House of Commons Home Affairs Committee
Firearms Control
Third Report of Session 2010–2011
Volume I
HC 447-I
House of Commons Home Affairs Committee
Firearms Control
Third Report of Session 2010–2011
Volume I Volume I: Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence
Additional written evidence is contained in Volume II, available on the Committee website at www.parliament.uk/homeaffcom
Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 14 December 2010
HC 447-I Published on 20 December 2010 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £20.00
The Home Affairs Committee
The Home Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Home Office and its associated public bodies.
Current membership Rt Hon Keith Vaz MP (Labour, Leicester East) (Chair) Nicola Blackwood MP (Conservative, Oxford West and Abington) Mr Aidan Burley MP (Conservative, Cannock Chase) James Clappison MP (Conservative, Hertsmere) Lorraine Fullbrook MP (Conservative, South Ribble) Dr Julian Huppert MP (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge) Steve McCabe MP (Labour, Birmingham Selly Oak) Rt Hon Alun Michael MP (Labour & Co-operative, Cardiff South and Penarth) Bridget Phillipson MP (Labour, Houghton and Sunderland South) Mark Reckless MP (Conservative, Rochester and Strood) Mr David Winnick MP (Labour, Walsall North)
The following member was also a member of the committee during the parliament.
Mary Macleod MP (Conservative, Brentford and Isleworth)
Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk.
Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/homeaffairscom.
Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Elizabeth Flood (Clerk), Joanna Dodd (Second Clerk), Sarah Petit (Committee Specialist), Eleanor Scarnell (Inquiry Manager), Darren Hackett (Senior Committee Assistant), Sheryl Dinsdale (Committee Assistant), Victoria Butt (Committee Assistant) and Alex Paterson (Select Committee Media Officer).
Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Home Affairs Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 3276; the Committee’s email address is [email protected]
Firearms Control 1
Contents
Report Page
Key Facts 3
1 Introduction 5 Background to our inquiry 5 Conduct of the inquiry 5
2 Rationale for firearms control 7 Criminal use of firearms 7 The use of legal firearms in crime 10 Legitimate firearms users 13 The impact of legislation to control the supply of firearms on levels of gun crime 15 Other factors influencing levels of gun crime 20
3 Licensed firearms 23 Licensing and purchasing section 1 firearms and shotguns 23 The role of the licensing function in minimising risk 24 Proposals for greater involvement of medical practitioners in the licensing process 27 Proposals to tighten the “prohibited persons” restrictions 31 The licence renewal and revocation process 34 Proposals for a single system to cover shotguns and section 1 firearms 35 Licensing guidance and implementation 36 Concern about the impact of spending cuts on the licensing function 37 Additional concerns about access to firearms 38 Storage 38 The age at which supervised and unsupervised use of firearms should be permitted 41 Miniature rifle ranges 44
4 Tackling misuse of other firearms 45 The illegal gun market 45 Measures to tackle deactivated firearms 46 Measures to tackle blank firing imitation firearms 48 Stronger enforcement against conversion, supply and importation of illegal firearms 49 Measures to combat misuse of low-powered air weapons 51
Conclusions and recommendations 56
Formal Minutes 62
Witnesses 63
2 Firearms Control
List of printed written evidence 64
List of additional written evidence 64
List of unprinted evidence 65
List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament 65
Firearms Control 3
Key Facts
• Firearms were used in 14,250 offences recorded by the police in England and Wales in 2008/09, including 6,042 cases involving air weapons and 8,208 cases involving other firearms.
• 45% of police recorded offences involving firearms other than air weapons related to violence against the person, 44% to robbery and 6% to criminal damage.
• 77% of police recorded offences involving air weapons related to criminal damage and 19% to violence against the person.
• Just over a third of fatal or serious injuries were caused by handguns, just under a third by rifles or “other” firearms, 18% by shotguns and 17% by air weapons.
• There were 39 firearms homicides in 2008/09, which represented 6% of all homicides during the year: 4 of these deaths involved a weapon that was held on a certificate; 17 involved a weapon that was not held on a certificate; the status of the weapons in the remaining 18 deaths was unknown.
• The most recent figures show 138,728 firearm certificates on issue in England and Wales, covering 435,383 firearms; and 26,072 firearm certificates on issue in Scotland, covering 70,856 firearms.
• The most recent figures show 574,946 shotgun certificates on issue in England and Wales, covering 1,366,082 shotguns; and 50,308 shotgun certificates on issue in Scotland, covering 137,768 shotguns.
• 24 out of 9,668 firearms licence application renewals, and 93 out of 25,408 shotgun licence application renewals, were refused in 2008/09.
• Some 260 firearm certificates and 1,009 shotgun certificates were revoked during 2008/09.
• There are 34 pieces of legislation governing the control of firearms.
Firearms Control 5
1 Introduction
Background to our inquiry
1. The terrible murder of 12 men and women, and injury of 11 others, by Derrick Bird with legally-held firearms on 2 June 2010 triggered a fierce debate about how to prevent a repeat of such events. Should a man who, it subsequently emerged, had criminal convictions, have been allowed to own lethal firearms? Was there anything in his behaviour that could have alerted the authorities to his potential for violence? The following month, the dangers of firearms were again brought to the forefront of public attention by the shootings perpetrated by Raoul Moat, albeit with weapons obtained illegally.
2. The Chief Constable of Cumbria Constabulary requested the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) to investigate whether or not his force should have granted Derrick Bird certificates allowing him access to firearms. Given the number of wider issues posed by these shootings, and the fact that our predecessors had not inquired into this subject for over ten years, we decided that the efficacy of current measures to control the supply of firearms also merited broader consideration by a select committee.
3. In July 2010 we therefore announced our intention:
• To investigate the extent to which legally-held guns are used in criminal activity and the relationship between gun control and gun crime, including the impact of the Firearms (Amendment) Acts 1997;
• To examine whether or not the current laws governing firearms licensing are fit for purpose, including progress on implementing the Committee’s recommendations set out in its Second Report of the 1999–2000 session;
• To examine proposals to improve information-sharing between medics and the police in respect of gun licensing;
• To examine information-sharing between police and prisons in assessing the risk of offenders who may have access to firearms; and
• To consider the danger presented by, and legislation regulating, air weapons.
Conduct of the inquiry
4. We took oral evidence on five occasions between September and November 2010 from the British Shooting Sports Council, the British Association of Shooting and Conservation, the National Rifle Association, Professor Peter Squires, the Independent Police Complaints Commission, the Countryside Alliance, the Gun Trade Association, a number of witnesses from Cumbria, the Gun Control Network, the ACPO leads for firearms licensing and for criminal use of firearms, the National Ballistics Intelligence Service, the British Medical Association, the Home Office and the Attorney-General of the District of Columbia. We also visited the National Shooting Centre at Bisley, where we met a wide range of people involved in Olympic and Paralympic sports and a variety of other organisations concerned with the use of firearms.
6 Firearms Control
5. We received 41 written submissions which we publish with this report or on our website. In addition 929 individuals who participate in shooting, or whose livelihoods depend upon it, wrote to us. As a number asked for their submissions to be kept anonymous for security reasons, and because their views were reflected in the published submissions from the shooting membership organisations, we have decided not to publish the vast majority of them. However, it was hugely valuable for us to hear from those with first-hand experience of the existing regulatory system. We are grateful to all who contributed to our inquiry.
Firearms Control 7
2 Rationale for firearms control
Criminal use of firearms
6. The figures for “firearms offences” published annually by the Home Office include offences in which a firearm, held either legally or illegally, has been fired, used as a blunt instrument or used to threaten people. In 2008/09, the last year for which complete figures are available, firearms were used in 14,250 offences recorded by the police in England and Wales, including 6,042 cases involving air weapons and 8,208 cases involving other firearms. This means that they were used in 0.3% of all police recorded offences. Provisional data for 2009/10 suggest that 7,995 non-air weapon firearm offences were recorded, a decrease of 3% in this category.1 Trends over the previous ten years are portrayed in the graph below; it is worth noting that the level of offences reached in 2002/03 marked a historical peak in recorded firearm offences.2 According to the authors of the Home Office statistical bulletin, the large decrease in offences of 41% since 2003/04 can be largely attributed to a 56% reduction in the number of air weapon offences,3 which tend to be less serious, although it also reflects a fall in more serious gun violence, including homicide, since 2004/05.
Figure 1: Offences reported to the police in which a firearm has been used, 1999/00 to 2008/094
30,000 All firearms All firearms excluding air weapons Air weapons
25,000
20,000
15,000 Numbers
10,000
Introduction of NCRS 1 5,000
Violent Crime Reduction Act 2 0 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 7. In terms of the nature and seriousness of the offences, 45% of police recorded offences in 2008/09 involving firearms other than air weapons related to violence against the person, 44% to robbery and 6% involved criminal damage. In comparison, some 77% of police
1 Home Office Statistical Bulletin, Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2008/09, January 2010, p 38; Home Office Statistical Bulletin, Crime in England and Wales 2009/10: Findings from the British Crime Survey and police recorded crime, July 2010. Figures for air-weapon offences are not available in this publication. 2 Firearm Crime Statistics, Standard Note SN/SG/1940, House of Commons Library, June 2010,Chart 1 3 Home Office Statistical Bulletin, Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2008/09, January 2010, p 38
4 Ibid., Figure 2.1
8 Firearms Control
recorded offences involving air weapons related to criminal damage, with a further 19% concerning violence against the person.5 Details of offences in which firearms were actually fired can be found in the table below. Just over a third of fatal or serious injuries were caused by handguns, just under a third by rifles or “other” firearms, 18% by shotguns and 17% by air weapons.
Table 1: Offences in which firearms were used, by firearm, whether fired, and degree of injury caused, 2008/096
Weapon Number of Number/ % Of those fired offences in which the weapon Number/ % Number/ % Number/ % was fired fatal or slight injury no injury serious injury Shotgun 619 251 70 39 142 (41%) (28%) (16%) (57%) Handgun 4,275 424 136 70 218 (10%) (32%) (17%) (51%) Imitation 1,511 1,067 14 500 553 firearm (71%) (1%) (47%) (52%) Rifle/other 1,803 929 109 444 376 (52%) (12%) (48%) (40%) Air weapons 6,042 5,340 69 613 4,658 (88%) (1%) (11%) (87%) Total 14,250 8,011 398 1,666 5,947 (56%) (5%) (21%) (74%)
There were 39 firearms homicides in 2008/09, which represented 6% of all homicides during the year.7 Some 28 involved a handgun, seven a shotgun, three a rifle and one an unidentified firearm. Provisional data for 2009/10 appear to show that the number of fatal injuries remained unchanged at 39, but that incidents resulting in injury rose by 8% to 1,901.8
8. However, Professor Peter Squires, of Brighton University, raised a note of caution in using these official statistics as an accurate measure of gun crime in England and Wales. Firstly, a large number of firearms-related offences are not included in these figures; there are approximately 55 types of offences that can be committed before a weapon is pointed at anyone:
Like the visible tip of the iceberg, what gets recorded in the criminal statistics by the Home Office is only the criminal misuse of firearms ... even simple illegal possession of a firearms which ... attracts a five year penalty, is not recorded as gun crime in the Home Office data. If simply possession offences and others were added into the ‘gun
5 Home Office Statistical Bulletin, Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2008/09, January 2010, p 44 6 Ibid, adapted from Tables 2a and 2.05. 7 Compared with 75%–80% of homicides in Washington DC, for example [Q 316, Mr Nickles] 8 Ev 111 [Home Office]
Firearms Control 9
crime’ count, estimates suggest that the total UK gun crime figure would rise by as much as 60%.9
Some 4,024 firearms possession offences and 254 “other firearms offences” (offences under the Firearms Act concerned with licensing and certification of firearms) were recorded in 2009/10.10
9. Professor Squires also argued that offending by firearm is “grossly under-reflected” in recorded crime statistics in terms of threats, attacks on animals and criminal damage.11 Assistant Chief Constable Sue Fish, ACPO lead officer for Criminal Use of Firearms, agreed that there is a “certain level that is under-reported”, but with some caveats:
I would be highly surprised if there were any deaths through the use of firearms that were not known about. The same with serious injury: when a victim presents himself at hospital, hospitals are under an obligation to report a shotgun or firearms injury to the police ... There is an issue in terms of minor injury or where there is a shotgun or a firearm discharged in a street or a public place that is not reported to us.12
Nevertheless, previous research has highlighted the fact that even very serious firearms offences such as attempted murder may go unreported, particularly if the victim is involved in criminal activity.13
10. In response to reports we had heard that police officers may be reluctant to record the use of a firearm in an offence solely on the basis of a victim’s statement to that effect, Ms Fish clarified that the gun would not have to be obtained in order for an incident to be recorded as a firearms offence.14 This may technically be the case, but a study in one London borough by Gavin Hales in 2005 found that in “a very small number of recorded crimes”, use of a firearm was mentioned in free text incident descriptions but not then recorded in the codes that are used to count firearms offences.15
11. Looking beyond the statistics, we heard moving evidence from individuals who have been personally affected by gun crime, in particular from the relatives and survivors of the Derrick Bird shootings: Dr Ian Chrystie, Mr Harry Berger, Mr Kevin Moore and Ms Jude Talbot.16 When asked to describe the impact of these shootings on the community, the Reverend Richard Lee, Vicar of Egremont, told us:
All I can say is that there is an abiding sense of ... “someone took away my innocence; someone took away my village; someone took away my street; someone took away my liberty, and they killed someone outside my front door”, and one feels offended
9 Ev 76 [Professor Squires] 10 Home Office Statistical Bulletin, Crime in England and Wales 2009/10: Findings from the British Crime Survey and police recorded crime, July 2010, Table 2.04 11 Q 70 12 Q 227 13 Gavin Hales, Chris Lewis and Daniel Silverstone, Gun crime: the market in and use of illegal firearms, Home Office Research Study 298 (London: Home Office, 2006) 14 Q 229 15 Gavin Hales, Gun Crime in Brent (Portsmouth: University of Portsmouth, 2005), p 29 16 Q 142
10 Firearms Control
by that and very unsettled indeed ... So the effect on the community, I look upon it as if you take an enormous stone block and you hit it with a chisel at a certain angle; fault lines will fracture throughout, and you never quite know where they are until you just try to move the block.17
We are also acutely aware, although our inquiry did not focus on this specific problem, of the devastation wreaked by gun violence linked to serious and organised crime in too many parts of the UK.
12. The police recorded 14,250 offences in which a firearm was fired, used as a blunt instrument or to threaten in England and Wales in 2008/09, the last year for which complete figures are available. This represents only 0.3% of all recorded offences and a 41% fall in firearms offences since 2003/04. However, to put this into context, the reduction came from a historic peak in levels of gun crime reached in the early years of the 2000s. Where firearms are used, it can be to devastating effect: they were responsible for 39 homicides, and around 2,000 injuries, in 2008/09. Moreover, the extent to which firearms, especially air weapons, are used in less serious crimes is likely to be higher than is recorded; and a number of firearms-related offences are not captured in these statistics. While it is heartening that official figures show the use of firearms in crime to be declining, these figures should not be allowed to fuel complacency.
The use of legal firearms in crime
13. In summary, UK law18 largely prohibits private ownership and use of automatic weapons, semi-automatic and pump-action rifles, weapons which fire explosive ammunition, short shotguns with magazines, elevated pump-action and self-loading rifles, and handguns. It allows individuals to apply for a licence to own what are known as Section 1 Firearms (in reference to the 1968 Firearms Act), which include rifles, muzzle- loading revolvers and shotguns with magazines that are capable of holding more than two cartridges; and Shotguns (covered by Section 2 of the Act), which include pump-action and self-loading weapons which have a magazine that is incapable of holding more than two cartridges. It also allows individuals to use these weapons without a licence in certain circumstances, under supervision. Low-powered air weapons, deactivated firearms, antiques and imitation firearms are permitted without a licence, although there are still a number of restrictions on their ownership and use.
14. We received mixed evidence about the use of legally-owned firearms in crime. There is a lack of data in the public domain showing the extent to which legally-owned firearms are used in gun crime, partly because it is difficult to collect accurate data (because in many incidents the gun is not fired or recovered and therefore difficult to identify), and partly because the Home Office does not routinely publish the data that it does collect. The data
17 Q 160 18 Power to legislate on firearms was reserved to the UK Parliament under the Scotland Act 1998, although the potential devolution of air weapons is currently under discussion. Firearms in Northern Ireland are controlled in a slightly different way by the Firearms (Northern Ireland) Order 2004.
