APPENDIX 52
Memorandum by Mr Martin Kay
HOME AFFAIRS FIREARMS REVIEW COMMITTEE
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this submission by a private
individual to the Home Affairs Committee is to provide discussion
points for consideration in respect of the issues in the Terms
of Reference of the forthcoming review of Firearms legislation.
It serves to highlight some points in the Terms of Reference which
are cause for concern to the author who is an active target and
sporting shooter.
AIR WEAPONS
In regard to the extent of problems caused by
air weapons, in 1989 there were 1,762 recorded personal injury
offences involving air weapons, against 1,401 in 1995. The overall
number of air weapon offences has risen from 4,800 in 1988 to
7,500 in 1995. The majority of these offences are cases of criminal
damage, 5,700 in 1995. A significant but obscure factor in this
apparent rise in offences is the effect of price inflation, criminal
damage has been defined for some years as that having a cost of
£25 or greater. The overall percentage of firearms offences
involving air weapons has reduced from 35 per cent in 1989 to
18 per cent in 1995. (Home Office figures.) There is no indication
as to the rural/urban differential regarding location of offences.
These figures should be considered in the context
of an estimated pool of 4,000,000 air weapons presently in circulation
within the UK. (BASC published estimate.)
Although air weapons are generally exempt from
certificate control in respect of possession, there are detailed
restrictions on their use, purchase and possession. Their criminal
misuse is regarded under the Firearms Act as seriously as use
of other firearms, with provision for heavy fines and custodial
sentences. Full Firearms Certificate (FAC) restrictions are applied
to air weapons generating muzzle energy in excess of specified
levels, 12 foot lbs for rifles and six foot lbs for pistols. These
levels were set some years ago and are relatively modest when
compared to the .22 rimfire which is the smallest common sporting
and target rifle cartridge, with a muzzle energy of about 140
foot lbs
Introduction of full FAC requirements for all
air weapons would create a massive administration and enforcement
burden for the police. With an estimated 4,000,000 air weapons
in circulation, the potential exists for some 2,000,000 new FAC
applicants overnight, putting an intolerable demand on the already
struggling police system. The likelihood of non-compliance with
a new, all-encompassing certification requirement is very significant.
This would inevitably create a huge number of criminals and illegally
held weapons where previously few existed, with the secondary
effect of a massive increase in police effort required for enforcement.
There is no evidence to suggest that a requirement
to licence air weapons would result in a reduction of offences.
By far the greater number of all firearms related offences are
committed with unlicensed weapons, the vast number of untraceable
weapons which will undoubtedly remain outside any licensing scheme
would be in the hands of individuals who may be predisposed to
crime and who would not willingly submit themselves to the police
investigation accompanying any licensing scheme.
SHOTGUNS
Shotguns were first brought into the licensing
system in 1967, as a Government response to the murder of three
London policemen by criminals armed with illegally held pistols.
The police have wide discretion regarding grant and renewal of
Shotgun Certificates (SGCs) including authority to obtain medical
histories from an applicant's doctor. An individual who wants
to obtain an SGC is making himself known to the police, and subjecting
himself to a comprehensive licensing and inspection process which
is designed to, and is effective in, dissuading unsuitable applicants.
At the end of 1997 there were 623,100 SGCs relating to 1,343,900
shotguns on issue, on average about two guns/certificate. Revocations
of SGCs occur at the rate of about 1 per cent of the total annually,
indicating an effective control regime and high levels of responsibility
on the part of SGC holders who value their shooting sport and
do not want to lose it.
The law relating to SGCs was revised in 1988
by the Firearms (Amendment) Act. Since then the number of SGCs
on issue has reduced from 882,000 to 623,100 at the end of December
1997, a reduction of about 25 per cent. Armed crime in the same
period is generally considered to have risen significantly, hence
the Home Affairs Committee Review. This has been reflected in
the experience of Australia following the Tasmanian shootings,
where many categories of weapon were banned and confiscated by
the Government in the same manner as were pistols in the UK. Massive
increases in the figures for armed robbery and homicide have been
recorded subsequently, as has been reported by Keith Tidswell
of Australia's Sporting Shooters Association in an interview published
in "Archive News" section of the web side WWW.nralive.com.
"OTHER"
FIREARMS
Pistols and pistol shooting were, as the committee
will be aware, prohibited from private ownership following the
Dunblane shootings of March 1996. Such a wholesale prohibition
was not recommended by Lord Cullen. The eventual cost to the taxpayer
was in the order of £168,000,000 in compensation for newly
prohibited pistols and associated accessories confiscated and
destroyed.
