Examination of Witnesses (Questions 160
- 179)
THURSDAY 14 NOVEMBER 2002
EDWARD KING
AND JOHN
BATLEY
160. Firearms dealers in my constituency tell
me they have never sold, heard of or seen any air weapon, pistol
or rifle that operates less than one joule. Would that be accurate?
(Mr King) I would assume they are possibly telling
you the truth in that respect. I do apologise, I do not know where
your constituency is, sir?
161. Belfast East.
(Mr King) Belfast East. I would not know whether that
is appropriate or not. What I would say is in the airgun category
we have limits on the United Kingdom mainland of six foot pounds
for air pistols and 12 foot pounds for air rifles and the majority
of rifles fit into those categories.
(Mr Batley) Below .74 foot/Ibs, which is one joule,
the Forensic Science Service have done an enormous amount of work
on the study and comparison of this and it has generally been
accepted that below one joule the item—I cannot call it
a fire arm because it is not recognised in the Firearms Act—is
not lethal in other words it cannot penetrate the skin, so we
are talking about something well below what I think you are referring
to as a firearm.
162. Thank you.
(Mr Batley) They are in effect, if you like, considered
to be grown up toys, they are certainly not firearms.
Chairman: We will not go down that road.
Mr Clarke
163. I just want to tease out this differential
that you indicate in terms of those airguns of one joule which
you do not consider as weapons and those airguns you consider
their use to be. The primary reason for an airgun is for informal
target practice in the home. Surely the type of airgun that we
are talking about with the polystyrene balls is perfectly adequate
for target shooting, so I cannot distinguish this difference that
you make between an airgun—?
(Mr King) I understand exactly where you are coming
from, what are you saying is if an airgun of less than one joule
can be used for informal target shooting then why would one need
to have one that falls into the classification of a firearm. It
is a relatively straight forward answer, if one were to stand
up a paper target at six metres, which is the normal distance
at which one fires an air pistol, if you use one of these it would
be difficult to see whether it hit the paper at all, let alone
how accurate you are being, bearing in mind the type of thing
we are talking about, firing a small ball down quite a large tube,
it rattles down the tube, a six inch square target at six metres
is quite a precise target to hit. It is one of those things that
even a marksman would have difficulty hitting.
164. It would be equally useful in the essential
training of a young person in the handling of firearms.
(Mr King) I think you are omitting the fact that marksmanship
is essential when you are training somebody to use a fireman.
If you cannot see where you are going to hit a target or if the
target has been hit there is an essential part of that training
which is being missed.
165. I think there are ways of being able to
indicate what has been hit, if you approach the target or look
at the target after the act.
(Mr King) I would be quite happy to set up a demonstration
for this but in technical and ballistic terms it is jolly difficult
to get an air soft of less than one joule item, even if you put
it in a clamp so nothing else moves, to hit the target in the
same place twice, and that is without putting the human element
into it, which is the whole principle of practising for target
shooting.
Mr McCabe
166. I notice that you say in your evidence
that there is a very strong case for allowing young people to
have access to firearms under supervision at an early age, I wonder
if you can tell us what you regard as that very strong case?
(Mr King) As an Association we clearly represent our
trade and our members. The earlier that a youngster is introduced,
even to the idea that firearms exist in terms of what type there
are, what they can do, why they are dangerous—I have children
who are four and eight years old and they know that I shoot, they
know that I own guns of different types and they know they are
dangerous, I call that an introduction. I am not necessarily going
to go and put guns in the hands of my children until I feel that
they are responsible to understand the handling of them. Certainly
the concept is one that they understand.
167. If I can interrupt you, you do not say
in your evidence that there is a very strong case for introducing
young people, you say there is a strong case for having access
to firearms.
(Mr King) I am coming on to that. Once that has happened
the supervised use of firearms by young people is, in our view,
the best way of ensuring that in later life they are able to handle
those responsibly and without a threat to other people. It is
undeniable that young people in today's world become aware of
firearms whether they like it or not, there are influences from
everywhere—I do not want to go into the area of video games—there
is an interest in certain cases, a fascination in others and if
that can be channelled into responsible use at a young age, I
am not specifying a specific age, as a youngster it enables them
to grow up to use these things responsibly and in certain cases
excel at an age they are able to internationally. We only recently
had a 15 year old Commonwealth Games winner, if that person had
not been given access to firearms as a young person or supervised
as a youngster she would certainly have never reached that stage
of winning a medal. Richard Foulds, who is our gold medal winner
in the Olympics, started shooting at a young age and it taught
him how to do it responsibly. When you are at that stage you have
the capacity to learn and develop skills which you may not have
later on in life, and it applies to shooting as it does to other
sports.
168. I am happy to acknowledge you are an enthusiast
for gun sports and activities. I am right to say that the strong
case you make is based on your experience of dealing with your
own two children and this 15 year old who won a Commonwealth gold
medal, is that the extent of it? It is a belief you are expressing
rather than something you can support with a great deal of evidence.
Is that fair?