Firearms Control 11
most frequently cited to us were those provided to the Cullen Inquiry19 by the Home Office on the firearm homicides that took place during the years 1992–1994. In his report, Lord Cullen noted that in 22, or 14%, of the 152 cases in which it was known whether or not the firearm was legally held, the firearm was lawfully held by the perpetrator.20
15. Statistics for the use of legal firearms in homicide are still collected by the Home Office as part of the Homicide Index but are not included in the published annual bulletin. We requested information on the 39 shooting homicides recorded in 2008/09 and received the following response:
• Four of these deaths (10%) involved a weapon that was held on a section 1 firearm or shotgun certificate;
• 17 (44%) involved a weapon that was not held on a certificate;
• The status of the weapons in the remaining 18 deaths (46%) was unknown.21
16. The Home Office told us that “the evidence suggests that the vast majority of crimes involving firearms are carried out with illegally-held guns”.22 This point was reiterated in many submissions from shooting organisations and individuals, as well as in the submission from the ACPO Firearms and Explosives Licensing Group.23 Data from the National Ballistics Intelligence Service also indicated that “the vast majority” of firearms- enabled offences are committed with illegally-held firearms. Mr Matt Lewis, Acting Head for Knowledge and Communications for the Service, added that where legally-held weapons are used in crime:
We don’t suspect that there are many legally-held weapons that are being crossed over and used in crime and then go back into legal possession. We think it is much more likely that a shotgun, for example, has been stolen from a residence and is then shortened and used in crime.24
We were interested to note that these findings broadly mirrored the experiences of authorities in Washington DC, where, according to the Attorney-General, Mr Peter Nickles, registered firearms “very rarely, if ever” are found to be used in crimes.25
17. A Home Office study published in 2006 found that access to illegal firearms, including converted firearms and realistic imitation firearms, had increased, and that in many cases
19 The Cullen Inquiry followed the shootings in Dunblane in 1996 by Thomas Hamilton. Its focus was on handguns, as these were the weapons used. The Government of the time subsequently banned handguns from private ownership except in a number of exceptional circumstances. 20 The Hon Lord Cullen, The public inquiry into the shootings at Dunblane Primary School on 13 March 1996, 1996, para 9.11 21 Data provided by the Home Office Public Order Unit, with the following caveats: i) since weapons are not always recovered, the licensing status cannot always be determined; ii) centrally-collected data on the licensing status of firearms do not give any indication as to who held the firearm/shotgun certificate. Therefore, it cannot be assumed that any of the suspects, or the homicide victims, were the certificate holders. 22 Ev 111 23 Ev 105 24 Qq 225–6 25 Q 315
12 Firearms Control
criminals had become more prepared to use them. These developments were linked to drugs markets and to ‘gang’ culture, and demonstrated the extent to which the increase in serious firearm offending in the early half of that decade related to the use of illegal weapons in serious and organised crime.26
18. However, the Gun Control Network, an organisation which campaigns for tighter firearms controls, claimed that “many” of the fatal domestic shootings in the UK are committed with legally-held weapons. They presented their analysis of recent shootings which suggested that between January 2009 and March 2010 fourteen people, about a quarter of all shooting homicide victims, died in “apparent domestic shootings”, at least five of which, or 36%, involved a legally-owned shotgun.27 This is broadly consistent with the data submitted to the Cullen Inquiry: of the 15 handguns used in domestic homicides between 1992 and 1994, six were legally held by the perpetrator.28 Animal Aid described a number of murder or attempted murder cases over the past few years in which licensed weapons were used.29 The Gun Control Network also pointed to the number of suicides carried out with guns, including four young men in 2010 who had access to shotguns in their homes, and stated that “almost all” of the mass shootings around the world, including Hungerford, Dunblane and Cumbria in the UK, have involved licensed gun owners and licensed guns. They concluded:
So it is clearly not the case that licensed weapons are not part of the problem. They are part of the problem.30
However, we note that the law and the enforcement of regulations on ownership and possession of guns have been tightened considerably in the period since Hungerford and Dunblane and it would be unwise to draw conclusions from aspects of those incidents that have already been addressed both in law and in licensing practice.
19. Professor Squires told us that he had logged 44 domestic firearm incidents between 1 January 2010 and 30 September 2010 that were reported in national and local media, comprising nine murders, nine attempted murders and 23 other incidents involving threats, wounding, assault or Actual Bodily Harm, and animal cruelty. Sixteen of the incidents involved low-powered air weapons, which are legal by definition, and fifteen involved shotguns, one-third of which he estimated would be likely to be licensed. He concluded:
By these estimates, legal weapons are still responsible for around 50% of our most serious domestic firearm incidents.
Many people would like to state a position that there is a clear, watertight differentiation between legal and illegal weapons, but that is not the case. I’d go even
26 Gavin Hales, Chris Lewis and Daniel Silverstone, Gun crime: the market in and use of illegal firearms. Home Office Research Study 298 (London: Home Office, 2006) 27 Ev 98 28 The Hon Lord Cullen, The public inquiry into the shootings at Dunblane Primary School on 13 March 1996, 1996, para 9.46 29 See Ev w30 for more details. 30 Ev 98; Q 175
Firearms Control 13
further and say that most gun crime in Britain is committed with weapons that are licensed or otherwise legal.31
20. The use of legal firearms in cases of domestic violence is a particular concern. The Gun Control Network noted that almost all of the victims of the domestic shootings detailed above were women, and there were further incidents in which women survived being shot by a family member or ex-partner. Analysing the figures presented to the Cullen Inquiry, Professor Squires told us that:
18 out of 60, nearly a third of domestic firearms homicides, which are often a continuation of domestic violence, are committed with licensed weapons.32
21. We heard contrasting views about the extent to which legally-held firearms are used in crime. It is difficult to form an accurate assessment, given the limitations of available data. Certainly licensed firearms do not appear to be used in the majority of cases. They are infrequently used in serious and organised crime, which is fed by illegal firearms, particularly converted and realistic imitation weapons. Mass shootings with licensed weapons, such as the terrible crimes perpetrated by Derrick Bird, also thankfully remain rare, but the fact that they were carried out by licensed gun owners should not be overlooked in any further consideration of firearms legislation. Offences with low- powered air weapons, the possession of which is not illegal, comprise a substantial proportion of all gun crime. Moreover, legal firearms were used in at least 10% of firearms homicides in 2008/09, which, while it represents a tiny number of individual incidents, is not an insignificant proportion of these homicides. On the basis of data submitted to the Cullen Inquiry, and that collected more recently by Professor Squires and the Gun Control Network, we are concerned about the use of legal firearms in domestic incidents, often linked to domestic violence.
Legitimate firearms users
22. According to the most recent data available from the National Firearms Licensing Management System, a national register of all persons who have applied for a firearm or shotgun certificate:
• 138,728 firearm certificates were on issue in England and Wales on 31 March 2009, covering 435,383 firearms; and
• 574,946 shotgun certificates were on issue in England and Wales on 31 March 2009, covering 1,366,082 shotguns.
31 Ev 78; Q 50 32 Q 50
14 Firearms Control
In Scotland there were 26,072 firearm certificates, covering 70,856 firearms, and 50,308 shotgun certificates, covering 137,768 shotguns, on issue at the end of 2009.33 There are also estimated to be in the region of seven million air guns in circulation, owned by around five million individuals.34
23. The British Shooting Sports Council stated that “shooting is one of the most popular participation sports”. An estimated one million people in the UK shoot (including around 480,000 shooting game, wildfowl, pigeon and rabbits; 150,000 regularly shooting clay targets; and 250,000 regularly participating in target shooting with rifles, muzzle-loading pistols and air guns) and the number of young people entering the sport is increasing, with 1,200 entering the British Association of Shooting and Conservation’s Young Shots scheme during a six month period in 2007, and the Scout Association’s annual rifle competition attracting nearly 800 competitors.35 Several submissions drew attention to Britain’s success at the Olympics and other international competitions in shooting disciplines, and we were able to meet some of the recent Commonwealth medallists during our visit to the National Shooting Centre.36
24. A large number of submissions from individuals and organisations involved in shooting pointed to the conservation work carried out by shooters at their own expense. They drew attention to a 2006 study, The Economic and Environmental Impact of Sporting Shooting, carried out by Public and Corporate Economic Consultants, Cambridge, which found that shooting is involved in the management of two-thirds of Britain’s rural land, that two million hectares are actively managed for conservation as a result of shooting and that shoot providers spend £250 million a year on conservation.37 The National Farmers Union noted that farmers use shotguns and rifles for controlling pests, to fulfil their legal obligations as landowners.38
25. The Countryside Alliance highlighted the benefits shooting brings to the UK economy, noting that shooters spend £1.6 billion per annum on UK goods and services.39 The UK sporting firearms industry also supports around 70,000 jobs.40 Between 170,000 and 250,000 air guns are sold by dealers each year in England and Wales, with about 35% of domestic production exported. The industry employs over one thousand people in the manufacture and distribution of air guns and the value of the trade is in the region of £50 million.41 We received several submissions from individuals whose employment depends upon firearms; for example, the owners of Sportsmatch UK told us:
33 Home Office Statistical Bulletin, Firearms Certificates in England and Wales 2008/09, March 2010, Scottish Government, Firearms Certificates, Scotland, 2009, May 2010
34 Ev 64 [British Association of Shooting and Conservation] 35 Ev 54 36 See, for example, Ev 55 [British Shooting Sports Council] 37 See, for example, Ev 86 [Countryside Alliance] 38 Ev w16 39 Ev 86 40 Ev 81 [Gun Trade Association]
41 Ev 82 [Gun Trade Association]
Firearms Control 15
We are a small engineering company in Bedfordshire employing seven people producing components almost exclusively for the shooting industry. We were established in 1972 and export over 60% of our production. We would not be a viable concern without the UK, our biggest market, however.42
26. There are 138,728 section 1 firearms certificate holders and 574,946 shotgun certificate holders in England and Wales. The proportion of licence holders who use their guns in crime is tiny. Many representations were made to us by individual shooters and their representatives about their legitimate enjoyment of shooting sports, about the need for farmers in particular to have access to firearms in the course of their professional activities and about the wider benefits shooting brings to the UK economy.
The impact of legislation to control the supply of firearms on levels of gun crime
27. Since the 1920s successive governments have used legislation to limit access to firearms, with the aim of curbing their misuse and the UK now has some of the strictest gun control legislation in the world. The major piece of legislation regulating ownership and use of firearms is the Firearms Act 1968, and its subsequent amending acts. The 1968 Act prohibited a number of firearms based on their size, mode of firing or firepower and introduced the current licensing regime for the possession of legal firearms, their parts and ammunition in England, Scotland and Wales. Following the mass shooting at Hungerford, the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988 banned semi-automatic and pump-action rifles, weapons which fire explosive ammunition, short shotguns with magazines, and elevated pump-action and self-loading rifles; in the aftermath of the Dunblane shootings, the Firearms (Amendment) Acts 1997 effectively banned handguns from private ownership.
28. More recently, the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 raised the age at which an individual can purchase an air weapon from 14 to 17; banned air guns designed or adapted for use with a self-contained gas cartridge system; and made it an offence for a person to have with him an unloaded air weapon or imitation firearm in a public place without lawful authority or reasonable excuse. The Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 further raised the minimum age at which an individual may purchase or hire an air weapon or ammunition for an air weapon to 18; and banned the manufacture, import and sale of realistic imitation firearms, subject to a limited number of defences. The Crime and Security Act 2010, which has not yet come into effect, made it an offence for a person in possession of an air weapon to fail to take reasonable precautions to prevent it coming into the hands of a person under 18 who is not lawfully permitted to have the weapon with him.
29. A number of submissions to our inquiry, including those from Mr Colin Greenwood and the Historical Breechloading Smallarms Association,43 claimed that continued use of prohibited weapons in firearms-enabled crime provided evidence that legislation to ban weapons has had only limited effect. The Greensleeves Shooting Club argued that variations in gun crime rates over time “do not correlate” to variations in legal ownership
42 Ev w6 43 Ev w19–20; Ev w40
16 Firearms Control
levels over the same period.44 According to Mr Greenwood, since 1988, almost one million legally held guns of all classes have been removed from the legitimate market. However, Mr Greenwood claimed that “serious armed crime has risen significantly and shows a significant move away from the supposedly less strictly controlled shotgun to the now- banned pistol”.45 We are not convinced that this is the case. The issue is obscured by the fact that where converted or reactivated weapons are used, they will be included under the category of weapon they replicate, so it is not possible, for example, to tell how many of the offences perpetrated with “pistols” actually relate to genuine handguns. Professor Squires stated that:
For a long time [replicas] clouded the picture of gun crime in this country and allowed many people to suggest that the legislation after Dunblane had not worked, whereas in fact it had.46
30. Mr Greenwood provided an interpretation of Home Office statistics which appear to show that the Acts prohibiting ownership of certain rifles and shotguns (1988) and of pistols (1997) did not have an impact on reducing homicides committed with these guns. Rather, the peak in gun homicides reflected, rather than caused, the overall peak in homicides between 2000 and 2005.47 However, official statistics for firearm-enabled robbery paint a different picture: these offences actually peaked between 1992 and 1993, when overall levels of robbery were around half of what they have been in recent years.48 Robberies in which a shotgun was used have in fact decreased considerably since measures to restrict their ownership, although this is not true for handguns. Variations in the use of different firearms in crime over time are depicted in the table below.
Table 2: Notifiable offences recorded by the police in which firearms were reported to have been used, by principal weapon, 1980 to 2008/09, England and Wales49
Year Air Shotgun Handgun Other Total weapons
1980 5,032 522 620 383 6,587
1981 5,629 846 1,114 478 8,067
1982 5,337 1,068 1,538 457 8,400
1983 5,474 904 1,127 456 7,961
1984 5,540 994 1,232 610 8,376
1985 6,380 1,105 1,390 876 9,742
44 Ev w12 45 Ev w18. Calculated from the reduction in firearm and shotgun certifications depicted in table 1 of the Home Office Statistical Bulletins, combined with the average holding of shotguns and firearms by each certificate holder. 46 Q 66 47 Home Office Statistical Bulletin, Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2008/09, January 2010 48 Ev w22 49 Adapted from Firearm Crime Statistics, Standard Note SN/SG/1940, House of Commons Library, June 2010, Table 2. Rifles are counted under ‘other’.
Firearms Control 17
Year Air Shotgun Handgun Other Total weapons
1986 5,886 1,160 1,314 1,003 9,363
1987 5,172 1,234 1,543 1,053 9,002
1988 4,813 1,206 1,484 1,021 8,524
1989 5,037 1,313 1,983 1,169 9,502
1990 5,380 1,193 2,537 1,263 10,373
1991 5,464 1,569 3,430 1,666 12,129
1992 6,098 1,494 4,023 1,726 13,341
1992 6,337 1,592 4,273 1,865 14,067
1994 7,165 1,190 3,087 1,725 13,167
1995 7,568 983 3,319 1,564 13,434
1996 7,813 933 3,347 1,783 13,876
1997 7,506 580 2,648 1,676 12,410
1997/98 7,902 565 2,636 1,702 12,805
1998/99 8,665 642 2,687 1,880 13,874
1999/2000 10,103 693 3,685 2,465 16,946
2000/01 10,227 608 4,110 2,753 17,698
2001/02 12,377 712 5,874 3,438 22,401
2002/03 13,822 672 5,549 4,027 24,070
2003/04 13,756 718 5,144 4,476 24,094
2004/05 11,825 597 4,360 6,112 22,894
2005/06 10,439 642 4,672 5,774 21,527
2006/07 8,836 612 4,173 4,860 18,481
2007/08 7,478 602 4,172 5,092 17,343
2008/09 6,042 619 4,275 3,314 14,250
31. The Gun Control Network claimed that an approach restricting the legal ownership of firearms can be successful in reducing their use in crime. The organisation analysed data compiled from the World Health Organisation to conclude that:
Comparisons between industrialised countries show that there is a correlation between the levels of gun ownership and gun violence. This country has one of the lowest rates of gun death with annual gun homicides in England and Wales at 0.10
18 Firearms Control
per 100,000 population compared, for example, with 0.69 in Canada, 0.93 in Switzerland and 3.52 in the USA.50
Hales et al have argued that, had the changes in the nature of gun crime alluded to in paragraph 16 occurred in an environment which allowed greater freedoms in gun ownership, “the picture today might be much more grave”.51 The National Ballistics Intelligence Service attributed the current level of shotgun thefts (see chapter three) to a lack of supply of firearms from other means within the criminal market place.52 The Home Office also cited their 2006 study which concluded that the extent of criminal activities to manufacture weapons, such as the conversion of imitation firearms, suggested that the UK’s gun controls “significantly constrain” the ability of criminals to obtain lethal firearms.53
32. The Violent Crime Act 2006 was introduced in part to address these new challenges. In respect of the provisions concerning replica weapons, Professor Squires considered that the Act seemed to have helped to reduce related crime “significantly ... the numbers have started to drop rapidly since 2007”.54 The relevant legislation may also have had an impact on declining levels of air weapon offences, although these decreases began in 2003/4, prior to the introduction of the Violent Crime Reduction Act.
