Select Committee on Home Affairs Appendices to the Minutes of Evidence


APPENDIX 26

Memorandum by the Shooting Sports Trust

THE CONTROL OF SHOTGUNS

SUMMARY

  (i)  At the end of 1997 686,294 people in Britain legally owned over 1.5 million shotguns and about 250 million cartridges are used per year. The sport and trade are valued at £653 million per year with a significant proportion of that money supporting a major rural industry.

  (ii)  Proposals to impose further restrictions on shotguns and to substantially reduce numbers will be costly in police time and effort both in administration and enforcement, probably involving a five-fold increase in police workload. The shooting community would also be subjected to substantial extra cost and inconvenience and the net effect on the trade and the sport would be devastating.

  (iii)  Before any such action is recommended, any proposals must be weighed against criteria required by this Government, and commended by the Prime Minister in the Better Regulation Guide.

  (iv)  Controls in firearms have been in place since 1920, but shotguns were excluded until 1967. The large number in circulation was balanced against low levels of misuse and the damage that would be done to the trade and the sport.

  (v)  The first step in controlling shotguns involved a certificate which related to the person. Further much more restrictive measures were introduced in 1988. In neither case did the controls produce a reduction in the use of shotguns in crime, but the 1988 measures did reduce the number of shotgun owners by over 21 per cent in the first renewal cycle. The reduction now amounts to 30 per cent of the peak 1988 figure.

  (vi)  Statistical evidence shows that shotguns are used in homicide more than any other class of firearm, but the numbers are very low and further research shows that the use of legally held shotguns is virtually restricted to domestic crime or those involving jealousy etc. In this class of homicide the outcome of a crime is highly unlikely to be affected by the availability or otherwise of one type of weapon.

  (vii)  In all classes of homicide, the firearms used are almost exclusively held illegally and further restrictions will not affect their availability.

  (viii)  In crimes such as robbery pistols are used much more frequently than shotguns and, prior to the banning of pistols, the number of legally held shotguns exceeded the number of legally held pistols by a factor of more than 15. If availability was the key factor, shotguns should have been used 15 times more frequently than pistols.

  (ix)  Proposals for stricter controls on shotguns do not appear to be supported by hard evidence. If the problem is examined critically and in accordance with principles now promoted by this Government, calls for further restrictions must be rejected.

  (x)  The Shooting Sports Trust is of the view that current firearms legislation is so complex as to be almost beyond comprehension and calls for a detailed, open and properly considered review before any further measures are proposed in any area of firearms control.

Submission

INTRODUCTION

  1.  At its forthcoming hearings, the Parliamentary Home Affairs Committee proposes to consider existing controls on shotguns and proposals to change those controls. The Shooting Sports Trust has conducted research in this field over a number of years and is aware of proposals which have been made to further restrict shotguns and to reduce the numbers in private hands.

  2.  The Shooting Sports Trust firmly believes that, as in any consideration of proposed legislation, the principles adopted by the present Government in its Better Regulations Guide of 1999 should be applied, and suggests that the Committee should adopt that approach in considering this question.

  3.  In particular, it is suggested that mere opinion or speculation should not be admissible and that any proposals which are made to the Committee should:

  (a)  state clearly the goals which the proposed changes are intended to achieve;

  (b)  state clearly how any changes are likely to attain the stated goal; and

  (c)  provide evidence to show that the proposed changes are likely to achieve the goal either on the basis of past experience or of some valid and sustainable indicators of probable effect.

  4.  It is also suggested that the Committee should set its own goals for any changes and should follow the guidance provided by the Prime Minister in Section 1 of the Better Regulation Guide.

HISTORY

  5.  Controls on firearms were introduced in 1920 as a result of the recommendations of an internal committee. The Committee recommended that the ownership of rifles and pistols be subject to a police certificate, but that shotguns should be exempted because, "Cases are rare in which they are used for any criminal or illegal purpose". The Committee provided no evidence of the extent of misuse of shotguns or any comparison with misuse of other firearms.

  6.  The question was considered further by a Departmental Committee in 1936. In relation to ordinary sporting shotguns, the Committee could find no reason to differ from the view of the 1919 Committee. They noted, however, that shotguns were responsible for more suicides and accidents than any other class of firearm. They also noted that they were used more frequently than other classes of firearm in cases of murder, attempted murder and manslaughter, but they were not the favourite weapon of the bandit and burglar. Unfortunately, the statistics provide no comparison with those firearms subject to controls, such as pistols.