The Director General of the National Crime Squad,
Roy Penrose, was reported in the Independent on 28 December
1998 as having said that the handgun ban has had no effect on
the supply of firearms to criminals in the UK. The death toll
in London alone this year is at least 15 in gang related shootings,
including the high profile murder of TV presenter Jill Dando.
Many other serious incidents have occurred in other major cities
such as Manchester, Bristol and Newcastle with weapons such as
Kalashnikov automatic rifles, another category of prohibited weapon,
being used.
The HMSO Criminal Statistics for England and
Wales 1997 detail methods of homicide for that year:
|
Sharp Instrument | 31%
| Shooting | 9%
|
Kicking or hitting | 17%
| Burning | 5%
|
Blunt instrument | 11%
| Other | 16%
|
Strangulation | 11%
| | |
|
While all killing is to be deplored, it is self evident that
the incidence of shooting as a modus operandi is very much a minor
proportion of the total.
As is the case with shotguns commented on above, the number
of FACs on issue has declined since 1987 by some 16 per cent.
How the significant reduction in the number of legally held firearms
can be considered to be a crime prevention measure has yet to
be explained. The explanation implicit in the comment by Roy Penrose
is the obvious one, that criminals do not bother with the formalities
of obtaining certificates for the readily available tools of their
trade. There is simply no evidence whatsoever to indicate that
further restrictions or bans on specific types of weapon will
increase public safety.
The present regulations regarding FAC issue and firearm use
are demanding both from the point of view of the user and the
police in terms of the massive and, it has to be said largely
self inflicted administrative and enforcement workload. Regulations
have been added to regulations, often in response to police recommendations
for further controls and restrictions. The result has been the
creation of an administrative monster the scale of which they
understandably complain about, and yet refuse to relinquish to
a civil body dedicated to the task, as was proposed some years
ago by the Firearms Consultative Committee. Lord Cullen was particularly
critical of the performance of the licensing system as administered
by Central Scotland Police, which for many years permitted Thomas
Hamilton to own firearms with the result that he was able to perpetrate
perhaps the worst single criminal act by an individual in the
UK this century.
The concept of a dedicated Firearms Licensing Authority working
with, yet not controlled by, the police has great merit and deserves
further evaluation. It would inevitably save on operational costs
in a time when the Chief Constable of Cumbria Police is stating
that routine policing is likely to be withdrawn from rural areas
owing to cost. He is unlikely to be the only Chief Constable faced
with such a situation. Relieving the police of the burden of Firearms
administration would be of benefit to all police forces, the shooting
community and the general public.
SHOOTING ACTIVITY
IN THE
UK
The scale of recreational shooting activity in the UK is
considerable. Research by the BASC indicates that over 1,000,000
people actively participate in shooting sports. This is by any
measure a significant part of the population which uses or supports
the use of firearms in legitimate and safe pursuits, and represents
considerable economic and social activity. This is recognised
in the UK Biodiversity Plan of 1994, which acknowledges the contribution
to land management and conservation carried out on behalf of shooting.
Some 5.25 million hectares of the UK is managed by gamekeepers
working directly for shooting interests, bringing benefits of
work and revenue to what could otherwise be disadvantaged remoter
areas.
The 1997 Cobham Resource Report estimates this benefit to
represent 26,300 full time jobs directly dependent on shooting
activity, with 13,400 indirect jobs in hotels, suppliers and game
dealers. In 1996 direct expenditure on shooting and stalking in
the UK was valued at £402,000,000 and indirect expenditure
£251,000,000. The scale of economic benefit associated with
shooting is particularly significant to Scotland, attracting tourists
and shooters from all over the world.
The facts indicate that shooting is of great social and economic
value to the UK. Anti gun pressure groups continue to suggest
that firearms ownership and use is an anti-social phenomena which
should be legislated out of existence. No evidence, as opposed
to luridly presented, emotional, and often inaccurate tabloid
standard reporting has ever been advanced by such groups to support
this view.
Proposals made by Chris Mullin MP in 1996 have included a
prohibition of shotgun ownership in urban areas. How can an urban
area be defined? I live in a village of 40 houses, 32 miles north
of Aberdeen. We are surrounded by open countryside for miles all
round, yet have street lights and a 30 mph speed limit. Does that
mean that for the purpose of this proposal I would be considered
to be an urban dweller and my right to own shotguns taken from
me? Or would it simply mean that my shooting friends who live
in Aberdeen and Peterhead, neither exactly a sprawling metropolis
but decidedly urban in parts would no longer be permitted to join
me?
A fair and reasoned review will be welcomed, the many of
us who use firearms safely and correctly will be following your
deliberations with interest.
8 October 1999
|