33. Immediately after the Derrick Bird shootings, a number of politicians, police officers and media commentators made public assertions about the difficulties in using greater regulation of weapons to prevent such tragedies. Our witnesses had differing opinions as to whether or not this was the case. Mr Harry Berger, who was injured by Derrick Bird, considered that it was very hard to predict when “someone is going to flick the light switch and change from being sane to insane”. However, Dr Chrystie, whose daughter was also injured, countered that: “it is an undeniable fact that if the late Mr Bird had not had access to firearms he would not have been able to use them”.55
34. Irrespective of its efficacy, the legislation is extremely complicated, a point that was also made to, and taken up by, our predecessor Committee.56 There are many pieces of legislation governing the use of firearms in addition to those listed above: 34 overall, including the Welfare of Animals Regulations 1995 and the Energy Act 2004.57 As a result of this complexity, a number of submissions to our inquiry from both policing and shooting representatives recommended a consolidating Act. For example, Mr Geoff Doe, of the National Rifle Association, argued that neither “Joe Public” nor many police forces fully understand the law.58 Mr Bill Harriman, of the British Association of Shooting and
50 Ev 96 51 Gavin Hales, Chris Lewis and Daniel Silverstone, Gun crime: the market in and use of illegal firearms. Home Office Research Study 298 ( London: Home Office,2006), pp 114–5 52 Ev 103 53 Ev 111 54 Q 66 55 Q 142 56 Home Affairs Committee, Second Report of Session 1999–2000, Control over Firearms, HC 95, para 226 57 Q 18 [Mr Doe] 58 Ibid.
Firearms Control 19
Conservation, who acts as an expert witness in firearms cases, told us that it had been necessary for him to advise lawyers and even judges on the legislation, adding “it is very complicated and it’s a mess”.59 The submission from the ACPO Firearms and Explosives Licensing Group stated that:
The legal landscape is jumbled meaning that great effort is expended negotiating it. It would appear an opportune time both to review and consolidate the relevant law, adding clarity where it is needed.60
When we put this proposal to the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State responsible for crime prevention, Mr James Brokenshire MP, he noted that any such revisions must take care not to create unanticipated consequences:
It may be that, by creating new law, you add uncertainty. That is always the risk when you seek to consolidate or legislate. Sometimes that might add the opportunity for new legal arguments to appear and therefore greater uncertainty in law to exist.61
35. There is considerable evidence, although it is not clear-cut, that well-designed legislation to regulate and restrict the legal supply of firearms can reduce gun crime. The UK has strict gun laws and comparatively low levels of gun crime. The link should not be overstated—there is no direct correlation in recent UK history between levels of gun ownership and gun crime trends. However, it is fair to assume at least in part that this demonstrates the success of the licensing regime, in place since 1968, which enables the authorities to satisfy themselves that those owning firearms are fit to do so. We do not believe that a total outright ban on ownership and use of section 1 firearms and shotguns would be a proportionate response to the risks posed by these weapons. There is, however, scope for further minimisation of risk through adjustments to the licensing process, which we consider in more detail in chapter three. We also believe that more effective measures could be put in place to tackle criminal use of those firearms which are not currently subject to a licensing regime; we consider this in chapter four.
36. An onerous burden is placed on the police and on the public because of the difficulty of understanding and applying the 34 relevant laws which govern the control of firearms. It is unreasonable to expect members of the public to know their responsibilities when the law is so complex and confused. It is also unreasonable to expect the police to apply the law accurately in all cases when it is so complex. This is unhelpful to good relations between the police and the public. We recommend that, rather than adding new rules and greater confusion, the Government provides proposals for early consultation on how to codify and simplify the law. Along with the proposals themselves, we urge the Government to give careful consideration to how it will publicise the legislation in order to give greater clarity to the lay person.
59 Q 18 [Mr Doe] 60 Ev 105 [ACPO Firearms and Explosives Working Group] 61 Q 301
20 Firearms Control
Other factors influencing levels of gun crime
37. The rise in the use of converted firearms, as well as the sharp increase in violent knife offences that occurred at the same time as recent falls in gun crime, demonstrate the limitations of measures that target specific lethal implements in attempting to reduce overall levels of violent crime. The British Shooting Sports Council argued that:
Firearms are simple technology and the advent of computer aided design and computer aided manufacture systems has facilitated illicit manufacture … Criminals will manufacture firearms if no other source is available. Firearms availability is a matter of supply and demand, and success is more likely to come from reducing criminal demand.62
The Minister agreed that “supply is part of the issue, but it is not the only issue”.63 Tackling the root causes of violence in our society must constitute a key part of a prevention strategy.
38. While this issue fell outside the scope of our inquiry, witnesses from Cumbria emphasised how distressing the intrusive media coverage of the Derrick Bird shootings was for victims’ families and the wider community. The local MP, Mr Jamie Reed, spoke of the “frankly gratuitous, shocking, unjustifiable, invasive media coverage that surrounded much of it, which has left very, very deep scars”.64 He added:
In these instances the media has a crucial role, in the first instance, in disseminating information—a hugely important public protection role in many ways. When the incident is over—this incident was done in little over an hour—the role of the media changes and, of course, it’s right and proper that it should be reported upon. Is it right and proper that people should be offered money to sell stories when, as we know, once we develop a marketplace for this kind of commodity stories are invented with no regard for the people affected by what’s printed or broadcast?65
39. Professor John Ashton, Director of Public Health for Cumbria, argued that the way in which shootings were reported by the media increased the risk of copycat incidents. Speaking in respect of the Derrick Bird shootings, he said:
I think you have to distinguish between the specific events and violence prevention more generally, out of which this event will have grown ... I think the role of the media is terribly important in these events. One of the colleagues that I was with when this happened has headed up the Center for Disease Control and Prevention: injury and violence prevention centre in America for the last 10 years ... he has extensive experience of all the mass shootings in America. So we were able to draw on some of that knowledge and insight and feed it into Cumbria from a distance.
62 Ev 56 63 Q 309 64 Q 162 65 Q 164
Firearms Control 21
I don’t think this event would have happened if there hadn’t been the mass media sensationalist coverage ... of the Columbine shootings and these other things. This is the context, and the media coverage of this event will have sown the seeds for another event somewhere else in the world, because of the global satellite coverage and the sensationalisation of it. That’s a big strand of this that needs to be addressed bearing in mind that, within a few weeks, there was another similar kind of thing in Northumberland.66
However, we note that if Bird had not possessed the firearms, the killings would not have occurred. Professor Ashton advocated a code of practice for the media; we wrote to the media regulators to ascertain their views on this proposal.67
40. In response to these criticisms, the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) told us that they run a 24-hour system enabling any individual who feels harassed by the attentions of the media to contact their staff, who can then disseminate requests for privacy across the print and broadcast media industries. The PCC facilitated one such request for a family affected by the Derrick Bird shootings. The PCC also independently enforces a Code of Practice, which includes a set of standards on privacy, harassment and intrusion into grief or shock. All broadcasters who have an Ofcom licence, as well as S4C and the BBC, are required to comply with Ofcom’s Broadcasting Code, which forbids the broadcast of material which “condones or glamorises violent, dangerous or seriously antisocial behaviour and is likely to encourage others to copy such behaviour”. The Code also requires broadcasters to “avoid any unwarranted infringement of privacy in programmes and in connection with obtaining material included in programmes.” Failure to comply with these rules can result in sanctions. Both Ofcom and the PCC stated their willingness to discuss any recommendations for improvements in this area.
41. During the course of our inquiry, several witnesses touched on the question of whether there was a link between the use of violent entertainment media, such as video games, and violent behaviour. This is a wider and more serious issue than can be dealt with here. We intend to return to it later.
42. The supply of firearms is only part of the challenge of reducing gun violence. We understand that the Government is to publish details of its crime prevention strategy at the end of the year. In order to tackle the drivers of gun crime, we recommend that this strategy should explicitly link to long-term measures to reduce domestic violence, measures to tackle the social factors which foster extreme violence and measures to clamp down on illegal drug markets and other forms of serious and organised crime. We are concerned about the potential for sensationalist media coverage of shootings to encourage copycat killings. In respect of this last point, we recommend that the Government ask the media regulatory bodies to enforce a code of practice which both prohibits overtly sensational media coverage of shootings and offers greater protection to victims and their families against intrusive reporting.
66 Q 166 67 Q 167
22 Firearms Control
43. We note the evidence given to us about the need for a ‘public health’ approach to preventing and limiting violence. We also note that the unique and imaginative approach to the collection and analysis of data about violent incidents led by Professor Jon Shepherd in Cardiff has delivered major improvements, measured by the significant drop in the number of victims needing treatment at Accident and Emergency. We recommend that a careful analysis based on science and ‘engineering’ methodology should be applied to this field of prevention.
Firearms Control 23
3 Licensed firearms
Licensing and purchasing section 1 firearms and shotguns
44. All persons in possession of a firearm or shotgun as defined by the Firearms Act 1968 must have a certificate issued by the Chief Police Officer of the police force area in which they live, unless they are otherwise exempt. A certificate must be renewed every five years and can be revoked in the interim if the Chief Police Officer considers that the holder can no longer be entrusted with firearms. Firearm certificates are issued for weapons covered by section 1 of the 1968 Firearms Act, including rifles, muzzle-loading revolvers and shotguns with magazines that are capable of holding more than two cartridges. The Chief Police Officer must be satisfied that an applicant has good reason for wanting a weapon, is fit to be entrusted with it, and that the public safety or the peace will not be endangered.
45. Shotgun certificates, covered by section 2 of the 1968 Act and section 2 of the 1988 Act, permit the holder to possess any number of shotguns. These include pump-action and self-loading weapons that have a magazine that is incapable of holding more than two cartridges. Applications may not be granted or renewed if a Chief Police Officer has reason to believe that the applicant is prohibited by the Firearms Acts from possessing a shotgun or if he is satisfied that the applicant does not have a good reason for possessing, purchasing or acquiring one, but the applicant is not actively required to demonstrate it.68
46. As already noted, according to the most recent data available:
• 138,728 firearm certificates were on issue on 31 March 2009, covering 435,383 firearms;
• 574,946 shotgun certificates were on issue, covering 1,366,082 shotguns.
Those applying for a certificate must complete a form which asks them to declare any criminal convictions and supply details of relevant medical conditions and of their GP, provide two references (or counter-signatories in the case of shotguns) and a £50 fee.69 Some 1% of new applications for firearm certificates and 2% of new applications for shotgun certificates were refused in 2008/09.70 In considering applications, officers will visit the applicant’s home to check storage arrangements, and may follow up any concerns about the medical information provided with the applicant’s GP.
47. We were interested to hear, as a comparison, the details of the registration process for handguns implemented by the authorities in Washington DC after their ban on handguns was overturned in 2008. Applicants are required to:
• Submit fingerprints for a national criminal background check and for identification purposes.
• Submit the handguns subject to the registration process to the police department for a ballistics identification procedure. If a crime is later committed with a firearm and that
68 House of Commons Library, Statutory Control on Firearms, SN/HA/3639, 18 June 2010, p 2 69 Q 22 [Mr Penn]; Ev w2 [Mr Bob Meadows] 70 Home Office Statistical Bulletin, Firearms Certificates in England and Wales 2008–09, March 2010
24 Firearms Control
firearm has been registered, it can then be traced back to the individual who put the gun up for registration.
• Take at least an hour of firearms training at a firing range and at least four hours of classroom instruction and then complete a test to show a significant familiarity with the laws pertaining to firearms as well as vision tests.
• Undergo a background check (carried out once every six years).
Registration must be renewed every three years. If the gun is sold, lost or destroyed, that information must be given to the police department.71
48. In the UK, shotguns and section 1 firearms must be bought from a registered firearms dealer. Mr John Batley, of the Gun Trade Association, explained the process by which any such firearm bought, sold or transferred must, by law, be entered onto a statutory register. The transaction must be carried out face to face and the dealer must satisfy himself that the buyer is bona fide by checking their certificate and raising any doubts with the relevant firearms licensing department. A shotgun certificate will state simply that the holder is authorised to purchase shotguns; buyers holding a firearms certificate will have to have the right to acquire or purchase entered by the police on his certificate as they require a “good reason” to own each and every firearm.72
The role of the licensing function in minimising risk
49. Following the Cumbrian shootings, Assistant Chief Constable Adrian Whiting, the Association of Chief Police Officers’ (ACPO) lead officer for Firearms and Explosives Licensing, was asked to investigate the decision by Cumbria Constabulary to grant and renew shotgun and firearms licenses to Derrick Bird, to see if any errors had been made and if there were any lessons that could be learnt for the licensing function both locally and nationally. His findings were published and made available to us on 2 November 2010. Derrick Bird was first granted a shotgun licence in 1974, with his most recent licence renewal taking place in 2005. He was in possession of three shotguns, one of which was used in the shootings. He was granted a firearms certificate, authorising possession of one rifle and authority to acquire up to 500 rounds of ammunition for it at any one time, in 2007. This rifle was also used in the shootings.73
50. Mr Whiting found that Bird had had little contact with his GP and none with mental health services, and therefore an opportunity to review his licence on this basis would not have arisen. More notably, he found that there would have been several occasions when Cumbria Constabulary could have considered revoking his shotgun licence because of his involvement in crime. Police files have been “weeded” so that it is not possible to scrutinise the deliberation process during renewals, or to ascertain whether or not any reviews took place in the meantime, but the incidents in question were as follows:
71 Q 324 [Mr Nickles]. This registration process is currently subject to legal challenge in the Supreme Court. 72 Q 123 73 Assistant Chief Constable Adrian Whiting, A report (Part 1) concerning the grant of a firearm certificate and a shotgun certificate to Derrick Bird by Cumbria Constabulary, November 2010, Section 4
Firearms Control 25
• In 1982 he was convicted of drink-driving, fined £100 and disqualified from driving for 12 months.
• In 1988 he came to the notice of the police regarding an argument with his girlfriend.
• In 1990 he was convicted on two counts of theft and one count of handling stolen goods and sentenced to 6 months imprisonment wholly suspended for 12 months on each count concurrently.
• In 1999 he was arrested in connection with an investigation into allegations concerning the making of a demand for payment with menaces, and was released without charge.74
51. In respect of the drink-driving incident, Mr Whiting concluded that he anticipated that this would have caused his shotgun certificate to be reviewed; “however it has never been the case that such a conviction would automatically lead to revocation”. In relation to the theft, he concluded that the fact that the sentence was “wholly suspended” meant that Derrick Bird did not automatically become a “prohibited person”, but he added:
I have to observe though that a conviction for this type of offending would be a serious consideration in terms of revocation. Theft is a Schedule 2 offence under the Firearms Act 1968 and with other considerations may indicate a lack of trustworthiness on the part of a person so as to lead to a decision to revoke or refuse to grant.75
52. Overall, Mr Whiting concluded that the decisions made and the actions taken in respect of the grant and renewals of Derrick Bird’s shotgun certificate, and those in respect of the grant of his firearm certificate “were in accordance with the law, regulation, Home Office advice and ACPO policy”. The decisions made and actions taken by the Constabulary in terms of firearms licensing were therefore “reasonable in the circumstances” and, in his view:
There were no reasonable opportunities for the licensing system to have been the instrument of intervention thus preventing the appalling offences subsequently committed.76
Mr Craig Mackey, the Chief Constable of Cumbria, told us that the firearms licensing process could only be used to minimise risk; completely eliminating the risks posed by firearms would require a fundamental change in attitude towards gun ownership in the UK.77 But there is a need to look at how the existing law can be tightened.
53. Other tragedies, including the Dunblane shootings in 2006, have raised serious questions about whether or not the perpetrator should have been allowed to hold a certificate78 and therefore whether the system is minimising risk as effectively as it could
74 Assistant Chief Constable Adrian Whiting, A report (Part 1) concerning the grant of a firearm certificate and a shotgun certificate to Derrick Bird by Cumbria Constabulary, November 2010, paras 4.12–4.15 75 Ibid., paras 5.2, 5.13 76 Ibid., paras 3.1–3.4
77 Q 244 78 Ev w11 [Greensleeves Shooting Club]
26 Firearms Control
do. A series of individual investigations involving crimes committed with licensed firearms prompted the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) in 2007 to consider what lessons could be learnt in relation to the role of the police. Ms Jane Furniss, Chief Executive of the IPCC, explained that:
It became evident to us that there was an issue about whether the system was working. In the cases that we investigated, we discovered that there was a great deal of information about the person’s previous behaviour that should have alerted the licensing officer in the police to concerns.79
This included instances in which certificates were granted (or not revoked) despite a record of offences that might be considered relevant; cases involving licensees who were the subject of a series of allegations of serious violence that did not proceed to a conviction; and instances in which firearms certificates were granted to those with a history of depression and alcohol-related problems because they did not disclose them on application.