  7.  In the three years ended 28 February 1934 police reported that shotguns of the type now subject to a shotgun certificate had been used in 378 suicides, 28 criminal fatalities, 18 cases of criminal use involving serious injury and 20 involving slight injury, 10 cases of criminal intimidation and 18 cases where the criminal was found in possession. They had also been involved in 161 fatal accidents, 111 accidents involving serious injuries and 101 involving slight injuries. These figures are not comparable with modern statistics except, perhaps, the cases resulting in death, but they do provide a measure of shotgun misuse at that time.

  8.  The Committee noted that ". . . the numbers (of shotguns) in daily use by private persons far exceeds those of any other type of firearm, (and) the figures in the table are not surprising and cannot be regarded as excessive". They recommended that shotguns should remain outside the system of controls and the 1937 Act excluded shotguns with barrels exceeding 20 inches in length from certificate control.

  9.  Shotguns remained outside the system of controls until 1967 when the first shotgun certificate was introduced. This licensed the person without seeking to control individual weapons and the legislation was framed so that a chief officer of the police had to grant a certificate unless he had reason to believe that the applicant was prohibited from possessing shotguns (because of convictions for crime etc) or that the person could not be permitted to possess shotguns without danger to public safety or to the peace. To a very limited extent, the burden of proof lay on the chief officer of police, but the burden provided by a requirement to "have reason to believe" is very easily discharged.

  10.  Despite comment from some chief officers of police there is no evidence to show that this provision resulted in certificates being granted to unsuitable persons. Having regard to the pressure later exerted by chief officers of police for greater powers in this regard, it is right to assume that they would have highlighted any cases which supported their claims. Instead, they relied on broad statements of "belief" and on unsupported anecdote, but produced no evidence that the original wording was in any way inadequate.

  11.  Almost immediately following the consolidation of firearms legislation in the 1968 Act, an internal enquiry was set up under the chairmanship of HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary. Though it did take some evidence from outside bodies, the scope for representations by the shooting community was extremely limited. The report was never made public but formed the basis of a Green Paper, The Control of Firearms in Great Britain, which was published in May 1973.

  12.  Included in a large number of proposals to tighten firearms legislation was a proposal that shotguns be subject to the same controls as rifles and pistols. The statistics produced in support of this proposal offered no evidence by which it was possible to apply principles such as those in the Better Regulation Guide to any of the proposals. Statistics spanned only three years, but they showed that shotguns had been involved in 33 murders, 71 attempted murders, 163 woundings and 315 robberies. Pistols, which had been strictly controlled since 1920, were used in 10 murders, 45 attempted murders, two manslaughters, 56 woundings and 534 robberies.

  13.  The 1973 figures cannot be directly compared with the figures produced in 1937, but having regard to population increases and the enormous increase in levels of crime, and particularly violent crime, they are surprisingly similar, with shotguns featuring in homicides more than pistols, but still not the favoured weapon of the "bandit and burglar". Prior to the ban on pistols, the number of shotguns legally held was 15 times greater than the number of pistols. If mere availability was the important factor, the use of shotguns in all classes of crimes would have been not less than 15 times the use of pistols. Statistics produced later in this paper show that mere availability is not the most important factor in the choice of firearm used by criminals.

  14.  The 1973 Green Paper was subject to an enormous level of criticism and could not be defended on any logical grounds. No action was taken at that time to implement its proposals, but, as will be shown, the Home Office kept its "shopping list" of proposals and the police often sought to impose its proposals by administrative rather than legislative means.

  15.  Minor changes both to firearms legislation and the administration of the Acts took place, but it was not until 1988 that changes in the law relating to shotguns occurred. The Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988 was an immediate response to the 1987 Hungerford incident which had involved a self loading rifle and a pistol. Proposed changes were announced by the then Home Secretary within weeks of the incident. There were no consultations about the changes to be made and no attempt to justify them on the sort of logical grounds found in the Better Regulation Guide. There was no mention of shotguns in the proposals originally announced.

  16.  In December 1987, the Government produced a White Paper listing its proposals, once again without logical justification. At this time, proposals relating to shotguns were included. The evidence shows that the change was due entirely to pressure exerted by the police organisations through contacts with the then Labour opposition and by their manipulation of the media.