(Mr King) I would not contradict you that I have an
interest in shooting sports, and that is taken for granted. I
would say that the strong case extends way beyond my own personal
sphere. I am not directly responsible myself for training youngsters
in the safe use of firearms but there are numerous organisations,
like the scouts and cadet forces who actually take charge of this
and do it with a not insignificant number of youngsters who do
grow up to be proficient users in the various disciplines they
are using them. It is not just my opinion it is borne out by the
fact there are organisations that deal with young people who are
doing this already and doing it successfully without a consequential
increase and threat to the public or to peace.
(Mr Batley) A recent consideration by the Scouts Association,
both parents and the scouts, voted to continue using airgun shooting
for young people and training for young people within the entire
scouting organisation within the United Kingdom. I presume it
is a considerable amount of people. The cadet forces use it, schools
use it, many young people are taught at the weekend, they go to
game fairs. I have been present at many, many game fairs and I
have seen queues of young people. We in the GTA have a system
where we visit village fetes and small weekend dos and we are
always inundated with young people who wish to learn. We feel
teaching them at that age, when they are readily open to discipline,
we are giving them a good start in life if they wish to continue
shooting, it is age in which discipline sinks in better, pre teen
years.
Mr McCabe
169. You cite the example of the Scout Association,
I presume you are aware there are also examples of parents who
made it clear to the Scout Association and the education establishment
they are not prepared to have their children taken. The current
position is that parents have to actively say yes for their children.
(Mr Batley) I have no objection to that at all.
170. First of all I noticed at the end of your
evidence when you are referring to the advantages of children
taking part in clay pigeon shooting and game shooting you say
that practice has not cause a single identifiable problem. Is
that because there is no national recording system for identifying
such problems or because you have never heard of a shooting accident
during game shooting?
(Mr Batley) I think you will find that most of our
training and voluntary education progress, particularly in the
game shooting world is what we call self-regulatory, father and
sons, uncles and nephews, gamekeepers and young people. It is
very rare to find a young person who is unaccompanied on any type
of shoot. I think self-regulation breeds discipline.
171. You would agree there is no system for
recording accidents and incidents?
(Mr Batley) The Home Office do have figures on accidents.
172. There is no single system for identifying
problems. When you say it has not caused a single identifiable
problem what you mean is there is no system for recording and
identifying problems you could lay your hands on. Is that accurate?
(Mr Batley) I think I would have to agree with that
statement.
173. You are aware there have been incidents
where there have been accidents in shooting during this?
(Mr Batley) I would also on the other hand point out
there are more fatal accidents in golf than there are in shooting.
(Mr King) I would back up what he says by agreeing
with your point, there is no single, identifiable measure.
174. Would you welcome that?
(Mr King) We are always receptive to clear and good
information and if it helps us keep our house in order all the
better in terms of information. What I would say is while there
are unfortunate accidents in the shooting world in all of the
areas of shooting they are still relatively small compared to
the number of serious accidents that occur with much, much less
dangerous items, such as golf clubs, bicycles and so on.
175. Let me ask you three other quick points,
when you talk about access to firearms under supervision could
you define what you believe supervision should mean?
(Mr King) When we refer to supervision what we have
in mind is if a youngster is to be supervised it should be an
adult over 21 who is already licensed to use the item which is
being used by the youngster. In the case of a firearm the adult
must be over 21 with a firearms certificate so that he or she
has already gone through the hoops of being a responsible person
with that particular firearm.
176. Should they have anything like a national
vocational qualification that equips them to supervise in an activity
area like that?
(Mr King) I would go back to the principle of self-regulation
and say that it has been proved to work well up to now without
an established system of NVQ, or whatever, and while in no way
I criticise the system of NVQs the fact that somebody has an NVQ
does not mean that an accident may not still happen even in that
case. I would say self-regulation has worked up to now.
177. What is the age limit you would recommend
for young people to have access to firearms in Northern Ireland?
(Mr King) We would like to see a system which is based
on clarity so that everybody, the authorities, the police and
the user, also those professionally involved the dealers, can
have a clear picture of what is allowed to whom. We have split
it for our own recommendations as 14 and below, 14 to 17 and 17
and above, considering somebody who is 17 and above is a responsible
adult, not for the purposes of supervision but for the purposes
of ownership. 14 to 17 is that category under which we recommend
that they should not acquire but that they may be able to use
with permission on private land and then below 14 may only be
under that already quite strict self-regulatory supervision.
178. Thank you. Given the very special circumstances
in Northern Ireland do you have any sleepless nights, is there
any cause for concern about the risk of exposing youngsters there
in particular to firearms at an early age?
(Mr King) The answer is I do not have sleepless nights
thinking about it—I have many sleepless nights about things
in general—I would say that a responsible and supervised
introduction of firearms is not a bad thing and if it is done
correctly I think it is a good thing as opposed to a bad thing.
Mr Clarke
179. This is a commonly used phrase, the number
of injuries and fatalities caused in other activities, I think
it would be fair to say there would probably be more injuries
and fatalities caused in the act of love making in any year than
there are in the shooting profession.
(Mr King) It depends how often you shoot!
| 