54. Mr Tom Davies, an IPCC Commissioner, gave particular details of two cases. One involved a man who was arrested at the end of a siege during which he fired 53 shots with eight guns, which had been removed from him over a period of years and subsequently reinstated by magistrates. Some oversights, both in his discharging his duty to say he had a medical condition and of police use of intelligence, had been identified. The second case concerned the death of Tania Moore, in which the perpetrator’s medical records from previous years, which might have given an indication of a lack of stability, were not supplied by the applicant or picked up by the police; neither had allegations of threatening behaviour and harassment. Mr Davies also discussed the case of Mark Saunders, whose inquest had just concluded. In the period prior to applying for his licence, he had been treated for depression and alcohol abuse, which he did not disclose on his application form.80
55. The IPCC noted that these cases related to a tiny minority of firearms licence holders, and a very small proportion of the IPCC’s workload (comprising 25 or 30 of over 15,000 referrals from police forces during their six years of operation). But Ms Furniss stated that, while the probability of such incidents occurring was small, the issue raised merited review as “when it does happen there can be deadly consequences”.81 We will now consider in turn the two major issues uncovered in this review, that of the use of information about an applicant’s health, and their involvement in crime, in informing the licensing officer’s decision-making process.
79 Q 76 80 Qq 74, 87 81 Q 86
Firearms Control 27
Proposals for greater involvement of medical practitioners in the licensing process
56. During our inquiry, we heard about the current complexities of the licensing system. It was evident that there is a lack of clarity between the licensing authorities and the medical profession as to who is ultimately responsible for assessing the fitness of a person to hold a firearms licence. An applicant for a firearm or shotgun certificate must provide their firearms licensing department with the authority to approach their GP for medical information. Applicants are obliged to provide a number of medical details, including whether they suffer from any “medical condition or disability including alcohol and drug related conditions”. They also have to make a declaration as to whether or not they have ever suffered from epilepsy or been treated for “depression or any other kind of mental or nervous disorder”. Licensing officers only usually approach GPs for information when there are “genuine doubts” about the applicant’s medical history which might have a bearing on their suitability to possess firearms. Where police do require additional information, the British Medical Association (BMA) advises that requests should be limited to specific factual issues and that requests for access to the applicant’s entire medical record should not normally be agreed to.82 Dr John Canning, giving evidence on behalf of the BMA, stated that GPs are “not very often” asked to provide medical evidence, but it does happen “from time to time”.83
57. If a doctor subsequently becomes concerned about a patient who owns a firearm, the guidance on the BMA website states that “doctors should be prepared to breach confidence and inform the appropriate authorities if necessary”.84 Professor Vivienne Nathanson, also representing the BMA, confirmed that a doctor’s duty of confidentiality is “never absolute”. She believed that, if a doctor judges that an individual poses a risk of serious harm to themselves or others, they would be confident of the need to tell the authorities in a position to do something about it. She compared the issue to the more prevalent one of a doctor telling the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority that a patient is no longer safe to drive a vehicle, if the patient refuses to give up his licence.85 Professor John Ashton, Director of Public Health for Cumbria, suggested that it may be more appropriate for specially-appointed doctors to play a role in licensing, rather than applicants’ GPs, who may feel compromised in discussing their own patients.86
58. Additionally, a licence applicant may approach his GP as a person of “good standing” with a request for them to act as referee or counter-signatory to his application for a firearm or shotgun certificate. Doctors are meant to provide such references in a personal, rather than an “expert”, capacity and are under no obligation to provide this service; indeed the BMA advises GPs not to endorse applications for patients unless they have
82 BMA, Firearms: Guidance from the BMA Ethics Department, July 2010 83 Q 274 84 BMA, Firearms: Guidance from the BMA Ethics Department, July 2010 85 Q 275 86 Q 169
28 Firearms Control
“sufficient knowledge about the individual to justify a judgement that the individual could safely possess and control” these weapons.87
59. Following their investigation detailed above, the IPCC proposed in 2008 that the licensing force should be required to approach the applicant’s doctor in each case to obtain confirmation that the medical information provided in the application form was correct. Independently of this process and in light of further cases, including that of Christopher Foster, who shot his wife, daughter and himself after confessing suicidal thoughts to his GP, ACPO and the BMA reached agreement in principle for a system “under which forces would notify an applicant’s GP of an application (initial or renewal) for a firearms or shotgun certificate, with a marker placed on the patient’s record accordingly, thus enabling the GP to raise any medical concerns on application or subsequently”.88 Mr Whiting explained that “because people tend to see doctors who are not necessarily their specified GP and because the licensing takes place every five years for renewal, there would ... need to be an enduring record that they can refer to”.89
60. A large number of submissions from individual shooters and their representatives raised concerns about this proposal on the grounds of:
• The ability of GPs to make a judgement about mental fitness to possess a firearm or to predict future violence, particularly in terms of an individual they may see infrequently;
• Their potential bias against shooters and their unwillingness to take responsibility for the decision to award an individual a licence;
• The security risks of keeping such a record, which would allow access to addresses where weapons are stored (given that it is estimated that up to 40,000 people may have access to the relevant NHS database);
• It potentially being in breach of data protection legislation;
• The potential to damage or alter the patient-doctor relationship, for example, if a patient feels unable to disclose certain medical or mental health concerns for fear of losing his or her firearms licence.90
61. In relation to this first point, Dr Ron C, a GP and shooter, told us that there is no form of screening test “capable of detecting future murderous intent or behaviour.” He estimated that 30–40% of all adult medical records will have reference to some degree of mental or psychological illness and symptoms and added that “GPs as generalists are certainly not qualified simply by their personal knowledge of the individual to make such a judgement”.91 The BMA agreed that:
87 BMA, Firearms: Guidance from the BMA Ethics Department, July 2010 88 Ev 81 [IPCC] 89 Q 259 90 See, for example, Ev 64 [British Association of Shooting and Conservation] 91 Ev w27. Evidence from individual shooters is published anonymously. See para 5.
Firearms Control 29
The likelihood that an individual will present a risk of harm in the future is extremely difficult to predict, as the best indicator of future behaviour remains prior behaviour. The BMA would therefore be extremely concerned if responsibility for managing the risk presented by individuals with shotguns and firearms were transferred to the medical profession.92
In oral evidence, Dr Canning added that:
As a GP, I can give no judgment to someone’s fitness to hold a weapon, particularly forecasting the future. What I can do is provide factual evidence about the past. It is impossible, and I have spoken to other colleagues in specialities such as psychiatry who say equally that it is impossible to predict the future. 93
62. The IPCC made clear that they were not asking GPs to assess individuals for fitness to hold a firearm, which would remain the responsibility of the officer making the licensing or revocation decision, but rather ensuring that the officer is in possession of full and accurate information about the applicant.94 Mr Mick Fidgeon, Firearms Licensing Manager for Essex, explained that currently information regarding medical conditions is referred to the appointed medical practitioner or to the force medical examiner to take a decision as to whether the medical evidence suggests that an individual is fit to be entrusted with firearms.95 Representatives from the BMA stated that there would be a limited set of conditions in which they would be truly concerned about an individual having access to a firearm, including but not limited to, florid psychosis, diagnosed dementia or severe and acute depression, especially if they were expressing significant suicidal thoughts.96 When questioned about individuals who abuse drugs or alcohol, Professor Nathanson emphasised that it would be their manifesting behaviour, rather than the cause of such behaviour, which would prompt concern.97
63. Views were expressed about the possibility that doctors might have a potential bias against shooters and be unwilling to take responsibility for a decision to allow an individual to have a licence. No firm evidence was provided of any such ‘bias’ and we reflected that there is also an opposite danger, namely that some doctors might be too sympathetic to a patient who was enthusiastic to own guns and fearful about being the cause of an application being rejected. Professor Nathanson disagreed that GPs were prejudiced against people who shoot, as they recognised there were legitimate uses for guns, but agreed that their views were influenced by their knowledge of the damage caused by shot wounds and as a result they took the matter very seriously. She also said that there is no evidence to suggest that worry about the risk of losing a licence would be likely to stop individuals from visiting their GP, noting that worry about the impact on their driving licence does not tend to deter people from seeing their GP.98
92 Ev 110 93 Q 270 94 Q 96 [Ms Furniss] 95 Q 260 96 Ev 110 97 Q 286 98 Qq 271, 287
30 Firearms Control
64. However, some shooters, such as Helen S, told us:
I probably would not go to my GP with problems if I thought there would be an effect on my firearms licences. If my job depended on it or it was my main social outlet, then I definitely would not risk seeing my GP.99
What may be more likely to compromise the success of the proposal is that many middle- aged men (93% of shooters are male, and the majority are over 40100) tend not to visit their GP, and many patients now have the option of attending walk-in centres where medical records may not be available to doctors.101
65. In response to data protection concerns, the Information Commissioner stated that, as the proposal was made in response to 11 incidents involving firearms over a period of 5 to 6 years, out of a population of up to 713,674 individuals holding a firearms or shotgun certificate,102 this raised a question as to whether the attachment of a tag to the health record of every NHS patient who holds a shotgun or firearms certificate is fair and proportionate under the First Principle of the Data Protection Act 1998 (“personal data shall be processed fairly and lawfully”). He was also unsure as to how personal data in the form of a tag “has any relevance to the medical purpose or purposes for which the personal data in the health record are processed”, in connection with the Third Principle (“personal data shall be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purpose or purposes for which they are processed”). Finally, he too voiced concerns about the security of the data, in relation to the Seventh Principle (“appropriate technical and organisational measures shall be taken against unauthorised or unlawful processing of personal data and against accidental loss or destruction of, or damage to, personal data”).103 BMA witnesses, however, did not appear to believe this constituted a real risk.104
66. Subsequent to our final evidence session, ACPO met the BMA, the Information Commissioner’s Office and representatives from the British Shooting Sports Council (BSSC) and the British Association of Shooting and Conservation (BASC) to discuss the proposals in more detail. We were informed that agreement was reached that “police would notify a GP of the grant and renewal of a firearm and/or shotgun certificate”, with the aim of implementing this arrangement within six months. Mr Whiting wrote that:
This is very much a “first step”, and whilst not offering quite the same level of assurance as an enduring record, nonetheless will offer greater assurances than we have at present ... The ICO foresaw no objections to this arrangement, though the BSSC and BASC continue to have concerns regarding the security of the letter. In ACPO’s view the arrangements within the GP service will ensure that these concerns are not realised.
99 Ev w6. Evidence from individual shooters is published anonymously. See para 5. 100 Public and Corporate Economic Consultants, The Economic and Environmental Impact of Sporting Shooting, 2006, p 7 101 Q 279 102 The exact figure is unclear due to the potential for crossover, estimated at 10–15%. 103 Ev w7–9 104 Q 288 [Professor Nathanson]
Firearms Control 31
He added that:
In the longer term ACPO still wishes to pursue a more enduring record, although there are the anticipated issues including the ICO’s view that legislative change will be necessary because of the existing definition of a health record in data protection law. The ICO also has grave concerns regarding proportionality in respect of such a step.105
67. We welcome the recent agreement between the Association of Chief Police Officers and the British Medical Association that the police alert GPs to every new and renewal licence application. We consider this to be an important step in ensuring that the licensing authority receives accurate medical information about applicants, given the cases we have heard in which applicants have failed to provide this, some of which have resulted in murder. Ultimately, police licensing officers must take responsibility for the decision as to whether or not to grant or revoke a licence. We note that there is already a duty on doctors to communicate their concerns if they judge that a patient poses a danger to themselves or to others. Police guidance must make clear that GPs are not being asked to predict future behaviour, as this is impossible, or to judge the fitness of an applicant to possess a weapon themselves. One means of dealing with this latter concern would be to consider requiring applicants to undergo a compulsory medical check with a specially-appointed medical examiner, but we note that this would be extremely resource intensive, that it might be regarded as disproportionate, and that we received no firm evidence that it would achieve the desired level of certainty in the licensing process.
Proposals to tighten the “prohibited persons” restrictions
68. Currently, persons sentenced to custody for a period of three years or more are prohibited for life from possessing firearms. Those sentenced to three months in custody or more, but less than three years, are subject to a five-year prohibition from the date of their release. ACPO estimated in 2004 that approximately 10% of certificate holders held a criminal conviction; and more recent research undertaken by Mr Whiting led him to the view that each police area contains at least one certificate holder with a criminal conviction.106 However, ACPO argued that there is a lack of clarity in some cases about whether or not an individual would be eligible for a licence:
The circumstances in Cumbria appeared to demonstrate some disconnect between the public (or at least the media) expectation in this regard and the law. In particular how the courts interpret the law in relation to wholly suspended sentences hangs on the wording of the law prior to the introduction of such provisions.107
69. Police guidance states that forces should consider previous convictions or cautions, in particular those involving violence, in deciding whether or not to grant a certificate. The guidance also provides that they should consider:
105 Ev 107–8 106 Assistant Chief Constable Adrian Whiting, A report (Part 1) concerning the grant of a firearm certificate and a shotgun certificate to Derrick Bird by Cumbria Constabulary, November 2010, 5.13 107 Ev 106. Current provisions for wholly suspended sentences were introduced via the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
32 Firearms Control
• Evidence of aggressive or anti-social behaviour, which may include domestic disputes;
• Evidence of disturbing and unusual behaviour which suggests that firearms could be misused;
• Evidence of alcohol or drug abuse which suggests possible impairment of judgement and loss of self-control.
Ms Furniss noted that the IPCC’s suggestion that officers take into account evidence of criminal behaviour falling short of a conviction has been implemented. This was confirmed by Mr Whiting:
My licensing manager, by way of example, would submit a file to me that might contain arrest information or other information—some of it potentially sensitive that I wouldn’t wish to share with the applicant or to let them know that we know—and I would make decisions taking that information into account, and, in cases, I have either refused or, indeed, revoked.108
Licensing officers use the National Firearms Licensing Management System, which is linked to the Police National Computer, to monitor intelligence of such behaviour: the system automatically notifies a force if any of their certificate holders comes to the attention of the police, or when another prosecuting agency commences proceedings against them.109
70. However, the IPCC argued that the guidance should go further in encouraging officers to consider bind-overs and the cumulative relevance of a series of offences; to give greater emphasis to convictions for domestic violence; to apply to allegations of criminality a test of ‘balance of probabilities’ or ‘significant risk that the allegation or intelligence is true’; and should be explicit that intelligence which has not resulted in a conviction may still be evidence of unfitness, especially if a number of allegations have been received from different people.110 When asked if he agreed with these proposals, Mr Whiting replied:
I take note of and am in agreement with their proposals in relation to bind-overs and weighing up the accumulative effect of convictions that might otherwise seem unrelated ... The issue, as they recommended it, was to see a change in the Home Office guidance, which I think is relatively straightforward if people are so minded.
What I have recommended in relation to wholly suspended sentences would require, I believe, some greater clarification than that, because it is based on the interpretation of the law as the 1968 Act is worded and in a particular judgment in the Fordham case.111
108 Q 262 109 Q 78 110 Ev 79–80 111 Q 247. In R v Fordham [1970] the prohibition to holding a certificate as set out in section 21 (2) was held not to apply to a person whose sentence was suspended.
Firearms Control 33
In his report on the Cumbria shootings, Mr Whiting recommended that prohibited person status be attached to wholly suspended sentences of imprisonment.112
71. The IPCC stated, in relation to its investigation findings, that “it was noticeable from the analysis of the cases how many involved domestic incidents”, either as the trigger for misuse of a licensed firearm or in the licensee’s previous behaviour.113 The Gun Control Network told us about a system introduced in Canada whereby the current spouse or recent ex-spouse is required to sign the application form of any individual applying for a firearms licence. If they fail to do so, this prompts an additional level of investigation by the registering authorities. Mrs Gill Marshall-Andrews argued that since this was introduced, the gun murder rate of women has reduced by 40%114 (although further analysis would be required to establish cause and effect). Mr Whiting argued in his report on the Derrick Bird shootings:
I recommend that there is guidance given on who should be consulted in the application and renewal process. This needs to be supported by regulation as otherwise there are clear concerns over interfering with an individuals’ entitlement to a private life. The number of occasions on which a close family member may wish to raise a concern is likely to be a small proportion of the overall whole, and there will be a consideration of proportionality to attend to. In my view those adults in a domestic relationship should be enquired of as a matter of requirement.115
72. We consider that there should be both tighter restrictions and clearer guidance on the granting of firearms and shotgun licences to individuals who have engaged in criminal activity. Firstly, the legislation should be amended to clarify that persons in receipt of wholly suspended sentences are subject to the same prohibitions from obtaining a licence to hold section 1 firearms or shotguns as they would be if their sentence had not been suspended. We do not believe it appropriate for those convicted of offences which are serious enough to warrant a custodial sentence to retain their firearms. We are also of the view that those who receive shorter custodial sentences should not be allowed to possess firearms and recommend accordingly.
73. We understand that police licensing officers are now encouraged to take into account intelligence about criminal behaviour that does not result in convictions, as well as convictions resulting in non-custodial sentences, when considering whether or not to grant a licence: it must be made explicit in police guidance that officers are expected to take such behaviour extremely seriously, in particular cases of bind-overs, arrests and police call-outs for domestic violence, and an accumulation of convictions for offences whose penalty falls short of that requiring prohibition.