  17.  The White Paper proposals were included in the 1988 legislation which had a difficult passage through Parliament. The changes imposed on the shotgun certificate system may seem to be less than draconian, but they had an immediate and dramatic effect on the law abiding shooting community. A change in the criteria for granting certificates placed the burden of proof regarding danger to public safety etc, directly on the applicant and allowed the chief officer of police to refuse to grant a certificate if he was satisfied that the applicant did not have a good reason for possessing, purchasing or acquiring a shotgun. This still falls short of the requirement for Section 1 firearms, but it was to be used to the full by chief officers of police.

  18.  The new law elevated to Section 1 category those magazine shotguns capable of holding more than three cartridges in total, provided for secure storage requirements on all shotguns and imposed restrictions on the purchase of ammunition.

  19.  In the 1973 Green Paper it was suggested that the imposition of a "good reason" requirement on shotguns would reduce the number of certificate holders by up to 20 per cent. The 1988 Act took effect on 1 July 1989 when the renewal cycle for certificates was of three years. Shotgun certificate numbers are reported at the end of each calendar year and in the four years which cover the first renewal cycle shotgun certificates in Britain were reduced from 971,102 in 1988 to 761,343 in 1992, a reduction of 21.6 per cent. A significant upward trend in shotgun certificate numbers over the previous six years was suddenly and markedly reversed and the downward trend in certificate numbers has continued and even accelerated. Trends in crime, however, have not followed that downward path.

NUMBERS OF LEGALLY HELD SHOTGUNS

  20.  Records of the numbers of firearm and shotgun certificates in existence were not kept at national level prior to 1968 and for a number of years thereafter were produced only sporadically. The following table shows the figures for Britain and it will be noted that it was some time before the new shotgun certificate system settled down, the apparent rise between 1968 and 1974 probably being attributable to that cause. The rise from 1975 to 1988 is probably attributable, in part, to increased interest in the sport of clay pigeon shooting which occurred worldwide.

NUMBERS OF SHOTGUN AND FIREARM CERTIFICATES

ENGLAND, WALES AND SCOTLAND


Year
Shotgun Certificates
Firearm Certificates

1968
256,061
1969
701,562
1971
793,092
228,921
1974
850,507
224,665
1979
867,149
209,954
1980
866,980
206,799
1981
870,132
203,360
1982
864,802
200,808
1983
867,684
197,718
1984
882,958
198,507
1985
905,531
198,550
1986
928,479
198,562
1987
950,369
197,430
1988
971,102
193,809
1989
952,154
182,903
1990
877,865
175,164
1991
800,085
170,288
1992
761,343
168,182
1993
751,881
169,875
1994
740,441
172,821
1995
722,574
174,020
1996
704,135
173,912
1997
686,294
164,690


  Figures for 1998 are not available at time of writing.

  21.  Home Office figures show that, in 1977 there were 2.2 shotguns per certificate and 2.3 firearms per firearm certificate. The total number of each class of firearm over the years is therefore rather more than double the number of certificates. In 1977, therefore, more than 1.5 million shotguns were legally in circulation together with about 378,000 Section 1 firearms, a ratio of four to one in favour of shotguns.

  22.  The extent to which these legally held shotguns are used can be judged from the fact that some 250 million cartridges are fired each year, a number which is a little lower than that of previous years.

THE USE OF SHOTGUNS IN CRIME

  23.  The nature of the control exercised by the police varies with the type of firearm. Shotguns were not controlled until 1967 and were subject to a low level of control between 1967 and 1988. The 1988 Act contained significant inhibitions to shotgun ownership, though they remain less strictly controlled than pistols were until the end of 1997 when pistols were effectively banned for legal use. To help assess the effect of the more stringent controls imposed in 1988, the following table shows the use of shotguns in homicide and robbery for the following five years. The crime figures are for England and Wales and the numbers of certificates therefore exclude Scotland. There is nothing in the tables to indicate that the 1988 Act had any discernible impact.


Homicides
Robberies
Year
Shotgun certificates
Involving a Shotgun

1988
882,000
19
241
1989
865,100
19
280
1990
802,300
25
280
1991
724,600
25
381
1992
689,200
20
406
1993
681,100
29
437


  24.  Until the ban on pistols came into effect, legally held shotguns outnumbered legally held pistols by a factor of 15 to 1 and the larger number of shotguns were less strictly controlled. If either the number of each class of firearm legitimately in circulation or the extent of the controls imposed was a controlling or causative factor, the use of shotguns should have far exceeded the use of pistols in classes of crime. The following tables show that such was not the case for robbery.

