Supplementary memorandum submitted by
The Gun Trade Association Ltd
Thank you for your letter of 15 November in
which you refer specifically to the two questions of tests of
competence and components parts. Further consideration has been
given to these two points and I submit the following comments
for the information of the Committee.
PROPOSED TEST
OF COMPETENCE
In its submission to the Committee the Gun Trade
Association commented on proposals for a test of competence at
paragraphs 36 and 37 and our view remains unchanged.
Details are now provided about a complex test
of competence to be imposed in respect of all new grants of certificates
and when a different type of firearm is to be acquired by an existing
certificate holder.
We are aware of no evidence that the classes
of certificate holder involved have been a source of accidents
or a cause for concern and it would be appropriate to ask for
details of any accidents in which this matter has been found to
be a significant feature. In respect of Great Britain no such
accidents have ever been identified and no case for tests of competence
has ever been advanced. We stress that this very satisfactory
situation has existed since controls were introduced and over
that long period of time, no real problem has been identified.
It appears to be accepted in the letter from
the Northern Ireland Office dated 22 July 2002 that firearms clubs
will provide adequate instruction in the safe handling of firearms.
There can be no case for imposing a test of competence in respect
of members of firearms clubs. It must also be conceded that a
similar situation arises in respect of clay pigeon clubs. A mentor,
often a family member, usually introduces field shooters to their
sport and there is nothing to suggest that any problems have been
caused by this class of shooter.
There remains a tiny group of people, possibly
including those who possess pistols for personal protection, who
will not have ready access to instruction. In their case, the
sort of instruction suggested in the document would not be adequate
or appropriate. In those few cases, individual consideration can
be given to a requirement for a short period of training, though
advice about where such training is available will be found to
be sufficient in almost every case. If the chief constable is
not satisfied that a person will obtain sufficient instruction
he may use his power to impose conditions to ensure that this
is done or might even consider whether a refusal to undertake
training raises doubts about the suitability of the individual
to hold a certificate. There is no justification for extending
such unusual circumstances situation to all applicants for certificates.
There are several points where the proposed
competence specification is at fault:
(a) In shotgun coaching, the coach often
requires the trainee to point an unloaded shotgun at his eye,
after it has been checked. This provides a standard test of gun
fitting.
(b) Loaded firearms are carried in motor
vehicles when "lamping" vermin at night.
(c) .22 firearms are rarely cleaned after
use unless they have been subject to rain or snow. Other firearms
may not be cleaned after each use.
(d) Many shooters will be able to remedy
minor defects for themselves.
(e) Terms like "maximum range"
and "ballistic capabilities" are so wide they could
involve almost anything.
(f) The test provider will certainly make
a charge for this service and the applicant will be subject to
varying standards and often to the whims of the provider.
The most important question is whether a logical
and rational examination of the real problem has been carried
out and whether the proposal for what amounts to a mandatory initial
test is based on anything other than assumption.
DEFINITION OF
COMPONENT PART
At present the term "component part"
is not defined by statute in Great Britain, but the Firearms Consultative
Committee has recommended a definition that has been accepted
on all sides and is therefore a de-facto definition. No doubt
this will be incorporated into the law in due course, but in terms
of a statutory definition, the Northern Ireland Order is leading
the way.
The definition proposed in the order differs
from that proposed by the FCC in that magazines are not considered
to be component parts in Britain. Magazines are usually replaceable
and interchangeable items and a magazine firearm can be fired
with or without its magazine, though reloading is slowed if there
is no magazine. A magazine is not in fact a component and it is
stretching the law to try to include it in legislation by means
of a definition. Magazines have never been regarded as component
parts in Great Britain and their inclusion in the Order conflicts
with the advice in Home Office Guidance to the Police at Paragraph
13.70.
The remainder of the definition is, perhaps,
a little verbose and we believe that the reference to pressure
bearing parts at Article 2 (d) would cover all the other parts
specified and lead to clarity and simplicity. We accept, however,
that listing specific items in a definition sometimes assists
in interpreting the meaning of a broader term and we would be
content if the Draftsmen were to look at this matter again.
26 November 2002
Memorandum submitted by National Small-bore
Rifle Association and the National Rifle Association
This submission is made jointly on behalf of
the National Rifle Association and NSRA, who represent target
rifle shooters throughout the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland.
We would refer the Committee to the considerable
amount of work that has been undertaken by our predecessors in
the 1998 Review and would commend members to take note of the
discussions and submissions that have already taken place amongst
the interested parties.
For this submission we would like the following
points to be considered:—
1. Airgun Regulations to reflect mainland
legislation, ie only certificated if over 12ft lb for Air Rifle
and 6ft lb for Air Pistol.
2. No arbitrary limit to be placed on the
number of firearms to be allowed on certificate. The holder must
give "good reason" for each however.
3. Shotguns should be subject to Section
two of the Firearms Act 1968.
4. For those who reload, no arbitrary limit
on the number of primers to be held by the certificate holder,
ie the number of primers allowed should be in excess of the ammunition
entitlement on the certificate.
5. When applying for a variation of certificate
to acquire an additional firearm it should be sufficient to identify
a type of firearm and calibre eg "application to aquire one
7.62 rifle". It should not be necessary to identify an individual
firearm by way of make, calibre and serial number.
6. Allow gun dealers to hold a stock of
target rifles. The current system does not allow a purchaser to
see if the gun would suit him/her for size or weight.
7. A simplification of dealings between
Northern Ireland and the UK Mainland, especially for visitors
who are competing in organised events.
8. The publication of a Guidance similar
to new Home Office Guidance to the Police. This should not take
an inordinate amount of time to prepare as much of its content
would be common to both Northern Ireland and UK legislation.
9. Leave in place the current legislation
on handguns.
All statistics available point to the fact that
a firearm is hardly ever misused by a person who is legally entitled
to one and very few are stolen and misused in the perpetration
of crime. We know this view has the support of the former Chief
Constable of Northern Ireland.
9 May 2002
| 