74. Given our particular concerns about the use of legal weapons in domestic firearms incidents, we consider that the Canadian requirement for partners and recent ex-
112 Assistant Chief Constable Adrian Whiting, A report (Part 2) observations regarding potential changes to the system of granting such certificates and related provisions in law, November 2010, para 4.11 113 Ev 79 114 Qq 187–9 [Mrs Marshall-Andrews] 115 Assistant Chief Constable Adrian Whiting, A report (Part 2) observations regarding potential changes to the system of granting such certificates and related provisions in law, November 2010, para 4.13
34 Firearms Control
partners to sign licence application forms merits further exploration. We recommend that the UK Government should hold a consultation on the proposal that police licensing officers consult the current and recent domestic partners of applicants in assessing a licence application, and report back to us on the responses received.
The licence renewal and revocation process
75. Some 260 firearm certificates and 1,009 shotgun certificates were revoked during 2008/09.116 As alluded to above, a revocation review may be triggered by new information on the National Firearms Licensing Management System about a licence holder’s criminal conviction, or intelligence about their behaviour. The police are also required to be alert to changes in mental health, including detention under the Mental Health Act 2007.117 If the police consider the matter sufficiently serious to make the licensee potentially a danger to public safety or the peace, the certificate will be revoked, following which there is a right of appeal to the Crown Court within 21 days. Mr Harriman considered that “over the years we have seen an improved response when people have come to the attention of the police”, arguing that cases such as that of Thomas Hamilton in Dunblane, when action was not taken, were very unusual.118 ACPO advocated introduction of a complementary power to suspend a certificate for a period of time, to avoid revocation whilst a matter is investigated. Currently, chief officers often have to make a judgement ahead of investigation.119
76. In addition, 24 (out of 9,668) firearms licence application renewals, and 93 (out of 25,408) shotgun licence application renewals, were refused in 2008/09.120 Between 1920 and 1995, certificates were valid for three years. Since 1995, renewal is required every five years. The Gun Control Network argued that this period should be reduced to two years. Dr Mick North told us:
We’ve seen a number of instances over the years of people whose behaviour has changed over a short time period. In five years a lot of things can change. I have had a look to see what other countries do. New South Wales, as far as I can tell, does ask for renewal every two years. So it’s not unusual.121
D&G Consultants UK Ltd also supported proposals for shorter renewals.122
77. We put this proposal to Mr Whiting, who responded that, while theoretically reverting to more frequent inspection visits and checks would offer “greater assurances”, in his view, “it is very difficult to quantify that benefit”.123 We have seen preliminary data suggesting a rise in the number of shotgun licence revocations124 immediately following the Derrick
116 Home Office Statistical Bulletin, Firearms Certificates in England and Wales 2008–09, March 2010 117 Q 109 [Mr Downing] 118 Qq 38–9 119 Ev 106 120 Home Office Statistical Bulletin, Firearms Certificates in England and Wales 2008–09, March 2010 121 Q 179 [Dr North] 122 Ev w7 123 Ev 109 124 Restricted data provided to us in confidence by the National Ballistics Intelligence Service.
Firearms Control 35
Bird shootings in June 2010, suggesting that forces may be taking a more proactive approach, which is encouraging.
78. We are not convinced by arguments put forward in favour of decreasing the licence renewal period from five to two years. We have not seen any evidence to suggest that there has been an increase in misuse of lethal firearms since the period was increased from three years in 1995, and the proposal would place considerable pressure on police resources. We are encouraged by early signs that police forces may be taking a more proactive approach to licence revocations following the Derrick Bird shootings and consider that such an approach, facilitated by the National Firearms Licensing Management System, and greater emphasis on medical checks, is the most effective way forward.
Proposals for a single system to cover shotguns and section 1 firearms
79. Our predecessor Committee proposed a single licensing process to cover section 1 firearms and shotguns in 2000.125 In response to the Committee, the then-Government accepted that “there is no case for distinguishing between personal fitness to possess a shotgun and fitness to possess section 1 firearms”;126 the law, however, has remained unchanged. The ACPO Firearms and Explosives Licensing Working Group argued that a single form of certificate “remains desirable for safety and economic reasons”:
Utilising the procedures for s1 firearm control in respect of applications for the grant and renewal of shotgun certificates will generally provide a higher assurance of public safety. Similarly there should be provisions regarding the secure storage of shotgun ammunition.127
Mr Bob Meadows, an employee of Bedfordshire Police, was also in favour of a single certificate focusing on the section 1 firearms licence, noting that a shotgun applicant does not currently have to demonstrate good reason for wanting a shotgun.128 Mrs Gill Marshall-Andrews, of the Gun Control Network, agreed that:
The starting point should be that guns are lethal weapons and the onus should be on the applicant, somebody who wants to own a gun, to prove that they are okay to have a gun.129
80. However, Mr David Penn, of the British Shooting Sports Council, maintained that a single system that was modelled on the current process for licensing shotguns would be more efficient:
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
125 Home Affairs Committee, Second Report of Session 1999–2000, Control over Firearms, HC 95, para 85 126 The Government Reply to the Second Report from the Home Affairs Committee Session 1999–2000, Control over Firearms, HC 95, October 2000, p 6 127 Ev 106 128 Ev w3 129 Q 176 [Mrs Marshall-Andrews]
36 Firearms Control
you and the vendor and every one you sell has to be declared. So there is always an audit trail.130
The Greensleeves Shooting Club argued that, “whilst it is true that the onus is on the Chief Officer to prove that an applicant is unsuitable to hold a shotgun certificate, in practice Chief Officers (certainly it is the case with Gloucestershire Constabulary) satisfy themselves that the applicant has a legitimate reason for acquiring or holding a shotgun before granting or renewing a certificate”. They feared that the impact of applying Section 1 controls to shotguns could include “unrealistic limitations” on where individual shotguns might be used; the potential need for clay shooting clubs to be approved by the Home Office; and the ending of clay shoots at game fairs and other events.131
81. We advocate a change in the law to create a single system for the licensing of section 1 firearms and shotguns. Such a system should be based upon the current process for granting licences for section 1 firearms. The benefits of such a system would be two- fold: firstly, we consider that allowing guns to only those individuals who have good reason to hold them strikes the appropriate balance between personal freedoms and public safety, and we see no reason why those applying for a shotgun licence should be exempt from proving ‘good reason’. Secondly, it will render the process considerably more straightforward and, we understand from the police, cheaper to administer. We believe that this can be undertaken in such a way as to avoid any undue restrictions on the use of shotguns.
Licensing guidance and implementation
82. Some concerns were raised about the consistency of licensing decision-making between forces, including by Nick L, in relation to the ACPO-recommended Any Other Lawful Quarry licence condition, and by Helen S, who drew attention to the recent sentencing of three men who should not have been able to keep their licences following previous convictions.132 Mr Tom Davies, of the IPCC, told us that:
If the kind of decision making that is done by the 43 individual licensing officers across the police forces in England and Wales were carried out to guidance with more consistency in it ... it might enable them, without too much bureaucracy, to put in the right kind of safeguards.133
83. Mr Geoff Doe, of the National Rifle Association, advised that the Home Office guidance is 200 pages long and is now eight years out of date; six amending Acts of Parliament are therefore not included.134 We put this point to a police user of the guidance, Mr Fidgeon, who argued that:
130 Q 16 131 Ev w13 132 Ev w6. Evidence from individual shooters is published anonymously. See para 5. 133 Q 88 134 Q 19
Firearms Control 37
I would say that the guidance is almost fit for purpose. It is undergoing a review at the moment ... The main thing for us is that guidance is not always upheld by the courts.135
To resolve this, Mr Whiting has proposed a change in status of the guidance to that of an “Approved Code of Practice” (in the same way that the Manufacture and Storage of Explosives Regulations 2005 have been classified as an Approved Code of Practice).136
84. Current police guidance on firearms legislation is out-of-date. We recommend that the guidance is urgently updated to take into account recent changes to legislation to ensure that officers are properly equipped to take the best decisions that they can. Furthermore, the Government should facilitate a change in the status of the guidance to make it an Approved Code of Practice, to give police decisions greater weight with the courts. While we have no wish to interfere with the judicial process, we are aware of at least one case where a magistrate has reinstated a firearm revoked by the police, only for the firearm to be subsequently used in crime.
Concern about the impact of spending cuts on the licensing function
85. Shooting organisations expressed concern about the impact of spending cuts on the rigour of the licensing process. For example, Mr Graham Downing, of the Countryside Alliance, stated that:
One of my great fears at present, with the proposed cutbacks of funding within the police service generally, is that if this were to impact on firearms licensing, we are going to see an erosion of the numbers—at least—of firearms inquiry officers and firearms licensing managers.137
Mr David Penn, of the British Shooting Sports Council, feared that the “consistency, quality, efficacy and general speed of licensing will all suffer”.138 These concerns were shared by Mr Whiting, who told us:
I have already had to recommend to chief officers that, in particular, things such as home visits, which are part of our national policy on both grant and renewal, are conducted in person. A number of forces conduct them by telephone and, in some cases, by post. It gives me some concern that, in the forthcoming climate in which policing will operate, arrangements such as that will be placed under increasing pressure.
I don’t foresee a wholesale collapse ... in relation to this, but I do see that there is a risk of erosion around some of the practices that we currently recommend.139
135 Q 249 136 Assistant Chief Constable Adrian Whiting, A report (Part 2) observations regarding potential changes to the system of granting such certificates and related provisions in law, November 2010, para 4.12 137 Q 116 138 Q 33 139 Q 238
38 Firearms Control
D&G Consultants UK Ltd stated that “at present”, visits are “often omitted” from consideration of renewal applications.140
86. Mr Bob Meadows, of Bedfordshire Police, told us that forces are not currently recovering the cost of processing requests for firearms and shotgun licences. Bedfordshire Police believe that the cost of processing a firearms certificate is currently around £130 per new application. The current charge to the applicant for a firearm or shotgun licence is £50, and has been since 2000. He added that “even in 2000, the charges generated were in no way representative of the actual cost to forces processing the applications”.141
87. According to the Countryside Alliance, one means of improving the workflow would be “to iron out the ‘bulge’ in renewals”, a legacy of the change in certificate duration from three to five years, by extending the life of a proportion of certificates over the course of a number of renewal cycles. We understand that police representatives have made proposals for how such a system might operate, with estimated savings of £2 million, which have not thus far been taken up.142
88. There is concern about the potential impact of police spending cuts on the firearms licensing function. In particular, it is important to preserve recent improvements in the rigour of the process, such as the increase in home visits undertaken for renewal applications, which we consider should be compulsory. One means of ensuring sufficient funds is to increase applicant fees; given that the current fee structure was set in 2000, we consider that the Home Office should consider raising the current £50 fee to a level that covers the reasonable costs of licensing. We also understand that substantial savings could be made by extending the life of a proportion of certificates in order to remove the peaks and troughs created when the renewal period was extended to five years. The Home Office should implement this proposal and report back to us within twelve months on the steps that it has taken on this recommendation.
Additional concerns about access to firearms
Storage
89. Professor Peter Squires noted that an additional threat to public safety is posed by legal weapons that are stolen. He said:
Around 1,000 weapons are stolen from private homes. They immediately become part of the complicated problem of guns on the street. Shotguns are sawn off, weapons are converted, and weapons are smuggled home.143
140 Ev w7 141 Ev w1 142 Ev 89 143 Q 54
Firearms Control 39
Official Home Office figures show that 2,830 firearms in total were misappropriated (defined as stolen or obtained by fraud or forgery, or handled dishonestly) in 2008/09— including 1,337 air weapons, 682 shotguns, 91 handguns, 242 rifles, 16 starting guns, 318 imitation firearms and 144 defined as other.144
90. Within these figures, the ACPO Criminal Use of Firearms Group and the National Ballistics Intelligence Service (NABIS) stated that they were “increasingly concerned” with the rising number of shotgun thefts in the UK. They identified that over the period 1 April 2009 to 31 July 2010 41 incidents were entered onto the NABIS database involving the theft of a total of 80 shotguns.145 They were not able to provide us with earlier data for comparison, as the organisation has only been in existence since 2008, and it is difficult to obtain accurate and dependable data from information on the Police National Computer. However, Mr Mike Eveleigh, of the British Association of Shooting and Conservation, noted that the overall statistics for misappropriated firearms have been falling over the past decade, with the exception of 2008/09, which has been attributed to one particular incident in Gwent involving fraud.146 Previous research (from 1994 and 2006) has identified that the majority of criminals who used a real firearm said that they had bought the weapon from a friend.147
91. One witness argued that ready access to firearms in the home increases the chances of their misuse. Professor Squires advocated one means of reducing these risks:
I know that many people who like to have weapons like to keep them at home, and that is part of the essence of being a gun owner. I do not think, however, that they should have large supplies of ammunition available at home ... The problem is not of firearms in the home, but ammunition and firearms together.148
He argued that those who need to use ammunition for agricultural purposes could be permitted to order it as needed, and for those who use it in sport, the ammunition could be brought to the sporting event. Relatives of two of Derrick Bird’s victims, Mr Kevin Moore and Ms Jude Talbot, supported such proposals.149
92. However, the National Union of Farmers has responded that such measures would be “impractical, unworkable and disproportionate”, arguing that farmers need to be able to access firearms and ammunition at short notice to deal with pests.150 In his report on the Cumbrian shootings, Mr Whiting also expressed his view that such measures might not achieve the desired effect. Speaking in relation to Derrick Bird, he said:
144 Home Office Statistical Bulletin, Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2008/09, January 2010, Table 2.10 145 Ev 103 146 Q 120 147 Morrison, Shona and O’Donnell, Armed Robbery, A Study in London (Oxford: University of Oxford, 1994) and Hales et al. Gun Crime: the market in and use of illegal firearms, (London: Home Office, 2006), cited in Ev w26 [Mr Greenwood] 148 Q 56 149 Q 149 150 Ev w16
40 Firearms Control
A further suggestion is that certificate holders should not be able to store firearms at their home address. In these circumstances such a requirement would only have introduced a delay whilst they were collected. I cannot foresee that requirements of this sort could avert a person intent on murder.151
We have been advised that viable ammunition can also be easily improvised “with simple hand tools”.152
93. In relation to prevention of theft, Mr Eveleigh also told us that he was aware of at least four occasions in which shooting clubs or cadet armouries had been attacked and weapons stolen. There is a statutory condition on every firearm and shotgun certificate which requires weapons to be stored securely so as to prevent access to the firearm, ammunition or shotgun by unauthorised persons. In practical terms, a certificate holder must ensure that the cabinet containing the weapons must be secured so that a force of two Kilo- Newtons is required to prise it away from the fitting.153 The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State responsible for crime prevention, James Brokenshire MP, also raised the increased risk of theft of storing firearms away from a dwelling:
I think it is these very practical issues that need to be considered and thought through properly. For example, if you were to prescribe weapons to be put in outhouses rather than domestic dwellings, that might increase or change the risk that may be attached to thefts under those circumstances.154
94. It has been suggested that prohibiting ownership of firearms and ammunition together in the home would reduce both the risk of them falling into the hands of criminals, through theft, and the ease at which they could be misused by their legal owners in violent incidents. We were inclined to agree with Mr Whiting’s assessment, that the need to fetch a weapon, or ammunition, from a storage facility would be unlikely to deter those intent on murder. We are not convinced that holding weapons at central locations would necessarily reduce the risk of theft; it could indeed increase the risk of theft.
151 Assistant Chief Constable Adrian Whiting, A report (Part 2) observations regarding potential changes to the system of granting such certificates and related provisions in law, November 2010, para 4.7 152 Ev 65 [British Association of Shooting and Conservation] 153 Ev 90 [Mr Mike Eveleigh] 154 Q 300
Firearms Control 41
The age at which supervised and unsupervised use of firearms should be permitted
95. The key pieces of legislation governing the age restrictions on the possession and use of firearms are as follows:
Possession and use of section 1 firearms Firearms Act 1968 Section 1: Requirement of firearms certificate (1)Subject to any exemption under this Act, it is an offence for a person— (a)to have in his possession, or to purchase or acquire, a firearm to which this section applies without holding a firearm certificate in force at the time.
Firearms Act 1968 Section 22 Acquisition and Possession of firearms by minors (2) It is an offence for a person under the age of fourteen to have in his possession any firearm or ammunition to which section 1 of this Act applies, except in circumstances where under section 11(1) or (4) of this Act he is entitled to have possession of it without holding a firearm certificate.