ROBBERIES IN WHICH CERTAIN FIREARMS WERE USED—ENGLAND AND WALES


Year
All firearms
Shotgun
Sawn-off
shotgun
Pistol

1980
1,149
127
181
529
1981
1,893
262
292
1,001
1982
2,560
364
372
1,440
1983
1,957
269
342
1,011
1984
2,098
216
378
1,106
1985
2,539
282
399
1,221
1986
2,651
256
471
1,196
1987
2,831
280
450
1,374
1988
2,688
241
451
1,321
1989
3,390
280
524
1,772
1990
3,939
280
448
2,223
1991
5,296
381
650
2,988
1992
5,827
406
602
3,544
1993
5,918
437
593
3,605
1994
4,104
274
373
2,390
1995
4,206
245
299
2,647
1996
4,013
237
247
2,575
1997
3,029
121
178
1,854


  Figures for 1988 are not yet available.

  25.  It is clear that robbers favoured pistols over shotguns to a very significant degree and neither the much lower numbers in legitimate circulation nor the stricter controls have influenced that choice. A different pattern emerges in respect of homicide.

HOMICIDES IN WHICH CERTAIN FIREARMS WERE USED—ENGLAND AND WALES


Year
All firearms
Shotgun
Sawn-off
shotgun
Pistol

1980
24
11
1
8
1981
34
21
11
1982
46
28
7
9
1983
42
27
5
8
1984
67
34
7
21
1985
45
22
7
8
1986
51
31
6
10
1987
77
33
10
10
1988
36
19
8
7
1989
45
19
7
13
1990
60
25
8
22
1991
55
25
7
19
1992
56
20
5
28
1993
74
29
10
35
1994
66
22
14
25
1995
70
18
10
39
1996
49
9
8
30
1997
59
12
4
39


  26.  In robbery, the pistol is the preferred weapon of the criminal. There has been ample research dating back many years and confirmed many times since, that robbery is rarely a first offence. Criminals tend to graduate towards robbery and almost all will therefore be prohibited persons under the Firearms Act. Their firearms would, therefore, be unlawfully held.

  27.  In homicide the picture changes and the shotgun is still the most common firearm. The rise in the use of pistols in homicide since 1992 may well be associated with the rise in drug and gang related shootings which are being reported in the media and by the police. A discernible change in the pattern of homcides involving firearms is taking place.

KEY STATISTICAL INFORMATION

  28.  Many aspects of the use of firearms in homicide have been subject to speculation, but in 1966 the Home Office produced what is probably the most important piece of statistical information in the form of a brief study of the numbers of homicides in which the firearm used was legally held. There has been a steadfast refusal, until now, to attempt such a study on the ground that the figures were incomplete, but all criminal statistics are, by their nature, incomplete and provided that all available information is presented, statistics such as these, particularly if presented over a period of years, can be highly informative.

  29.  The original Home Office study has been updated and was last published in the Annual Criminal Statistics for 1997. There may be more information in the 1988 figures when they are available. The study covered a period of three years (1992 to 1994) with a total of 151 homicides involving a firearm in which the legal status of the firearm was established. It examined the circumstances of the homicide in accordance with their own categories. There were 45 cases in which the status of the firearm was not known. The table shows the updated 1997 figures.


Firearm used
Circumstances of homicide
Legally held
Not legally held

Organised Crime, drugs related, contract killing etc
none
43
Domestic
14
41
Robbery or gain
1
17
Argument, jealousy, revenge
4
17
Other
4
10

Total
23
128


  30.  It is to be regretted that there is no breakdown of the type of firearms involved and that the two categories of "domestic" (limited to current or former spouse, cohabitant of lover) and "argument, jealousy and revenge" were separated since they usually arise from similar sets of circumstances. We learn from a Parliamentary reply on 22nd December 1997 that only four of the legally held firearms were handguns. It seems likely that a majority of the remaining 19 cases (equal to 6.3 per year) involved shotguns. These were virtually all either domestic or jealousy etc. Only one legally held firearm was used in a robbery and there were four other cases.

