APPENDIX 25
Memorandum by the National Small-bore
Rifle Association
INQUIRY INTO CONTROLS OVER FIREARMS
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The National Small-bore Rifle Association
(NSRA) is recognised by the Department of Media Culture and Sports,
and the various Sports Councils, as one of the UK national governing
bodies for target shooting. It is responsible for airguns and
firearms chambered for .22 rimfire cartridges whilst the National
Rifle Association (NRA) deals with rifles and pistols of larger
calibres, and the Muzzle Loaders Association of Great Britain
(MLAGB) with muzzle loaded rifles, pistols, and shotguns powered
by black powder.
1.2 Through the Great Britain Target Shooting
Federation the NSRA has links to International Federations and
to the British Olympic and Commonwealth Games Federations. It
has affiliated clubs and associations throughout the United Kingdom
and abroad, some of which therefore operate in regions outside
the jurisdiction of the Firearms Acts. The NSRA operates ranges
and provides competition up to national level. It supports a number
of national squads through which shooters represent Great Britain
at Olympic, World and European events; for example, the current
Junior World 50 metre rifle champion is a member of the British
national squad.
1.3 However, for the purposes of this submission
discussion is confined to England, Scotland and Wales and to those
principal questions in which the Home Affairs Committee have declared
a special interest and for which the NSRA has particular responsibilities.
Evidence will be submitted separately by the British Shooting
Sports Council (BSSC) and others which will provide statements
on the benefits of target shooting across all disciplines and
it is not proposed to take up the time of the Committee by repeating
that material here.
2. AIRGUNS
2.1 The Legitimate use of airguns
2.1.1 Airguns are used for a variety of
legitimate uses. A separate paper by another constituent member
of BSSC will set out the use of airguns in the farming community.
This paper is restricted to their use in target shooting.
2.1.2 Air rifle and Air Pistol events are
included in all international competitions including Commonwealth
and Olympic Games. In the 1998 Commonwealth Games in Malaysia
English shooters won four Gold and two Bronze medals out of the
eight Airgun events. This type of success is only possible through
dedicated training and coaching starting at an early age. Thus
the ability of young people to use airguns is an essential element
of maintaining this country's sporting prowess.
2.1.3 Apart from elite sporting use, airguns
are used for recreation and sports by many youth organisations.
Every Army Cadet Force detachment has two air rifles to encourage
proficiency in marksmanship. In the wider field of youth activities
outside the cadet movement, the NSRA plays an important role with
all the major youth organisations. The Scout Association has recently
reconfirmed its commitment to providing airgun and small-bore
shooting as one of its activities. This followed wide consultation
with Scouts, their leaders and parents. However, as part of the
review, the Scout Association has declared that all instructors
are to achieve NSRA qualifications. The NSRA is providing Instructor
courses for up to 5,000 Scout leaders to assist in the achievement
of this laudable aim; in the last two years approximately 2,500
have already been awarded.
2.1.4 The National Association of Boys Clubs
(NABC) also recognises the proficiency and coaching schemes of
the NSRA and the Association sponsors and runs the annual NABC
championships at our National Indoor Shooting Centre in the Midlands.
The letter, at Annex A, from the National director of the NABC
is a good illustration of the significant benefits that comes
from supervised instruction in the use of airguns. Additionally
the NSRA Youth Proficiency Scheme, sponsored by Sport England
is now run by 677 schools and clubs and is an excellent entry
level for young people to develop marksmanship skills. A copy
of the instructor manual for that course is enclosed from which
it can be seen that safety is of paramount importance to all legitimate
shooters.
2.2 The Misuse of Airguns
2.2.1 A useful summary, which puts the misuse
of airguns into perspective, can be found in the report of the
Adjournment debate in the House of Commons on 23 June 1999. The
Home Office Minister was able to report to the House:
"From 1987 to 1997 ... the incidence of
injury caused by airgun misuse has shown a steady year-on-year
decline. In 1997 there was a significant reduction in the number
of injuries from airgun misuse in comparison with those recorded
in 1987 - from 1,782 to 1,194 in 1997. In addition only 125 of
the incidents in 1997 - less than 11 per cent in total - consisted
of an injury more serious than superficial bruising."[49]
2.2.2 Whilst this trend is welcome, it should
not lead anyone to be complacent. There is, however, no evidence
to suggest that more restrictive controls would, of themselves,
reduce further the misuse of airguns. The current airgun controls
have very severe penalties but have failed to deter those cases
of airgun misuse, which probably make up the majority, and which
can be seen to fall into the following two categories:
Accidents—all too often caused
by unsupervised use of airguns by the very young. Understandably
the sensitivity of such cases makes it difficult for the police
to bring prosecutions.
Hooliganism—the deliberate flouting
of the law often in circumstances where it is very difficult for
the police to apprehend the miscreants and/or by the young against
whom there is very little sanction because of their age.
2.2.3 It follows, therefore, that more restrictive
measures are unlikely to enjoy any greater success. In simple
terms—why replace one unenforceable law with another which
is equally ineffective. In such a case, the only people who will
suffer are the legitimate shooters who are obeying the law in
the first place. This would do nothing to increase public safety
but would bring the law into disrepute.