Firearms Act 1968 Section 11 Sports, athletics and other approved activities (1)A person carrying a firearm or ammunition belonging to another person holding a certificate under this Act may, without himself holding such a certificate, have in his possession that firearm or ammunition under instructions from, and for the use of, that other person for sporting purposes only. (4) Any person may, without holding a certificate, use any such rifle and ammunition at such a range or gallery (a miniature rifle range or shooting gallery at which no firearms are used other than air weapons or miniature rifles not exceeding ·23 inch calibre);
Possession and use of shotguns Firearms Act 1968 Section 2 Requirement of certificate for possession of shot guns (1)Subject to any exemption under this Act, it is an offence for a person to have in his possession, or to purchase or acquire, a shot gun without holding a certificate under this Act authorising him to possess shot guns.
Firearms Act 1968 Section 22 Acquisition and Possession of firearms by minors (3) It is an offence for a person under the age of fifteen to have with him an assembled shot gun except while under the supervision of a person of or over the age of twenty-one, or while the shot gun is so covered with a securely fastened gun cover that it cannot be fired.
Firearms Act 1968 Section 11 Sports, athletics and other approved activities (5)A person may, without holding a shot gun certificate, borrow a shot gun from the occupier of private premises and use it on those premises in the occupier’s presence. (6)A person may, without holding a shot gun certificate, use a shot gun at a time and place approved for shooting at artificial targets by the chief officer of police for the area in which that place is situated.
Purchasing of firearms and shotguns Firearms (Amendment) Regulations 2010 2.—(1) The Firearms Act 1968 is amended as follows. (3) In section 22 (acquisition and possession of firearms by minors) for subsection (1) substitute— “(1) It is an offence for a person under the age of eighteen to purchase or hire any firearm or ammunition.”.
96. In other words, no person under the age of 18 may purchase or hire shotguns, firearms or ammunition. A shotgun certificate is required in order to use a shotgun, and may be applied for at any age, unless shooting with the occupier of land, with their gun and in their presence; or shooting at a police-approved clay shooting layout. A person under 15 may not have an assembled shotgun with them except when under the direct supervision of someone aged 21 or over; or when the shotgun is in a securely fastened gun cover so that it
42 Firearms Control
cannot be fired. After reaching the age of 15, a person may use a shotgun without supervision on private land, providing they hold a valid shotgun certificate. A person aged between 15 and 17 may be given or lent a shotgun and cartridges.
97. No-one under the age of 14 may use a Section 1 firearm except for target shooting as a member of a Home Office approved rifle club; or at a shooting gallery where no rifles larger than .23 inch calibre are used, such as at fairgrounds. From the age of 14 a person may be granted a firearm certificate and may then be given firearms and ammunition. The law does not set a minimum age at which the holder of a firearm certificate may shoot without adult supervision or have access to firearms. All purchases of firearms and ammunition must be conducted by an adult aged 18 or over, following which the firearms and ammunition will be transferred to the young person’s certificate.
Table 3: Age restrictions on possession and use of firearms
What is allowed under the Shotgun Section 1 firearm Firearms Acts
Apply for a licence At any age 14
With the At any At approved At any age Shoot under supervision occupier of age rifle club or land, with their shooting gun gallery In other At any In other 14 (with a circumstances age (with circumstances certificate) a certificate) Be in possession of a firearm unsupervised 15 14
Purchase or hire firearm and/or ammunition 18 18
98. The Preparatory Schools Rifle Association argued that it should be for coaches, parents and guardians to determine the age at which young people are fit to apply for a licence, stating that “children mature at differing ages and can handle the responsibility at different times”. The organisation described the positive effects of participation in shooting for young people:
There are many benefits to the pupils as they learn to concentrate and be calm to achieve a high score when target shooting. Shooting is a sport in which male and female competitors compete on equal standing. It often appeals to the pupil who may not excel in the more physical sports.155
Mr Doe noted that 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 in respect of its youth proficiency scheme.156 Shooting organisations
155 Ev w32 156 Q 31
Firearms Control 43
emphasised that under-14s (in the case of firearms) and under-15s (in the case of shotguns) are not allowed to shoot without supervision.
99. Concerns have been raised in the press about children as young as ten being granted shotgun certificates. We discovered that there are 26 ten year olds across the country who hold a shotgun certificate, and that a total of 4,899 firearms and shotgun certificates were awarded as of 7 September 2010 to children under the age of 18 in England and Wales.157 The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Mr James Brokenshire MP, stated that the evidence he had seen showed “no indication of misuse” of firearms by young people.158 Mr Whiting agreed that the evidence in relation to young people shooting “does not give any cause for concern”.159 However, he accepted that age limits would introduce greater safeguards and subsequently suggested to us:
• An absolute minimum age for shooting with firearms and shotguns, where there is no lower limit at all at present, of 10 years of age.
• That new provisions are introduced to require children shooting section 1 firearms to be subject to the same requirements for supervision as children shooting shotguns: to be supervised until they reach the age of 15 by a certificate holder who is over the age of 21.
100. He also suggested that the term “occupier” in the Firearms Act 1968 and related legislation should be clarified to reflect contemporary shooting arrangements, which he argued would make harmonising the minimum age for both firearm and shotgun certificates more straightforward.160 The term “occupier” is used to qualify when individuals may shoot without a licence, for example, “a person may, without holding a shot gun certificate, borrow a shot gun from the occupier of private premises and use it on those premises in the occupier’s presence”,161 but it has no legal definition. The British Association of Shooting and Conservation stated that clarification would reduce the need for children to apply for certificates.162
101. A large number of young people enjoy shooting in a safe and responsible manner. However, the legislation governing their use of firearms is extremely complex and confusing. We recommend that the Government brings forward proposals to simplify and clarify (a) the age at which an individual is permitted to shoot under supervision in the controlled environment of a shooting range; (b) the age at which an individual is permitted to shoot under supervision outside of such a controlled environment; and (c) the age at which an individual is permitted to shoot unsupervised. In formulating such proposals, the Government should be informed by our beliefs that the risks involved in shooting are greatly mitigated under supervision; that the purpose of granting a licence should be to allow an individual to shoot unsupervised; and that we can see no good
157 Q 269; HC Deb, 19 October 2010, col 640W [Commons written answer] 158 Q 296 159 Q 258 160 Ev 108 161 Firearms Act 1968, Section 11(5) 162 Ev 66
44 Firearms Control
reason to maintain the current differences in age restrictions between section 1 firearms and shotguns, the origins of which are purely historical.
Miniature rifle ranges
102. Mr Whiting raised a further concern on behalf of ACPO regarding access by non- certificate holders to lethal firearms, stating:
It is important that the Committee and the public are aware that public access to section 1 firearms without the need for a firearm certificate or indeed supervision can be achieved reasonably easily.163
ACPO declared itself “uneasy” with the provisions under the Firearms Act 1968 regarding miniature rifle ranges, which state that “a person conducting or carrying on a miniature rifle range (whether for a rifle club or otherwise) or shooting gallery at which no firearms are used other than air weapons or miniature rifles not exceeding ·23 inch calibre may, without holding a certificate, have in his possession, or purchase or acquire, such miniature rifles and ammunition suitable therefore; and any person may, without holding a certificate, use any such rifle and ammunition at such a range or gallery”.164
103. A miniature rifle range is a target shooting range not exceeding 100 yards in length, upon which miniature rifles and ammunition are used. The exemption came into being under the Firearms Act 1920 and reflected the use of a particular round of ammunition in military training. In the early twentieth century a number of politicians and military figures wished to promote rifle shooting in light of the inferior rifle technique demonstrated by British soldiers during the Second Boer War (1899–1902).
104. The Association considered that this exemption provides a “clear opportunity” for a person who has had a certificate refused or revoked, or who would be refused a certificate if they applied, to acquire legally rifles and ammunition that in all other respects should be controlled by the firearms certificate arrangements. Furthermore, there is no police involvement in supervising such ranges or the people using them, and the numbers of firearms possessed and the quantities of ammunition involved are not known or recorded on the National Firearms Licensing Management System.165 We consider that this issue warrants further consideration by the Home Office.
163 Ev 105 164 Firearms Act 1968, Section 11(4) 165 Ev 108
Firearms Control 45
4 Tackling misuse of other firearms
The illegal gun market
105. Professor Peter Squires argued that in recent decades the illegal gun market has changed significantly, in three major ways:
• Firstly, firearms manufacturers have franchised out their designs to other manufacturers, creating a large market in replica weapons, with some police forces reporting that as many as 25% of their armed response call-outs involve replica firearms.
• Secondly, a range of pistol-type weapons such as ‘blank firers’, CS gas guns, high- pressure gas pellet firing weapons or air pistols are capable of conversion so as to enable them to chamber and fire real bullets.
• Finally, dealers have bought significant batches of deactivated weapons (often military weapons deactivated and sold as souvenirs) and reversed the deactivation process in machine shops in order to bring the firearm back to working order.166
106. These trends were confirmed by information given to us in both public and private sessions with representatives of the National Ballistics Intelligence Service (NABIS) and the Association of Chief Police Officers’ (ACPO) lead officer for Criminal Use of Firearms, Assistant Chief Constable Sue Fish. The Head of NABIS, Mr Paul James, told us that:
The picture that is emerging is very much that there are a small number of weapons out there; handguns are the major problem—blank firing, converted or deactivated weapons. They are being used on four, five or six different occasions, and the guns move around the country.167
107. Professor Squires criticised a lack of proactive focus placed on identifying up and coming threats in relation to firearms. The Home Office stated that intelligence on firearms has “improved considerably” since the establishment of NABIS in 2008.168 NABIS examines every crime where there is potential to recover a bullet or cartridge from a crime scene, following which, they are logged on to a computerised system, in order to see whether a weapon has been used previously and on how many occasions. This enables the service to build a picture of the number of firearms in circulation, and, if the gun used in the crime has not been recovered, to attempt to recover it. Professor Squires accepted this point to some extent, but he maintained that “we need to have better data and they need to be shared with relevant science communities to take a better look into the future at the emerging problems”.169
166 Ev 75–6 167 Q 230 168 Ev 111 169 Q 64
46 Firearms Control
108. In response, Mr Matt Lewis, speaking on behalf of NABIS, gave the following opinion:
The data are extremely sensitive because it is not only about individual weapons; the real benefit of NABIS is that it allows us to break into categories and supply chains of weapons, so where we see a particular supply of weapons we can take action with partners. In revealing the statistics and data, in effect, we would be printing a guide either to convert or to import firearms into the UK, and the methods and how to do it ...
I would hate to feel that we would compromise anything that we are doing working with partners such as the Serious Organised Crime Agency, the UK Border Agency and forces, by saying, “Here are some data that you can analyse”.170
109. Replica, converted and deactivated firearms have emerged as a major source of illegal guns, perhaps owing to the difficulties that criminals now experience in acquiring genuine lethal firearms. In the past, policy-making to tackle emerging threats has been hampered by the lack of an effective evidence base about criminal use of firearms. We are encouraged that the formation of the National Ballistics Intelligence Service has gone some way towards addressing this deficiency. While clearly we would not be in favour of any disclosure that would compromise police operations, or assist criminals in accessing lethal weapons, we urge the National Ballistics Intelligence Service and the police to make generalised data about the illegal gun market available to academics and policy-makers more widely where this would not interfere with operational requirements, in recognition of the contribution that such individuals can make to crime reduction.
Measures to tackle deactivated firearms
110. Deactivated firearms are controlled under Section 8 of the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988. Those wishing to own a legal deactivated weapon can present it to the Proof Authorities who will confirm the de-activation by marking the item and issuing a certificate. This is not compulsory, “but it has become the widely accepted system for showing that a firearm has been properly deactivated and that it can be possessed and traded lawfully”.171 There are approximately 300,000 deactivated weapons in the UK, approximately 200,000 of which have been submitted to Proof Authorities. The specification for deactivation was revised in 1995 to make reactivation of certain items more difficult.172
111. Professor Squires stated that “the market in deactivated and reactivated weapons ... is a glaring gap in the system of gun controls in this country”.173 The previous Government published a consultation paper in 2009 which proposed a number of options for further control of deactivated firearms, including treating deactivated guns as realistic imitation firearms; making deactivation standards a mandatory requirement; requiring pre-1995
170 Q 231 171 Home Office, Controls on Deactivated Firearms: A Consultation Paper, February 2009, p 7 172 Background paper provided to us by John Batley of the Gun Trade Association 173 Q 69
Firearms Control 47
deactivations to be modified to the 1995 standard; selling deactivated guns only through Registered Firearms Dealers; and prohibiting people convicted of serious criminal offences from possessing de-activated firearms.174 No action has since been taken. NABIS and ACPO have recommended that consideration be given to ensuring that pre-1995 deactivated firearms are aligned with the post-1995 standard of deactivation “in order to prevent exploitation by criminally minded individuals”.175
112. Shooting organisations have generally opposed these proposals.176 Modifications are very costly for legitimate collectors. According to Mr John Batley, of the Gun Trade Association:
Published evidence of deactivated and reactivated firearms being used in crime is absolutely minute. I have some figures here that show nine uses of a deactivated firearm between 2004–08. I would suggest therefore that the vast majority of deactivated firearms, which are controlled by the proof authorities and of course by legislation, are not used in crime.177
The British Association for Shooting and Conservation was also sceptical about the amount of evidence showing a widespread problem of deactivated firearms, and in particular proof that it related to deactivation taking place in the UK rather than to imported weapons.178
113. The statistics in the 2009 consultation paper did appear to show that the use of deactivated and reactivated weapons in crime is very low, five instances in 2007/08 for example. However, the paper also noted that in 60% of firearms offences, no shot is fired, and therefore it is difficult to identify the weapon; and that in 2004 a father and son were imprisoned for selling deactivated weapons that were used in at least 96 criminal cases.179 Furthermore, since its formation in 2008, NABIS has identified “a change in criminal activity related to pre-1995 deactivated firearms”.180 We were made aware in private session of ongoing investigations into the conversion of a significant number of pre-1995 standard weapons into live weapons within the UK, which were subsequently used in very serious crimes.
114. Restricted intelligence from the National Ballistics Intelligence Service indicates that a significant number of pre-1995 standard weapons have been reactivated into live weapons within the UK, and subsequently used in very serious crimes. We therefore recommend that the Government introduces a requirement for firearms that were deactivated before 1995 to be modified to the 1995 standard, in order to make it harder for criminals to gain access to readily-reactivated weapons. We also recommend that deactivated guns are only sold through Registered Firearms Dealers.
174 Home Office, Controls on Deactivated Firearms: A Consultation Paper, February 2009 175 Ev 102 176 See, for example, the British Association of Shooting and Conservation’s response to Controls on Deactivated Firearms: A Consultation Paper, May 2009, www.basc.org.uk 177 Q 137 178 Ev 68 179 Home Office, Controls on Deactivated Firearms: A Consultation Paper, February 2009, p 8 180 Q 202
48 Firearms Control
Measures to tackle blank firing imitation firearms
115. ‘Blank firers’ are a type of imitation firearm used legitimately in starting athletic races, dog training, re-enactment, police and military training, film, TV and theatre production; they are also owned by collectors of militaria. However, some imitation firearms can be converted into firing weapons; “readily convertible” items are open to classification as a prohibited weapon. The Metropolitan Police Service has previously estimated that as many as 50% of all illegal firearms used in crime in London are conversions or imitations,181 and evidence from the force’s Operation Trident in 2004 suggested that 75% of murders and attempted murders with a firearm involved converted pistols. Just over one-fifth of almost 9,000 firearms submitted to the National Forensic Science Service for analysis between 2003 and 2008 were converted weapons.182
116. A number of such weapons have been the subject of specific prohibitions. Following concerns raised about the illegal conversion and criminal use of the Olympic .380 BBM blank firer by the Metropolitan Police Service in 2009, the Forensic Science concluded that the items were ‘readily convertible’ according to section 1(6) of the Firearms Act 1982 and therefore open to classification as a prohibited weapon. As of April 2010 it is illegal for anyone to be in possession of one of these items without an appropriate license.
117. Section 39 of the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 provided for the Secretary of State to make regulations requiring blank firers to conform to a certain specification. A person would be guilty of an offence if he were to manufacture, modify or import an imitation firearm which did not conform to such a specification. This would make it easier to outlaw readily-convertible weapons prior to their production. However, no regulations have yet been laid under this Section. Professor Squires argues that “rather than wait for each new weapon type to surface on the streets, a rather more proactive and preventive response is called for.” Ms Fish agreed:
Certainly, with blank-firing weapons, we think that is essential. It was set out in statute in the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006, that a specification should be formed around blank-firing weapons, so that they were less able to be converted to be live firers. That has not yet taken place, and it is a great concern to ACPO that there has not been speedy progress on that.183
When asked why regulations had not been made, Ms Fish responded that she understood that it had not previously been a Home Office priority.184
118. NABIS and the ACPO Criminal Use of Firearms Group stated that:
Both before and after the operation to remove the Olympic .380 BBM Blank Firer from sale and circulation it was, and continues to be, our view that the current standard in relation to the specification applied to blank firing weapons in the UK is
181 Gavin Hales, Chris Lewis and Daniel Silverstone, Gun crime: the market in and use of illegal firearms, Home Office Research Study 298 (London: Home Office, 2006) 182 Ev 75 [Professor Squires] 183 Q 204 184 Q 205
Firearms Control 49
not fit for purpose. ACPO recommends that the standard be revised with the utmost urgency ...