  31.  The inference that can properly be drawn is that despite the very large numbers in circulation and their widespread availability, legally held shotguns feature in only six cases of domestic and similar homicides per year. It is very doubtful if any other class of potentially lethal weapon features less frequently in such cases. They do not feature significantly in any other type of homicide.

  32.  Despite the peculiar nature of this class of crime, illegally held firearms dominate even the domestic categories and the removal of the legally held shotguns would have only a very small impact on the statistics. The removal of all legally held shotguns would have no effect on the overall homicide rate. A great deal of research confirms what is called the weapons substitution theory. It is widely accepted that the presence or absence of a particular weapon would have little influence on the outcome of a homicidal attack in a domestic situation and that what matters is the state of mind of the killer. In effect, the absence of a firearm in that class of offence would lead only to the use of another weapon with the same result.

  33.  Further restrictions of legally held shotguns would be costly, time consuming and oppressive. Since 1988 the number of persons allowed to own shotguns legally has been reduced by almost 300,000, but a 30 per cent reduction in the number of certificate holders and the number of guns has not produced any commensurate decrease in the use of shotguns in crime.

  34.  The use of firearms in robbery has been reduced since 1994, reversing massive increase in previous years but the Annual Criminal Statistics attribute this (as do many other sources) to the targeting by police of known armed robbers and there is no pattern of reduction which could be correlated with levels of legal firearms ownership.

COST OF ADDITIONAL CONTROLS

  35.  It is difficult to estimate the actual cost to society of imposing full Section 1 controls on shotguns. The certificate fees allegedly reflect the costs but a firearm certificate costs only 25 per cent more than a shotgun certificate on grant but renewal costs 155 per cent more. The police claim that these costs do not reflect the actual cost to them. To that must be added the creation of a need for a variation of a shotgun certificate each time a shotgun is changed or a new shotgun is acquired. There is no way of estimating the cost of that with the information presently available. Having regard to the very large number of shotguns in circulation, the added burden on the police would probably involve a five-fold increase in purely administrative work.

  36.  In addition to the administrative role, there would be an added burden created by a large number of technical offences concerning the acquisition and use of shotguns including compliance with conditions, use on unauthorised land and so on.

  37.  Shotgun certificate holders would also be burdened with additional fees and with the extra time and effort involved in the licensing procedures and with the irksome procedures necessary to obtain additional or replacement guns. They would also be subject to a series of conditions and controls which do not now apply and the absence of which does not seem to pose any danger to society.

  38.  It seems highly likely that the 30 per cent reduction in shotgun certificate numbers would be increased over the years following and that both the number of certificate holders and the number of shotguns would be greatly reduced in the short term and the reduction would be sustained. Each shotgun which can no longer be retained would be placed on the market and their value, and the value of every shotgun held, would diminish rapidly. The market in second hand shotguns, which is already depressed, would disappear and there would be an enormous loss of monetary value and of trade.

  39.  Shooting is a vast business generating a turnover of £653 million per year, much of that going into rural areas which are already very hard hit. That expenditure would be severely reduced by the changes in legislation which are being suggested and the result would be job losses in the trade and, more significantly, in rural areas.

  40.  The proposition that shooting is a purely rural activity is entirely misplaced. Whilst farmers need a shotgun for their work, most owners of shotguns use them for sporting shooting. Most clay pigeon grounds are close to urban areas and most of their clients come from those areas. Those involved in game shooting are drawn from all walks of life and urban dwellers are represented to a very large extent.

  41.  There is nothing to support the proposition that those who live in urban areas should be denied the right to enjoy shooting sports. Such a ban would be completely unworkable and totally iniquitous.

CONCLUSION

  42.  There is no evidence to show that imposing further controls on the ownership of shotguns will achieve any positive results in terms of crime control or public safety. The present system of firearms control is extraordinarily complex and there is an excellent case for reviewing and simplifying the system so that it is comprehensible to those who must comply with it. That does not, of itself, require a single system of controls. Most countries have various categories of firearms which are subject to differing levels of control and the current European Directive on firearms envisages a series of controls which range from those weapons which are free from control, including air weapons and non repeating shotguns, those weapons which are subject only to a declaration by the owner that he has acquired the weapons, those which are subject to individual authorisation prior to purchase and those which are prohibited.

  43.  The Shooting Sports Trust would strongly support a root and branch review of the system, but hopes that such a review would be based on evidence and not on assumptions and prejudice.

11 October 1999


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2000
Prepared 13 April 2000