2.3 Prevention of Abuse
2.3.1 Accidents can, very largely, be overcome
by proper education and training. The former should be aimed at
parents and other adults who supervise, or should be supervising,
the use of airguns either for target shooting or for vermin control,
whilst the latter should be aimed at the shooters. There is general
ignorance of what the law says about the use of airguns. Voluntary
initiatives, such as that taken by the Gun Trade to promulgate
Home Office produced leaflets on the law as it affects airgun
shooting and the dangers of abuse should be encouraged by an adequate
free supply of the documents to all retailers who deal in airguns
or pellets. It should not be forgotten that it is not only Gun
Trade members or Firearms Dealers who sell airguns and pellets.
2.3.2 The NSRA and BASC both run a programme
of training through formal courses, as already indicated. The
NSRA also has mobile display ranges, which feature at local shows
and events so that individuals, and particularly the young, can
experience airgun shooting under supervision and can be introduced
to the safe use of airguns.
2.3.3 If it is accepted that reactive enforcement
of existing law poses particular difficulties for the police it
follows that all organisations concerned with shooting, and this
includes the police, need to adopt a proactive stance. It is suggested
that lessons can be drawn from the way in which other unsociable
and illegal activities are targeted by the police and the relevant
authorities. The general trend appears to be to look at the supply
chain rather than usage. For example, the sale of tobacco, alcohol
and drugs to young people are all subject to scrutiny and action
yet the immediate and direct effect of their misuse tends to be
directed to the young person involved rather than a third party.
The misuse of airguns is different, because in many cases it is
a third party who suffers injury or damage to property, and yet
no checks or controls are applied on the supply of airguns or,
more importantly, ammunition.
2.3.4 Signs in shops and off-licences are
constant reminders of the law in relation to sales to young people
of tobacco and alcohol, either below 16 or 18 as the case may
be, and checks by trading standards officers and the police are
commonplace. They also serve as reminders to sales staff of their
responsibilities. There is little or no evidence to show that
the same is true of retail outlets that deal in airguns and air
pellets which is surprising given the alleged height of public
concern. These outlets range from gun dealers to sports and hardware
shops and, given the complexity and general ignorance of airgun
regulations and legislation, it appears likely that many such
outlets are unwittingly in danger of breaking the law. There is
clearly scope to prevent the potential danger to third parties
and to prevent young people breaking the law through genuine ignorance
by simple low cost measures such as signage and packaging. This
would draw attention to the law, even if it is not possible in
the short term to simplify it, and would also make it easy for
the authorities to monitor compliance. It is a positive step forward
which would probably find favour with all parties.
2.3.5 Given the uncertainty of the numbers
of airguns in circulation and the fact that there has never been,
nor needs to be, a requirement to register such firearms, there
appears little scope for control of the airguns themselves. This
is a view which is supported by ACPO and ACPO(S). Indeed if controls
such as those outlined above are implemented, which would not
need legislation, there would be no need since a firearm without
ammunition is effectively a blunt instrument and presents no more
danger to the public than many common or garden items.
2.4 Conclusions
2.4.1 In the short term increased awareness
of the law can be achieved by low cost measures aimed at the supply
of airguns in general and ammunition in particular. This will
serve not only to educate supervising adults as well as shooters
but will restrict access to airguns by those who are bent on flouting
the law.
2.4.2 No further restrictions are necessary
nor would they prove to be any more effective than those currently
in place.
3. OTHER FIREARMS3.1 The
Effectiveness of the Firearms (Amendment) Acts 1997
3.1.1 Within Great Britain, the 1997 prohibition
on pistols was totally effective in removing those pistols held
legally for target shooting. Although statistics for crimes with
firearms in 1998 are not yet available, it would appear that the
prohibition did nothing to reduce the widespread use in crime
of illegally held pistols. This continues to be a matter of great
concern to the target shooting community but is a matter for the
Home Office and the police.
3.1.2 The Home Secretary has the discretion
to allow prohibited pistols to be used in competition in Great
Britain. During the passage of the Firearms (Amendment) Bills
through Parliament in 1996 and 1997 assurances were given that
this discretion would be invoked, for example to allow the Commonwealth
Games to be held in England in 2002.
3.2 Other Firearms Requiring a Firearms Certificate
3.2.1 For some time it would appear that
the favoured weapons of criminals have been pistols or automatic
machine pistols or sub-machine guns. These are all now in the
prohibited category. In the course of our working relationships
with the police service and the Forensic Science Service we have
not been made aware of abuse of target shooting firearms. Those
firearms used in target shooting are predominantly single shot
and incapable of holding, or being adapted to hold, more than
one round at a time. Being designed specifically to meet international
standards for target shooting they pose no threat to public safety
and furthermore hold no attraction to the criminal fraternity.
There is, therefore, no evidence to suggest that the existing
licensing system for these firearms needs to be made more restrictive.
J D Hoare
Secretary
12 October 1999
Annex A: NABC Policy Statement (30 Apr 97)[50]
Enclosure 1: NSRA Youth Proficiency Scheme Tutors
Manual49
49 Air Guns (Safety) (HC Debate 23.6.99). Back
50
Not printed. Back
| 
