1.4 All of these factors contribute to our
belief that the time is now right for Parliament to address the
entire issue and produce a completely new Firearms Act. Any lesser
step will be insufficient. A mere consolidation of existing legislation
will only be cosmetic for it will not deal with the fundamental
issues of definition which is now necessary. A re-examination
of definitions will permit the full breadth of the legislation
to be considered; fundamental questions could be addressed such
as whether the scope of legislation should be widened so as to
include alternative weapons, for instance, the possession and
use of crossbows. Further whether some of the more extreme weapons
(see Para 2.3) should be prohibited or subjected to greater control.
Whether they should or not is a separate issue but what is clear
is a consistent approach is now necessary. This will be provided
by a totally new Firearm's Act which will replace all the current
plethora of legislation. This multiplicity of Acts, Regulations
and Ruleswhich by our researches now total thirteen in
numbermanages to confuse just as much as it clarifies.
It is for Parliament to address these areas and make its intentions
clear.
1.5 To undertake a task of this magnitude
requires justification based upon current inadequacies and the
benefits to be gained from undertaking it. We set these out below,
dealing with the headings used by the Committee in its press release
supplemented by reference to other areas of concern.
1.6 Whilst aware of the Committee's desire
to hear evidence of the extent of problems caused in both urban
and rural areas by the misuse of shotguns and air weapons, we
must point out that the Police Federation does not maintain records
of such matters. We are obviously all too well aware of the growing
criminal use of firearms, evidenced by the need of Forces to maintain
permanently armed response vehicles. Similarly, we are aware of
the many complaints dealt with by our members relating to what
might be termed the lower grade misuses of firearms. We doubt
these instances are fully recorded as firearms incidents. They
include such matters as poaching, shooting at birdsespecially
with air weaponsand low value instances of criminal damage;
ie all non notifiable offences which are rarely recorded unless
detected.
2. FIREARMS
2.1 To start with the system of certification
that is currently followed in relation to firearms to which Section
I applies. The process defined by Parliament in the Firearms Act
1968 works reasonably well. The difficulties have been created
by subsequent changes which appear to have been driven solely
by financial considerations.
2.2 The principle of these is the extension
of the length of a certificate's validity from three years to
five years. The effect of this change, when combined with an acceptance
of the renewal of certificates by post, has been considerable.
A system in which the renewing authority needs to be satisfied
as to the applicant's fitness to possess weapons, but denies itself
the opportunity to make that judgement can only be described as
fatally flawed. The result has been that the greater consistency
produced by a changeover to the use of dedicated Firearms Inquiry
Officers (whether police officers or civilian support staff) has
been negated by this defective system. It is worth noting that
the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) Committee on the
Administration of Firearms has agreed that ideally all certificates
should only be valid for three years and that renewals should
be conducted by way of personal visits. The Police Federation
which has membership of that committee welcomes and endorses that
decision but has to register its concern that the latter decision
still awaits consideration/ratification by another ACPO Committee
and ultimately by the ACPO Council. It is our understanding that
the further consideration being afforded to this issue is driven
by concerns as to the financial consequences of a reversion to
the renewal of certificates being conducted by personal visits.
2.3 Other areas of concern still exist in
relation to firearms which are subject to the constraints of Section
I. We specifically refer to the growth in weapons which appear
to owe more to a desire to defeat current definitions, specifically
the long barrelled pistol. As a result of the provisions of the
Firearms (Amendment) Act 1997 and the Firearms (Amendment) (No
2) Act 1997 conventional handguns are now prohibited. That legislation,
however, does not affect handguns with a barrel greater than 30
centimetres in length (or 69 centimetres overall length) resulting
in the appearance of weapons which have a revolver action but
a barrel length exceeding 12 inches. Whilst the weight of a weapon
with a barrel up to 18 inches in length is such that the weapon
is often fired from the shoulder. There recent introduction is,
in our opinion, no more than a thinly disguised attempt to subvert
legislative provisions.
Apart from these long barrelled revolver actions,
the Committee should also be aware of the appearance of very short
barrelled carbines, ie weapons fired from the shoulder. Due to
their use of an under-lever mechanism, combined with a large magazinecapable
of holding up to 30 roundsa formidable weapon has been
created in which accuracy is combined with a very fast rate of
fire. It must be emphasised that whilst the Police Federation
deplores their existence, they are perfectly legal being within
the definitions set out in current legislation.
2.4 One long standing concern must be mentioned.
Despite the certification process specifying the quantities of
ammunition that can be purchased or possessed at any one time,
this provision is nowhere near as tight as might be assumed. Laxity
has been brought about because of the legislations failure to
make any reference to the component parts of ammunition. This
results in certificate holders regularly claiming that their apparent
failure to purchase any ammunition since the certificate's last
renewal is not evidence of a lack of use but is brought about
by their reloading their own ammunition. If the primers necessary
for the process were also subject to certification it would be
possible for the actual extent of an applicant's assertions as
to their usage of the weapons being established, ie the "good
reason" necessary for firearms possession would be confirmed.
2.5 One further inconsistency has been subject
of criticism by our members. Parliament has deemed it necessary
to specify a range of offences which are deemed even more serious
if compounded by the carriage of a firearmwhether at the
time the offence was committed or when the offender is arrested
(Firearms Act 1968 Section 17(2) and 1st schedule). These offences
include such diverse areas as theft, blackmail, criminal damage
and offences against the person, but inexplicably make no mention
of the Misuse of Drugs Act. In the light of the ever increasing
recourse to firearms by drug dealers we find this omission hard
to understand.
3. SHOTGUNS
3.1 The definition of a firearm is:
"Any lethal barrelled weapon of any description
from which any shot bullet or other missile can be discharged
and includes:
a) any prohibited weapon whether it is such
a lethal weapon as aforesaid or not" and
b) any component part of such lethal or prohibited
weapon; and
c) any accessory to any such weapon designed
or adapted to diminish the noise or flash caused by firing the
weapon.
|