Examination of Witnesses (Questions 1-48)
DAVID PENN, GEOFF DOE AND BILL HARRIMAN
14 SEPTEMBER 2010
Q1 Chair: Mr
Penn, Mr Doe and Mr Harriman, thank you very much for giving evidence
to the Committee this morning on our first session concerning
firearms. The Committee is undertaking this inquiry to look at
the legislation governing firearms, to look at recent events that
have occurred in Whitehaven and Northumberland and to see whether
or not the legislation needs to be tightened in any way. For your
convenience and the convenience of the Committee we have a number
of the most popular firearms here. Some of us have not seen some
of these rifles so you may refer to them. I know you had difficulty
in bringing your own today despite having a licence, so thanks
to the Member for Carmarthen West; he has enabled us to have these
weapons. There is no ammunition in any of these firearms, you
will be pleased to know.
Mr Harriman: We
have checked.
Q2 Chair: You have?
Good. We have had a number of submissions about the use of firearms
in the United Kingdom. Can you give us an overview individually
please as to what these firearms are used for legitimately? Mr
Penn, if we could start with you?
Mr Penn: There
are three main legitimate uses.
Chair: Sorry, you will
need to speak into the microphone—the acoustics are very
bad—and as loudly as possible. Thank you.
Mr Penn: There
are three main legitimate uses. There is quarry shooting which
is hunting and included in that vermin control, deer control,
rabbit control. There is target shooting and then there is collecting.
There are a wide range of other uses; for instance veterinary
purposes, dart guns which are used to deliver either a lethal
dose or medicine to an animal, the slaughter of animals, humane
despatch of wounded animals, starting sports events, signalling,
life saving, equipment for aircraft or boats, film, theatre and
television productions, battle re-enactment, which is very popular,
and trophies of war. Self-defence is not considered a legitimate
use in Great Britain but it is in Northern Ireland where they
have separate legislation.
Q3 Chair: Do you
have any other categories to add, Mr Doe or Mr Harriman?
Mr Doe: No.
Q4 Chair: Of the
guns that we have here, which is the most popular as far as obtaining
a licence is concerned?
Mr Harriman: It
is the double-barrelled shotgun made in a variety of different
gauges. This is the most popular gauge, which is a 12 bore.
Q5 Chair: How many
guns have a licence at the moment? How many licences are there
for these guns?
Mr Harriman: Shotgun
certificates?
Chair: Yes, certificates, sorry.
Mr Harriman: Those
certificates will not necessarily relate to that type of gun.
They will relate to a variety of gauges and sizes and the number
of certificates that are on issue is, looking at my notes, 574,946
shotgun certificates.
Q6 Chair: Right.
That presumably covers all of these, or just that one?
Mr Harriman: Just
that particular one.
Q7 Chair: 500,000?
Half a million. And the other ones? What is this one?
Mr Harriman: That's
a self-loading shotgun, sir. That is much the same as the double-barrelled
one but it has a magazine where the ammunition is stored and instead
of it having two barrels—which is effectively just two guns
put together—it is a single barrel which is fed by a magazine.
It's increasingly used these days for wildfowling because they've
been built in heavy configurations making them suitable for use
with the large cartridges used on the marsh, which is also a pretty
hostile environment.
Q8 Chair: How many
certificates are there for this one?
Mr Harriman: They
will be within the total that I gave you earlier.
Chair: Within the 500,000.
Mr Doe: The total
number of shotguns covered by the certificates at the same date,
which is March 2009, was 1,366,082.
Q9 Chair: Okay, and
the third gun that we have there?
Mr Doe: For the
firearms being shown to you now, one needs a firearm certificate
as well as a shotgun certificate. For various purposes—target
shooting as well as vermin—at the same date in March it
was 138,728 certificates relating to firearms.
Q10 Chair: How many
firearms? I have the figure of—
Mr Harriman: 435,383.
Q11 Chair: So if
we add those two together we have 1.8 million firearms or shotguns
in existence and 600,000 certificates covering both, is that right?
Mr Harriman: I
think with the firearm and shotgun certificate additions there
is bound to be an overlap with people having both. Various estimates
suggest it is between 10% to 15%, so you can't do quite the simple
addition but there is an overlap.
Chair: Okay. Thank
you very much. Bridget Phillipson.