ACPO also recommends that a process of ‘type approval’ be brought into effect in order to ensure that blank firing items are in compliance with the standard before sale is permitted.185
We heard restricted information in private session to suggest that the continued use of blank imitation firers in serious criminality warrants action. The British Association of Shooting and Conservation supported type approval of blank firing imitations, stating that it would “provide importers and traders with peace of mind”.186
119. The previous Government introduced legislation enabling a more pro-active approach to outlawing “readily-convertible” imitation firearms via the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006, but did not take the necessary action to bring this into effect. Restricted intelligence from the National Ballistics Intelligence Service reveals the significant role that converted firearms play in facilitating serious criminality. We therefore recommend that the Home Secretary make regulations under Section 39 of the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 to require imitation firearms to conform to a specification that makes it more difficult for them to be converted into firing weapons, and that a process of type approval be introduced concurrently to limit the introduction of non-compliant items into the market place.
Stronger enforcement against conversion, supply and importation of illegal firearms
120. The legal definition of a prohibited ‘readily convertible’ firearm is outlined in Section 1(6) of the Firearms Act 1982, as follows:
(6) For the purposes of this section an imitation firearm shall be regarded as readily convertible into a firearm to which section 1 of the 1968 Act applies if—
(a) it can be so converted without any special skill on the part of the person converting it in the construction or adaptation of firearms of any description; and
(b) the work involved in converting it does not require equipment or tools other than such as are in common use by persons carrying out works of construction and maintenance in their own homes.
NABIS and ACPO argued in respect of (b) that:
These terms [‘common use’ by ‘persons carrying out works of construction and maintenance in their own homes’] create confusion and a lack of common understanding; neither do they reflect the range of tools available within the
185 Ev 102–3 186 Ev 70
50 Firearms Control
domestic marketplace. It is suggested the sub section be revised to reflect tools and equipment commonly available on the high street or via Internet retailers.187
Ms Fish described to us (in private session) the methods by which imitation weapons can be converted, adding that “we need to change the legislation around the tools that are available, because the wording currently reflects an age that simply doesn’t exist any longer”.188
121. NABIS and ACPO further recommended that two new offences should be created in relation to supply and importation of prohibited firearms:
• “Possession of a firearm with intent to supply”—on the basis that the currently- applicable offence of straight possession (ten years for a prohibited weapon, less for section 1 firearms or shotguns without a certificate189) for middle-men who supply firearms to others is not appropriate for the seriousness of the offence; and
• “Importation of, or conspiracy to, import firearms without a licence” with a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, given that relevant customs or possession offences currently carry a maximum sentence of only ten years imprisonment.190
122. As a comparison, the maximum penalty for intent to supply class A drugs and for trafficking class A drugs is life imprisonment. The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, stated in his summing up of a recent appeal in relation to firearms offences that being in possession of a firearm with intent to supply them “is not less criminally reprehensible” than the importation of drugs or possession with intent to supply.191 Mr Lewis explained why NABIS considered that current penalties were inadequate:
Often ... incidents use the same firearm that has been used in many incidents. They are put through a middleman, a person within a community who will loan or lease a firearm to others and therefore the impact on the communities is great ... we have made a recommendation around possession with intent to supply, to directly target those individuals who have a disproportionate effect on communities because this small number of weapons that NABIS shows us is being used time and time again is out there.192
123. Professor Squires said he had identified one particular source of imported illegal weapons through interviews with law enforcement personnel—returning soldiers.193 Mr
187 Ev 103 188 Q 218 189 Firearms Act 1968, Schedule 6 190 Ev 104 191 Regina v Wilkinson; Regina v Ali and Others; Regina v Olawaiye and Others; Regina v Bennett; Attorney-General’s Reference No 43 of 2009; Before Lord Judge, Lord Chief Justice, Mr Justice Butterfield and Mr Justice Flaux; Judgment October 6, 2009, cited in Ev 104 192 Q 228 193 Ev 77
Firearms Control 51
Paul James, of NABIS, denied there was evidence that this was a widespread problem, beyond a “couple of odd instances”.194 Professor Squires also told us that:
In relation to converted weapons, we need to work more closely with Europe and address the production, supply and distribution of a whole range of new CS gas weapons that are trickling their way into this country.195
Mr Lewis said that NABIS works closely with the UK Border Agency on trying to target weapons such as CS sprays, as well as Taser devices.196
124. The Government should introduce legislation to amend section 1(6) of the Firearms Act 1982 to ensure that the definition of a ‘readily-convertible’ imitation firearm accurately reflects the abilities of contemporary criminals to carry out such conversions, and introduce new offences for supply and importation of firearms to ensure that those guilty of such offences face appropriate penalties. Closer working with the UK’s European partners is also key to tackling the illegal importation of firearms.
Measures to combat misuse of low-powered air weapons
125. Air weapons can be divided into the following categories:
• Airsoft guns have muzzle energies of less than one foot pound and are therefore not considered lethal, do not fit the definition of a firearm and do not come under the control of the Firearms Act 1968.
• Air weapons which have muzzle energies above one foot pound but below six foot pounds (in the case of air pistols) or 12 foot pounds (in the case of air rifles) are capable of inflicting a penetrating wound and therefore classed as ‘firearms’ but do not require a licence because of their comparatively low power.
• Air rifles with muzzle energy in excess of 12 foot pounds require a firearm certificate.
• Air pistols with muzzle energy in excess of 6 foot pounds are prohibited.197
It is estimated that there are about 7 million low-powered air weapons in circulation in the UK.198
126. There are age restrictions on ownership of low-powered air weapons. Individuals under 14 years of age may not buy, hire, borrow or receive an air gun or ammunition as a gift. Parents wishing to buy air guns for under-14s must not allow them to be in possession of the air gun or ammunition unsupervised. Under-14s can use air guns under the supervision of someone of or over 21 years of age, on private premises with appropriate permission. Between 14 and 17 years of age it is legal to borrow an air gun from a person
194 Q 219 195 Q 55 196 Q 220 197 Ev 64 [British Association of Shooting and Conservation] 198 Q 13 [Mr Penn]
52 Firearms Control
aged over 18 years of age and use it on private property, without supervision. A person within this age group may not carry an air gun in a public place unless supervised by a person of or over 21 years and only with good reason.
127. There have been a number of recent pieces of legislation to tackle low-powered air gun use. The Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 raised the age limit at which a person could buy an air weapon from 14 to 17; banned air guns designed or adapted for use with a self- contained gas cartridge system; and made it an offence for a person to have with him an unloaded air weapon or imitation firearm in a public place without lawful authority or reasonable excuse. The Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 required anyone who wishes to sell air weapons by way of trade or business to register with the police as a firearms dealer; required such sales of air weapons to be made face to face; increased, from 17 to 18, the minimum age for acquiring or possessing an air weapon; and made it an offence for any person to fire an air weapon beyond the boundary of any premises. The Crime and Security Act 2010, when it comes into effect, will make it an offence for a person in possession of an air weapon to fail to take reasonable precautions to prevent it coming into the hands of a person under 18 who is not lawfully permitted to have the weapon with him.
128. Our predecessor Home Affairs Committee advocated in 2000 that the Government of the time should go a step further in requiring the licensing of all air weapons. The then- Government rejected this in its response.199 The Gun Control Network repeated the desirability of such a measure owing to their concern about the continued misuse of air weapons. It based this argument on the following factors:
• There are many reports of low-powered air guns being used to threaten partners and ex-partners.
• Without registration it is easy for them to fall into the hands of children and young people, often as a result of inadequate storage.
• Low-powered air guns may be purchased without background checks and so can easily be obtained by those banned from owning firearms, or others who would be deemed unsuitable for gun ownership.
• “There is plenty of evidence that they are lethal”.200
129. There have been a number of fatalities (ten since 1998, according to Professor Squires201) caused by low-powered air weapons, especially among children and teenagers, and they were responsible for a fifth of all serious gun injuries in 2008/09.202 Air guns are also frequently used in attacks on pets and wildlife; in 2008 the RSPCA dealt with 759
199 The Government Reply to the Second Report from the Home Affairs Committee Session 1999–2000, Control over Firearms, HC 95, October 2000 200 Ev 98 201 Q 69 202 Ev 98 [Gun Control Network]
Firearms Control 53
animals affected by the improper use of airguns.203 Some 92% of air weapon offences involve the weapon being fired, compared with only 12% of handgun offences.204
130. However, a number of witnesses drew attention to falling levels of reported air weapon offending.205 The Historical Breechloading Small Arms Association cited data showing that violent offences involving air guns fell from 23,77 to 1,311 between 1983 and 2008, while the overall number of violent offences rose.206 When asked about this, Professor Squires said: Offending by firearm is grossly under-reflected ... but the trend is moving in the right direction. That may well be as a result not so much of firearm legislation but of antisocial behaviour legislation, which has tried to tackle that lower-level nuisance in communities.207
We requested data from the Home Office of the number of criminal convictions for recently-created air weapon offences (which relate to possession, purchasing and improper use of air weapons, but do not cover air weapon enabled crime, such as criminal damage) to see the extent to which the legislation is being used:
203 Ev 98 [Gun Control Network] 204 Ev 75 [Professor Squires] 205 See, for example, Q 15 [Mr Penn]; Ev 83 [Gun Trade Association] 206 Ev w39 207 Q 70
54 Firearms Control
Table 4: Number of defendants found guilty at all courts for selected firearms offences, England and Wales, 2000–2009208
Year
Offence 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Selling or transferring an air weapon unlawfully (Firearms Act 1968 S.3(2) as added by Violent Crime ------1 Reduction Act 2006)
Carrying a loaded or unloaded or imitation firearm or air weapon in public place (Firearms Act 1968 ------67 155 S.19 as amended by ASB Act 2004)
Person under 17 purchasing or hiring firearm or ammunition (Firearms Act 1968 S.22(1)) 3 1 - - - - - 1 - -
Person under 17 having with him an air weapon or ammunition 26 3 5 3 2 7 8 19 18 19 (Firearms Act 1968 S.22(4))
Person under 17 making improper use of air weapon under supervision 1 1 - - 7 4 2 5 1 - (Firearms Act 1968 S.23(1))
Person supervising permitting improper use of air weapon by person under 17 2 - - - 1 3 - - - - (Firearms Act 1968 S.23(1))
Selling or letting on hire a firearm or ammunition to person under 18 ------1 2 - - (Firearms Act 1968 S.24(1))
Supplying air weapon to person under 17 (Firearms Act 1968 S.24(4)) 2 2 2 ------
Fire an air weapon beyond premises (Firearms Act 1968 S.21A as added by Violent Crime Reduction ------2 20 38 Act 2006)
Total 24 7 7 3 10 14 11 29 106 213
131. Shooting organisations were concerned about the impact of a licensing regime on legitimate users, which they argued would be disproportionate. Mr Batley told us that it would be “enormously costly and bureaucratic”.209 The Gun Trade Association argued that:
The effect of a licensing regime would be to irrevocably damage the air gun industry, to seriously damage an Olympic sport, to make the safe training of young shots much more difficult and to prevent parents and their children from enjoying a less formalised sport within the confines of their home or garden ... It is universally
208 Data provided by the Home Office 209 Q 134
Firearms Control 55
recognised that the UK air gun industry leads the field in terms of innovation through research and development and its products are highly regarded, worldwide.210
The Home Office stated that the “vast majority of air guns are used in a responsible and disciplined manner for legitimate purposes” such as target shooting. It also noted, a point reiterated in a number of submissions from shooters, that air guns are used frequently by clubs to introduce new members to the safe handling of firearms.211 The NFU notes that “the ability for farmers to use air guns is vital” for controlling smaller pests.212
132. Finally, the ACPO Firearms and Explosives Licensing Group was “not convinced” that applying certificate control to low powered air guns would “produce proportionate public safety outcomes”:
Against a background of significant reductions in air weapon enabled crime, the increased controls on sale, (through registered firearms dealers), the increases to the minimum age for purchase/hire, and with the forthcoming controls on security to prevent unauthorised access by young people, ACPO does not consider that bringing air weapons under the certificate system is proportionate. Continued enforcement of existing controls, together with that due in the future, is necessary and very desirable.213
Shooting organisations considered that the Crime and Security Act 2010 should be given a chance to have an effect, before further legislation is introduced, and that the focus of prevention of air weapon misuse remain on education and enforcement.214
133. Reported air weapon offences have been falling since 2003/04, possibly in response to legislation, although we appreciate that such offences are likely to be under- represented in official figures. We were encouraged by the number of successful prosecutions for possession of air weapons in public or by underage individuals, and improper firing of air weapons, that have been undertaken since 2008. Greater enforcement of air weapon offences, such as criminal damage, should form part of the more general police undertaking to be tougher on anti-social behaviour. Before considering whether or not to incorporate low-powered air weapons into the firearms licensing regime, the Government should continue to monitor closely the impact of recent legislation, including the Crime and Security Act 2010 on reducing air weapon offences.