Q12 Bridget Phillipson:
Thank you, Chair. The legislation around firearms is quite complex
and varied. Could you just briefly outline to us what is banned
outright, what you can legitimately hold with a licence and those
firearms that don't require you to have a licence?
Mr Penn: No firearms
are banned outright.
Chair: Sorry, you will need to speak
up, Mr Penn.
Mr Penn: My apologies.
No firearms are banned outright. A wide range of firearms such
as fully automatic weapons, centre-fired self-loading rifles or
pump-action rifles, small firearms, which covers pistols and small
firearms of that ilk, are covered by a prohibited weapon authority
which comes from the Home Office. This is normally only given
for people who are commercially buying and selling such weapons,
or occasionally for people who have to act as expert witnesses
in court and therefore need to handle this sort of firearm on
occasion as part of their daily business.
Conventional repeater rifles, single-shot rifles
and shotguns and muzzle-loading pistols are covered by section
1 firearm certificates. This also covers certain sorts of shotguns
with larger magazine capacity than three shots. The other class
of firearms, which is very widely owned and requires no certificate
whatsoever, is the air weapon that is not especially dangerous.
These are in considerable quantity in the countryside.
Q13 Chair: How many
airguns do we have? This is one of the airguns, is it?
Mr Penn: We believe
not especially dangerous air weapons, which have to be certificated,
about 7 million.
Chair: Seven million.
Q14 Bridget Phillipson:
Obviously you refer to air weapons as not especially dangerous
weapons. I don't know whether you regard every air weapon as not
especially dangerous?
Mr Penn: The law
specifies that an air rifle which delivers more than 12 foot pounds
of muzzle energy is specially dangerous. By comparison the .22
rifle you were shown earlier, depending on the ammunition it uses,
has about 90 foot pounds of energy. That's a lot more. The 12
foot pounds will do for rabbit control, pigeon control, that sort
of thing. For pistols, the maximum permitted energy is 6 foot
pounds and anything that goes above 6 foot pounds in an air pistol
immediately becomes a prohibited weapon.
Q15 Bridget Phillipson:
There have been a number of cases in my constituency and in Sunderland
of people being seriously injured or maimed through the use of
air weapons. I'm not clear whether those were held by people that
were entitled to hold them or had got into the hands of others,
but there can be serious consequences, would you not accept, of
air weapons being used inappropriately or very dangerously?
Mr Penn: Obviously
any firearm can be misused and we don't in any sense accept that
people should be anything other than thoroughly responsible with
their firearms, but given the very large numbers of air weapons
in the population at large the incidence of injury is relatively
small and the figures for air weapon misuse have been dropping
steadily since the 1980s. They're going down and down and down,
so things are getting better.
Chair: Thank you.
Q16 David Winnick:
On the open question of the availability of firearms, on 2 June
this year 12 people were murdered in Cumbria by a taxi driver
who had a licence for his firearms. Do you feel, bearing in mind
that and other such atrocities carried out by private individuals—sadly
and with the loss of life—that there is any case at all
for loosening the legislation on firearms?
Mr Penn: Loosening
the legislation? The legislation could be made more efficient
if rifles were licensed in a similar manner to shotguns. It would
create far less work for the police, but the controls would still
be there because every firearm or shotgun you acquire has to be
declared to the police by both you and the vendor and every one
you sell has to be declared. So there is always an audit trail.
There is a simpler system that could be adopted.
Q17 David Winnick:
So on the legislation that was introduced by the previous Government
following a previous atrocity in which school children had their
lives taken from them, as well as some teachers in Dunblane, you're
not arguing—tell me if I'm wrong in my interpretation—that
such laws should be repealed? You want what you have just described
as a more efficient way of applying the law, is that correct?
Mr Penn: That is
correct, but it is the policy of the British Shooting Sports Council
that we wish to see the return of competition pistol shooting.
Mr Winnick: Thank you.
Chair: Thank you. Nicola Blackwood.
Q18 Nicola Blackwood:
Thank you, Chair. As I understand it, legislation that governs
possession of firearms includes the Firearms Act 1968, the Firearms
Amendment Act 1997, the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003, the Criminal
Justice Act 2003, the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 and the
Crime and Security Act 2010. Now we have received written evidence
from both the Countryside Alliance and ACPO saying this is quite
a jumbled picture and they would like a review and perhaps a consolidation
Act. What is your personal view about how comprehensible the legislation
is for your average user? Would your battle re-enactor really
understand this kind of complex legislative picture?
Mr Doe: I'm afraid
you probably left out about 30 other Acts of Parliament.
Nicola Blackwood: Right. Thank you for
clarifying that.
Chair: Well, we won't hear about all
of them.
Mr Doe: I just
want to make the point that there are in fact 34 Acts of Parliament
that amended the original 1968 Act and some of them are as diverse
as the Atomic Energy Act 2004, so that gives you a feel for the
problems of interpretation and how the Government perhaps intended
the legislation to be. It is very difficult to interpret. It's
a long audit trail quite often to arrive at the answer, with all
the amendments. We are fortunate that we have a book here that
I'm going to show you—the Act with all the amendments. Joe
Public doesn't really understand it and many police forces don't
understand it when amongst themselves they have to discuss and
take a view on interpretation. I know we all have been invited
to help police licensing authorities to have a view on the legislation.
It would be useful to have one single document that we all understand.
Mr Harriman: As a practitioner
and an expert witness in the courts I often find that my role
goes a lot further than the technical matters and I have to help
barristers, solicitors and, in very occasional circumstances,
the judge to work out what the law is. In Archbold, which
is the standard legal text, the section on firearms is extremely
thick—and growing—and it is very difficult to comprehend
it. You have to go from one Act to another to learn any facts
and there is a long trail that goes back to get an answer. Even
then people are uncertain. It is very complicated and it reflects
the way in which the legislation has developed since 1920, which
was the first formative Act that we have that has been bolted
on to, added, amended and changed. Then not only do you have the
primary legislation but there are a large number of orders, statutory
instruments and secondary legislation, which add some of the infrastructure
to that. I can send you some. It is very complicated and it's
a mess.
Q19 Nicola Blackwood:
Do you think that complexity means that there is more likely to
be a risk of licences being granted inappropriately?
Mr Harriman: No,
I think the complexity means that it is very difficult for people
to understand. I don't think it necessarily entrenches the licensing
function but a lot of the work that my team does at the British
Association of Shooting and Conservation, is advise people who
phone us up to ask "What does the law mean, what can we do,
what mustn't we do?" We can put out as many fact sheets as
we like; we can put articles on the website and in our magazines,
but still people are very confused.
Mr Doe: Most of
us are motorists and we get along perfectly fine without a detailed
knowledge of motoring law. The difference between firearms legislation
and motoring legislation is that firearms legislation is strict
liability legislation. If you get something wrong your intent
is not relevant. You can be guilty of doing something without
any evil intent at all.
Nicola Blackwood: Yes.
Mr Doe: The Home
Office guidance—the interpretation for the view of the Act—runs
to 200 pages and it is now eight years out of date, and we have
six Acts of Parliament amending it. That is how complex the legislation
is.
Q20 Chair: So you
would like to see it consolidated. In answer to Nicola Blackwood's
question, you would like to see all these various Acts of Parliament
in one Firearms Act?
Mr Doe: Yes, it's
very important that is done before any other review of it is taken.
Q21 Chair: Have you
brought to the attention of the Home Office the fact that its
guidance is out of date?
Mr Doe: On a routine
basis, sir. We are involved with them at the moment, we are rewriting
various chapters but it seems to be a very long process.
Chair: Thank you. Steve McCabe.
Q22 Steve McCabe:
I wonder if you could just explain the processes by which an individual
is licensed to own and use a firearm or a shotgun.
Mr Penn: To some
extent the process for licensing a section 1 firearm will depend
on the applicant's good reason, whether it be target shooting
or hunting or whatever. In every case, the intention is to ensure
that the applicant can be permitted the firearm and ammunition
without danger to public safety and the police. That's the bottom
line as far as the police are concerned. The application is made
on form 101 where all details have to be included of any convictions
the applicant has had; convictions cannot be spent for the purposes
of a firearms licence. There is also a medical declaration and
the police will then follow up these points. They will check criminal
records, they will check police intelligence. If they have a concern
over any medical aspect they will consult the applicant's GP and
provided they are reasonably satisfied then—
Q23 Chair: There
is no consultation with the GP unless there is concern?
Mr Penn: That is
correct.
Q24 Chair: Do you
think that there ought to be in every case?
Mr Penn: That is
not our view, no. We think the balance is about right at the moment,
whereby if there is concern the GP should be consulted. Having
gone through these checks the police will then arrange a visit
by a firearms inquiry officer to the applicant and he will then
receive advice on the security that is found and the firearms
inquiry officer will come to conclusions about the applicant to
make sure that he is satisfied that the person is suitable.
Q25 Steve McCabe:
Are you aware of any difficulties or ambiguities in terms of the
way these kinds of qualifications are applied?
Mr Penn: Generally,
no. There are variations from force to force but they still go
through a process which is intended to ensure that the applicant
is suitable. They may do it in slightly different ways.
Q26 Steve McCabe:
I notice that one of the organisations that makes up your group
or consortium is Young Shots. What's the average age of a member
of—is it Young Shots, or Young Shooters, sorry? What is
the average age of a member of Young Shooters?
Mr Penn: I'm afraid
that is not one of our member associations.
Q27 Steve McCabe:
I'm sorry, I thought it said in your—my apologies. I have
it here. I thought it said, "A brief overview of shooting
in Britain, the British Shooting Sports Council." So you
couldn't comment on it—you don't know anything about it?
Mr Harriman: I
can give you a steer, sir. The Young Shots programme is part of
BASC's programme to encourage responsible firearms use by young
people who have expressed an interest, and we train people who
range from between 10 to 18 on average. I can't confirm that but
they are the very best average that you would get in any group
of young people who are interested in anything, whether it be
model aircraft or go-karting, it's very much a spread of age.
Q28 Chair: The minimum
age for holding a shotgun licence, one of these guns over here,
is 10 years of age?
Mr Harriman: There
is no minimum age.
Q29 Chair: There
is no minimum age? We were given figures under the Freedom of
Information Act that there are 1,000 under-18s that have licences.
Are those figures correct?
Mr Harriman: I
suspect they are. There are certainly to my knowledge a small
number of young people who have been given shotgun certificates,
having subjected themselves to the proper process. Also because
they're minors their parents are involved, and quite often you
find a firearms licensing manager will ask if the school might
want to make some comment as well. So whilst the process is the
same for an adult it is slightly broader, and the certificate,
once it has been granted to a young person, does not allow that
youngster to use a shotgun without any supervision until they
are 15. I think the reason that people apply for shotgun certificates
is because the law is so badly written as to how somebody who
doesn't hold a certificate may borrow one legitimately and use
it.
Q30 Chair: That is
a concern, is it not? Obviously young people of the age of 15
vary in their maturity and if there is no under-age limit as to
how old you can be to have one of these guns it does cause concern,
not maybe from the person who has the gun but if it is misused.
Is that a concern to your organisations?
Mr Harriman: Any
form of misuse is always a considerable concern, but it is my
experience that young people who have gone through the process
of being trained and taught, and perhaps having applied for a
shotgun certificate, regard it as a huge privilege to be given
that piece of paper by a firearms inquiry officer. I suspect they
are probably a lot more responsible in their behaviour with a
firearm than perhaps somebody who is a bit older and perhaps a
bit more blasé. I think it also goes on through older life—having
created that sense of responsibility when they are younger, they
will carry that through as they go through life.
Q31 Steve McCabe:
I just wondered if I can clarify who is responsible for Young
Shots? I don't want anyone to disown them. I understand they're
part of the British Association of Shooting and Conservation who
are one of your associations, so in effect you are responsible
for them.
Mr Doe:
Can I come in on that?
Chair: Yes, of course.
Mr Doe:
You touched on shotguns but also obviously there are a lot of
young people who are taking up air rifle shooting and cartridge
rifle shooting. Now the National Small-bore Rifle Association
have a youth proficiency scheme, which has been running since
1990 funded by the Sports Council, that has qualified over 8,000
people—adults—to coach air rifle and pistol shooting.
The National Small-bore Rifle Association is the only national
governing body of sport, which is recognised by the Duke of Edinburgh's
award scheme as an access organisation. The Scout movement also
offers shooting in a very large manner and in three weeks' time
there will be nearly 800 Scouts at their national championships.
They will be over the order of 14, 15, 16 in age.
Q32 Chair: But just
to go back to the law, there is a minimum age for applying for
a firearms certificate, is there not? Of 14?
Mr Doe:
There is.
Chair: But no minimum
age for a shotgun.
Q33 Mark Reckless:
Mr Penn, you mentioned some variation in approaches by police
forces and I wondered if you felt that they put a different priority
on this area or if perhaps any forces had better processes than
others?
Mr Penn: On the
administration of firearms licensing, it is our experience—and
we work very closely with ACPO on firearms licensing matters—that
there is every effort made to introduce good practice or best
practice across the board. One of our great concerns at the moment
is that if there are substantial cuts in the next Budget, which
we fear will be the case—the consistency, quality, efficacy
and general speed of licensing will all suffer because they won't
necessarily be seen as high priorities in a force who has significantly
reduced budgets.
Q34 Mark Reckless:
In that respect do you think we can assist the police through
a consolidation of the law perhaps in merging some of these categories?
Mr Penn: Yes, a
consolidated Act would make life much easier for everybody.
Q35 Steve McCabe:
Some people may find it strange that we have an age restriction
for when we can obtain a provisional driving licence, buy alcohol,
cigarettes, get married, and yet you can have a firearms certificate
at 14. Do you have any observation on that?
Mr Penn: A lot
of people start to learn to shoot when they're big enough to lift
the firearm and handle it safely, so it's not at all unusual for
people around that age to start shooting. It's pretty traditional
in this country and I have to say that it does not appear to be
a problem where licensed firearms are concerned, because people,
as Bill has explained, do have to go through a lot of checks and
they do appreciate the importance of safety. The problem, and
it is a reducing problem, is with unlicensed air rifles, but we
must emphasise that considering the large numbers out there the
misuse of air rifles is getting smaller and smaller, which is
a good thing.
Q36 Chair: If there
is not a minimum age for shotguns why should there be a minimum
age for firearms?
Mr Penn: I think
the reasons for that are probably lost in history.
Q37 Chair: But you
wouldn't object to it being 14 for shotguns as well as firearms?
Mr Penn: No, we
think the present system is fine because the younger persons under
14 certainly are always supervised. People can use an air rifle
in an unsupervised manner on land with permission from the age
of 14 onwards, but for a proper firearm people are supervised
at a young age, so there really is not a problem.
Mr Harriman: If
I could comment on that, Mr Chairman. I think part of the problem
at the moment with young people making applications for certificates
is that the law is uncertain as to who may lend a shotgun to somebody,
and it's hedged about with four tests. It has to be the occupier
of private premises, and we are not told what that means and it
is very difficult to work it out. There is a good definition in
the Wildlife and Countryside Act but that doesn't necessarily
transfer to the firearms licence. It then has to be the occupier's
gun on the occupier's premises in the occupier's presence. I can
remember in the days of the Firearms Consultative Committee, that
wasn't renewed in 2004, one of the last pieces of business that
we looked at was to try and find a workable and simple piece of
legislation that said, "If you are a person who is licensed
to hold a firearm or a shotgun then you may lend it to anybody
else who may then use it under your supervision on land where
you have permission to be." That would be so much easier
and I think that would remove the necessity for some young people
who apply for certificates because they want to stay absolutely
within the law and they find it very difficult to satisfy those
four tests in what is really quite an archaic bit of legislation.
Q38 Bridget Phillipson:
Could you just explain the process by which someone might have
a firearms licence certificate revoked, either temporarily or
permanently?
Mr Harriman: Certainly.
The police will have had some form of intelligence that there
has been some form of misdemeanour and in these days of improved
information technology it will quite often come from the courts
into the National Firearms Licensing Management System. Every
morning the licensing department will look to see whether there
are any hits on their system, and it will say, "Mr Smith
convicted of whatever in the magistrates court." They will
then look at that and they will probably go and speak to Mr Smith
and get some more facts and if they think that what he has done
is sufficiently serious to make him potentially a danger to the
public safety or the police then his certificate will be revoked.
He will have a letter to that effect served upon him and he will
be required to give up his certificate and also his firearms.
Now that brings him a right of appeal to the Crown Court within
21 days of the notice being served. It's a system that generally
works pretty well and over the years we have seen an improved
response when people have come to the attention of the police.
It might not necessarily be a conviction, it might be local intelligence,
perhaps a domestic violence unit reports something, perhaps a
concerned neighbour might make a report. The number of revocations
are very small and they're generally well less than 1%, and I
would suggest that doesn't indicate that there's slackness or
anything in the system, it's simply that people are well behaved
and that somebody who has a certificate knows that if they come
to the adverse attention of the police, the chances are they will
lose it and they will lose it pretty quickly.
Q39 David Winnick:
Despite that, Mr Harriman, and arising from Dunblane and more
recently the tragedy in Cumbria, there is a feeling—obviously
this will be part of our inquiry—that the application is
not being as rigorously applied as one would like. One suggestion
is that the medical authorities, the GP in a particular person's
case, should be asked for his or her view on whether a licence
should be given.
Mr Harriman: If
we go back to the terrible business at Dunblane, everybody knew
that there was something extremely strange about Thomas Hamilton
and the Central Scotland Police had the opportunity to revoke
his certificate and didn't because the then Deputy Chief Constable
was worried that he might go to appeal at the Sheriff's Court
and win it. In my experience that is most unusual. My experience
is if there is any doubt then a certificate will be revoked and
the former certificate holder then has the right of appeal.
Q40 David Winnick:
What do you say about the taxi driver who murdered in Cumbria?
Why on earth was a licence given to him?
Mr Harriman: Without
having the police reports from that incident I don't think that
it's proper that we should comment on it, because the only information
that I've had is what I've read in the newspapers.
Q41 David Winnick:
We come back to my original question a moment ago. Do you believe
that there is a case for a much more rigorous investigation by
the police before a licence is given for firearms?
Mr Harriman: I
think the current system is sufficiently rigorous.
Q42 David Winnick:
Sufficiently robust despite Cumbria?
Mr Harriman: Yes.
But we don't know what the facts on Cumbria are.
Q43 Chair: Sufficiently
rigorous but not clear, that's the message to this Committee.
There needs to be more clarity as far as the law is concerned,
updated guidance which is missing which you're helping to rewrite.
Is that right?
Mr Penn: I think
certainly the guidance is very important, because it's regarded
as the benchmark of interpretation between firearms licensing
departments and other organisations and the Home Office and it
has proven to be a fairly useful document.
Q44 Chair: Does it
worry you when you obviously see incidents like Cumbria and Whitehaven
and what happened elsewhere, that there will be a clamour for
there to be tougher gun controls?
Mr Penn: Yes, it
does worry us because nearly all the legislation has been reactive
to some incident that has occurred and in our view this does not
make for good legislation, either in this sphere or in any other.
Q45 Chair: Can I
ask you a final question about the regulation of the various shooting
clubs and ranges which there are. Who regulates these clubs?
Mr Doe: For target
shooters?
Chair: Yes. We will be going as a Committee
to have a look at some of these, but who regulates you? Is there
a regulator?
Mr Doe: For those
people who want a firearm for target shooting purposes it is a
requirement that they belong to at least one Home Office-registered
club. There are 1,366 registered clubs currently. The club has
to conform to a number of conditions.
Chair: If they are many
just send them to us.
Mr Doe: Indeed,
yes.
Q46 Chair: Who inspects?
We accept that there are conditions but who inspects to make sure
that you are—
Mr Doe: There are
23 conditions and the club applies to the Home Office for approval.
The Home Office pass it on to the local police force to do their
inquiries. The club is required to have a proper constitution,
be insured and to control and keep note of the firearms and their
condition, and the amount of use that the member has. A new person
has to do three months' probation and the police have to be advised
of any membership applications. If a member leaves again the police
have to be advised and if they don't use their firearm police
have to be advised.
A newcomer has to go through a probationary period,
at least three months. My own club does six months—their
choice—and when you do go down to a club initially you do
have to have a course of instruction on the proper handling and
control of firearms.
Q47 Chair: Do you
think it is sufficiently rigorous?
Mr Doe: Yes. Very
much so.
Chair: Thank you. Mr Winnick,
I think you have a question.
Q48 David Winnick:
You said a moment ago to the Chair that legislation has come about
because of what tragedies have occurred. Surely the point is,
is it not, that the Government of the day should be willing to
legislate without waiting for such incidents to occur?
Mr Penn: We agree
with you on that point. The problem appears to be the amount of
time that it would take to rewrite the very complex legislation
that you have seen before you today. One estimate I heard is that
it would be about two years' preparation time and one years' parliamentary
time to produce a complete new Firearms Act.
Chair: Gentlemen,
thank you very much for coming. We will of course be continuing
with our inquiry. We will be hearing evidence from some of the
families of the victims in Whitehaven and elsewhere, but also
we will be coming to visit one of your shooting establishments.
I am not sure whether we will participate but we might just watch.
It depends what the target is, of course. I thank you for coming
in. I thank Mr Bonner, Tim Bonner, for bringing in his firearms
at very short notice and I also thank others for attending. That
concludes this session.
| 