210 Ev 82 211 Ev 113 212 Ev w17 213 Ev 107, 109 214 See, for example, Ev 57 [British Shooting Sports Council], Ev 65 [British Association of Shooting and Conservation]
56 Firearms Control
Conclusions and recommendations
1. The police recorded 14,250 offences in which a firearm was fired, used as a blunt instrument or to threaten in England and Wales in 2008/09, the last year for which complete figures are available. This represents only 0.3% of all recorded offences and a 41% fall in firearms offences since 2003/04. However, to put this into context, the reduction came from a historic peak in levels of gun crime reached in the early years of the 2000s. Where firearms are used, it can be to devastating effect: they were responsible for 39 homicides, and around 2,000 injuries, in 2008/09. Moreover, the extent to which firearms, especially air weapons, are used in less serious crimes is likely to be higher than is recorded; and a number of firearms-related offences are not captured in these statistics. While it is heartening that official figures show the use of firearms in crime to be declining, these figures should not be allowed to fuel complacency. (Paragraph 12)
2. We heard contrasting views about the extent to which legally-held firearms are used in crime. It is difficult to form an accurate assessment, given the limitations of available data. Certainly licensed firearms do not appear to be used in the majority of cases. They are infrequently used in serious and organised crime, which is fed by illegal firearms, particularly converted and realistic imitation weapons. Mass shootings with licensed weapons, such as the terrible crimes perpetrated by Derrick Bird, also thankfully remain rare, but the fact that they were carried out by licensed gun owners should not be overlooked in any further consideration of firearms legislation. Offences with low-powered air weapons, the possession of which is not illegal, comprise a substantial proportion of all gun crime. Moreover, legal firearms were used in at least 10% of firearms homicides in 2008/09, which, while it represents a tiny number of individual incidents, is not an insignificant proportion of these homicides. On the basis of data submitted to the Cullen Inquiry, and that collected more recently by Professor Squires and the Gun Control Network, we are concerned about the use of legal firearms in domestic incidents, often linked to domestic violence. (Paragraph 21)
3. There are 138,728 section 1 firearms certificate holders and 574,946 shotgun certificate holders in England and Wales. The proportion of licence holders who use their guns in crime is tiny. Many representations were made to us by individual shooters and their representatives about their legitimate enjoyment of shooting sports, about the need for farmers in particular to have access to firearms in the course of their professional activities and about the wider benefits shooting brings to the UK economy. (Paragraph 26)
4. There is considerable evidence, although it is not clear-cut, that well-designed legislation to regulate and restrict the legal supply of firearms can reduce gun crime. The UK has strict gun laws and comparatively low levels of gun crime. The link should not be overstated—there is no direct correlation in recent UK history between levels of gun ownership and gun crime trends. However, it is fair to assume at least in part that this demonstrates the success of the licensing regime, in place since 1968, which enables the authorities to satisfy themselves that those owning
Firearms Control 57
firearms are fit to do so. We do not believe that a total outright ban on ownership and use of section 1 firearms and shotguns would be a proportionate response to the risks posed by these weapons. There is, however, scope for further minimisation of risk through adjustments to the licensing process, which we consider in more detail in chapter three. We also believe that more effective measures could be put in place to tackle criminal use of those firearms which are not currently subject to a licensing regime; we consider this in chapter four. (Paragraph 35)
5. An onerous burden is placed on the police and on the public because of the difficulty of understanding and applying the 34 relevant laws which govern the control of firearms. It is unreasonable to expect members of the public to know their responsibilities when the law is so complex and confused. It is also unreasonable to expect the police to apply the law accurately in all cases when it is so complex. This is unhelpful to good relations between the police and the public. We recommend that, rather than adding new rules and greater confusion, the Government provides proposals for early consultation on how to codify and simplify the law. Along with the proposals themselves, we urge the Government to give careful consideration to how it will publicise the legislation in order to give greater clarity to the lay person. (Paragraph 36)
6. The supply of firearms is only part of the challenge of reducing gun violence. We understand that the Government is to publish details of its crime prevention strategy at the end of the year. In order to tackle the drivers of gun crime, we recommend that this strategy should explicitly link to long-term measures to reduce domestic violence, measures to tackle the social factors which foster extreme violence and measures to clamp down on illegal drug markets and other forms of serious and organised crime. We are concerned about the potential for sensationalist media coverage of shootings to encourage copycat killings. In respect of this last point, we recommend that the Government ask the media regulatory bodies to enforce a code of practice which both prohibits overtly sensational media coverage of shootings and offers greater protection to victims and their families against intrusive reporting. (Paragraph 42)
7. We note the evidence given to us about the need for a ‘public health’ approach to preventing and limiting violence. We also note that the unique and imaginative approach to the collection and analysis of data about violent incidents led by Professor Jon Shepherd in Cardiff has delivered major improvements, measured by the significant drop in the number of victims needing treatment at Accident and Emergency. We recommend that a careful analysis based on science and ‘engineering’ methodology should be applied to this field of prevention. (Paragraph 43)
8. We welcome the recent agreement between the Association of Chief Police Officers and the British Medical Association that the police alert GPs to every new and renewal licence application. We consider this to be an important step in ensuring that the licensing authority receives accurate medical information about applicants, given the cases we have heard in which applicants have failed to provide this, some of which have resulted in murder. Ultimately, police licensing officers must take responsibility for the decision as to whether or not to grant or revoke a licence. We
58 Firearms Control
note that there is already a duty on doctors to communicate their concerns if they judge that a patient poses a danger to themselves or to others. Police guidance must make clear that GPs are not being asked to predict future behaviour, as this is impossible, or to judge the fitness of an applicant to possess a weapon themselves. One means of dealing with this latter concern would be to consider requiring applicants to undergo a compulsory medical check with a specially-appointed medical examiner, but we note that this would be extremely resource intensive, that it might be regarded as disproportionate, and that we received no firm evidence that it would achieve the desired level of certainty in the licensing process. (Paragraph 67)
9. We consider that there should be both tighter restrictions and clearer guidance on the granting of firearms and shotgun licences to individuals who have engaged in criminal activity. Firstly, the legislation should be amended to clarify that persons in receipt of wholly suspended sentences are subject to the same prohibitions from obtaining a licence to hold section 1 firearms or shotguns as they would be if their sentence had not been suspended. We do not believe it appropriate for those convicted of offences which are serious enough to warrant a custodial sentence to retain their firearms. We are also of the view that those who receive shorter custodial sentences should not be allowed to possess firearms and recommend accordingly. (Paragraph 72)
10. We understand that police licensing officers are now encouraged to take into account intelligence about criminal behaviour that does not result in convictions, as well as convictions resulting in non-custodial sentences, when considering whether or not to grant a licence: it must be made explicit in police guidance that officers are expected to take such behaviour extremely seriously, in particular cases of bind- overs, arrests and police call-outs for domestic violence, and an accumulation of convictions for offences whose penalty falls short of that requiring prohibition. (Paragraph 73)
11. Given our particular concerns about the use of legal weapons in domestic firearms incidents, we consider that the Canadian requirement for partners and recent ex- partners to sign licence application forms merits further exploration. We recommend that the UK Government should hold a consultation on the proposal that police licensing officers consult the current and recent domestic partners of applicants in assessing a licence application, and report back to us on the responses received. (Paragraph 74)
12. We are not convinced by arguments put forward in favour of decreasing the licence renewal period from five to two years. We have not seen any evidence to suggest that there has been an increase in misuse of lethal firearms since the period was increased from three years in 1995, and the proposal would place considerable pressure on police resources. We are encouraged by early signs that police forces may be taking a more proactive approach to licence revocations following the Derrick Bird shootings and consider that such an approach, facilitated by the National Firearms Licensing Management System, and greater emphasis on medical checks, is the most effective way forward. (Paragraph 78)
Firearms Control 59
13. We advocate a change in the law to create a single system for the licensing of section 1 firearms and shotguns. Such a system should be based upon the current process for granting licences for section 1 firearms. The benefits of such a system would be two- fold: firstly, we consider that allowing guns to only those individuals who have good reason to hold them strikes the appropriate balance between personal freedoms and public safety, and we see no reason why those applying for a shotgun licence should be exempt from proving ‘good reason’. Secondly, it will render the process considerably more straightforward and, we understand from the police, cheaper to administer. We believe that this can be undertaken in such a way as to avoid any undue restrictions on the use of shotguns. (Paragraph 81)
14. Current police guidance on firearms legislation is out-of-date. We recommend that the guidance is urgently updated to take into account recent changes to legislation to ensure that officers are properly equipped to take the best decisions that they can. Furthermore, the Government should facilitate a change in the status of the guidance to make it an Approved Code of Practice, to give police decisions greater weight with the courts. While we have no wish to interfere with the judicial process, we are aware of at least one case where a magistrate has reinstated a firearm revoked by the police, only for the firearm to be subsequently used in crime. (Paragraph 84)
15. There is concern about the potential impact of police spending cuts on the firearms licensing function. In particular, it is important to preserve recent improvements in the rigour of the process, such as the increase in home visits undertaken for renewal applications, which we consider should be compulsory. One means of ensuring sufficient funds is to increase applicant fees; given that the current fee structure was set in 2000, we consider that the Home Office should consider raising the current £50 fee to a level that covers the reasonable costs of licensing. We also understand that substantial savings could be made by extending the life of a proportion of certificates in order to remove the peaks and troughs created when the renewal period was extended to five years. The Home Office should implement this proposal and report back to us within twelve months on the steps that it has taken on this recommendation. (Paragraph 88)
16. It has been suggested that prohibiting ownership of firearms and ammunition together in the home would reduce both the risk of them falling into the hands of criminals, through theft, and the ease at which they could be misused by their legal owners in violent incidents. We were inclined to agree with Mr Whiting’s assessment, that the need to fetch a weapon, or ammunition, from a storage facility would be unlikely to deter those intent on murder. We are not convinced that holding weapons at central locations would necessarily reduce the risk of theft; it could indeed increase the risk of theft. (Paragraph 94)
17. A large number of young people enjoy shooting in a safe and responsible manner. However, the legislation governing their use of firearms is extremely complex and confusing. We recommend that the Government brings forward proposals to simplify and clarify (a) the age at which an individual is permitted to shoot under supervision in the controlled environment of a shooting range; (b) the age at which an individual is permitted to shoot under supervision outside of such a controlled environment; and (c) the age at which an individual is permitted to shoot
60 Firearms Control
unsupervised. In formulating such proposals, the Government should be informed by our beliefs that the risks involved in shooting are greatly mitigated under supervision; that the purpose of granting a licence should be to allow an individual to shoot unsupervised; and that we can see no good reason to maintain the current differences in age restrictions between section 1 firearms and shotguns, the origins of which are purely historical. (Paragraph 101)
18. Replica, converted and deactivated firearms have emerged as a major source of illegal guns, perhaps owing to the difficulties that criminals now experience in acquiring genuine lethal firearms. In the past, policy-making to tackle emerging threats has been hampered by the lack of an effective evidence base about criminal use of firearms. We are encouraged that the formation of the National Ballistics Intelligence Service has gone some way towards addressing this deficiency. While clearly we would not be in favour of any disclosure that would compromise police operations, or assist criminals in accessing lethal weapons, we urge the National Ballistics Intelligence Service and the police to make generalised data about the illegal gun market available to academics and policy-makers more widely where this would not interfere with operational requirements, in recognition of the contribution that such individuals can make to crime reduction. (Paragraph 109)
19. Restricted intelligence from the National Ballistics Intelligence Service indicates that a significant number of pre-1995 standard weapons have been reactivated into live weapons within the UK, and subsequently used in very serious crimes. We therefore recommend that the Government introduces a requirement for firearms that were deactivated before 1995 to be modified to the 1995 standard, in order to make it harder for criminals to gain access to readily-reactivated weapons. We also recommend that deactivated guns are only sold through Registered Firearms Dealers. (Paragraph 114)
20. The previous Government introduced legislation enabling a more pro-active approach to outlawing “readily-convertible” imitation firearms via the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006, but did not take the necessary action to bring this into effect. Restricted intelligence from the National Ballistics Intelligence Service reveals the significant role that converted firearms play in facilitating serious criminality. We therefore recommend that the Home Secretary make regulations under Section 39 of the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 to require imitation firearms to conform to a specification that makes it more difficult for them to be converted into firing weapons, and that a process of type approval be introduced concurrently to limit the introduction of non-compliant items into the market place. (Paragraph 119)
21. The Government should introduce legislation to amend section 1(6) of the Firearms Act 1982 to ensure that the definition of a ‘readily-convertible’ imitation firearm accurately reflects the abilities of contemporary criminals to carry out such conversions, and introduce new offences for supply and importation of firearms to ensure that those guilty of such offences face appropriate penalties. Closer working with the UK’s European partners is also key to tackling the illegal importation of firearms. (Paragraph 124)
Firearms Control 61
22. Reported air weapon offences have been falling since 2003/04, possibly in response to legislation, although we appreciate that such offences are likely to be under- represented in official figures. We were encouraged by the number of successful prosecutions for possession of air weapons in public or by underage individuals, and improper firing of air weapons, that have been undertaken since 2008. Greater enforcement of air weapon offences, such as criminal damage, should form part of the more general police undertaking to be tougher on anti-social behaviour. Before considering whether or not to incorporate low-powered air weapons into the firearms licensing regime, the Government should continue to monitor closely the impact of recent legislation, including the Crime and Security Act 2010 on reducing air weapon offences. (Paragraph 133)
62 Firearms Control
Formal Minutes
Tuesday 14 December 2010
Members present:
Rt Hon Keith Vaz, in the Chair
Nicola Blackwood Steve McCabe Mr Aidan Burley Rt Hon Alun Michael James Clappison Bridget Phillipson Lorraine Fullbrook Mark Reckless Dr Julian Huppert Mr David Winnick
Draft Report (Firearms Control), proposed by the Chair, brought up and read.
Ordered, That the draft Report be read a second time, paragraph by paragraph.
Paragraphs 1 to 133 read and agreed to.
Key Facts agreed to.
Resolved, That the Report be the Third Report of the Committee to the House.
Ordered, That the Chair make the Report to the House.
Ordered, That embargoed copies of the Report be made available, in accordance with the provisions of Standing Order No. 134.
Written evidence was ordered to be reported to the House for printing with the Report , together with written evidence reported and ordered to be published on 20 December.
Written evidence was ordered to be reported to the House for placing in the Library and Parliamentary Archives.
[Adjourned till Tuesday 21 December at10.30 am
Firearms Control 63
Witnesses
Tuesday 14 September 2010 Page
David Penn, British Shooting Sports Council, Geoff Doe, National Rifle Association and National Small-bore Rifle Association, and Bill Harriman, British Association of Shooting and Conservation Ev 1
Tuesday 26 October 2010
Professor Peter Squires, University of Brighton Ev 7
Tom Davies, Independent Police Complaints Commissioner, lead on firearms licensing issues, and Jane Furniss, Chief Executive, Independent Police Complaints Commission Ev 11
John Batley, Gun Trade Association, Graham Downing, Countryside Alliance, and Mike Eveleigh, British Association for Shooting and Conservation Ev 15
Tuesday 2 November 2010
Harry Berger, shooting victim, Dr Ian Chrystie, father of injured shooting victim Samantha Chrystie, Kevin Moore, brother-in-law of deceased shooting victim Darren Rewcastle, and Jude Talbot, daughter of deceased shooting victim Michael Pike Ev 21
Jamie Reed, MP for Copeland, Rev Richard Lee, Team Rector of Egremont, and Professor John Ashton, Joint Director of Public Health, Cumbria Primary Care Trust and Cumbria County Council Ev 25
Gill Marshall-Andrews, and Dr Mick North, Gun Control Network Ev 29
Tuesday 16 November 2010
Assistant Chief Constable Sue Fish, ACPO lead for the criminal use of firearms, Paul James, Head of the National Ballistics Intelligence Service, and Matt Lewis, Acting Head, Knowledge and Communications, NABIS Ev 33
Mick Fidgeon, Firearms Office Manager, Essex Police, Chief Constable Craig Mackey, Cumbria Constabulary, and Assistant Chief Constable Adrian Whiting, Association of Chief Police Officers lead for firearms and explosives licensing Ev 37
Dr John Canning, GP in Middlesborough and Chair, Professional Fees Committee, and Professor Vivienne Nathanson, Director of Professional Activities, British Medical Association Ev 42
James Brokenshire MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for crime prevention, Home Office Ev 45
Peter Nickles, Attorney-General for the District of Columbia Ev 50
64 Firearms Control
List of printed written evidence
1 British Shooting Sports Council Ev 54: 57: 59 2 British Association for Shooting and Conservation Ev 61: 65: 67 3 Professor Peter Squires Ev 74: 77 4 Independent Police Complaints Commission Ev 79 5 Gun Trade Association Ltd Ev 81: 85 6 Countryside Alliance Ev 86: 89 7 Mr Michael Eveleigh Ev 90 8 Dr Ian Chrystie Ev 94 9 Gun Control Network Ev 95: 100 10 Association of Chief Police Officers for England, Wales and Northern Ev 102 Ireland, and the National Ballistics Intelligence Service 11 Association of Chief Police Officers Firearms & Explosives Licensing Ev 104: 107 Working Group 12 British Medical Association Ev 109: 110 13 Home Office Ev 111 14 Peter J Nickles, Attorney General, District of Columbia Ev 114 15 Professor Dr John R Ashton CBE Ev 116
List of additional written evidence
(published in Volume II on the Committee’s website www.parliament.uk/homeaffcom)
1 Mr Bob Meadows Ev w1 2 Mr Nick L Ev w5 3 Sportsmatch UK Ltd Ev w6 4 Ms Helen S Ev w6 5 D&G Consultants UK Limited Ev w7 6 Information Commissioner Ev w7 7 Greensleeves Shooting Club Ev w10 8 National Farmers Union Ev w15 9 Mr Colin Greenwood Ev w17: w24 10 Dr Ron C Ev w27 11 Animal Aid Ev w28 12 Preparatory Schools Rifle Association Ev w32 13 Mrs Jacqueline Lewis Ev w34 14 Ofcom Ev w34 15 Press Complaints Commission Ev w35 16 Historical Breechloading Smallarms Association Ev w37
Firearms Control 65
List of unprinted evidence
The following written evidence has been reported to the House, but to save printing costs has not been printed and copies have been placed in the House of Commons Library, where they may be inspected by Members. Other copies are in the Parliamentary Archives (www.parliament.uk/archives), and are available to the public for inspection. Requests for inspection should be addressed to The Parliamentary Archives, Houses of Parliament, London SW1A 0PW (tel. 020 7219 3074; email [email protected]). Opening hours are from 9.30 am to 5.00 pm on Mondays to Fridays.
League Against Cruel Sports Scottish Government The Police Federation of England and Wales
List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament
The reference number of the Government’s response to each Report is printed in brackets after the HC printing number.
Session 2010–11 First Report Immigration Cap HC 361 Second Report Policing: Police and Crime Commissioners HC 511
cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [SO] Processed: [17-12-2010 14:58] Job: 006950 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_100914 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 1
Oral evidence
Taken before the Home Affairs Committee on Tuesday 14 September 2010
Members present: Keith Vaz (Chair)
Nicola Blackwood Mark Reckless Steve McCabe Mr David Winnick Bridget Phillipson ______
Examination of Witnesses
Witnesses: David Penn, British Shooting Sports Council, Geoff Doe, National Rifle Association and National Small-bore Rifle Association, and Bill Harriman, British Association of Shooting and Conservation.
Q1 Chair: Mr Penn, Mr Doe and Mr Harriman, Q4 Chair: Of the guns that we have here, which is thank you very much for giving evidence to the the most popular as far as obtaining a licence is Committee this morning on our first session concerned? concerning firearms. The Committee is undertaking Mr Harriman: It is the double-barrelled shotgun this inquiry to look at the legislation governing made in a variety of different gauges. This is the most firearms, to look at recent events that have occurred popular gauge, which is a 12 bore. in Whitehaven and Northumberland and to see whether or not the legislation needs to be tightened in Q5 Chair: How many guns have a licence at the any way. For your convenience and the convenience moment? How many licences are there for these guns? of the Committee we have a number of the most Mr Harriman: Shotgun certificates? popular firearms here. Some of us have not seen some Chair: Yes, certificates, sorry. of these rifles so you may refer to them. I know you Mr Harriman: Those certificates will not necessarily had difficulty in bringing your own today despite relate to that type of gun. They will relate to a variety having a licence, so thanks to the Member for of gauges and sizes and the number of certificates that Carmarthen West; he has enabled us to have these are on issue is, looking at my notes, 574,946 shotgun weapons. There is no ammunition in any of these certificates. firearms, you will be pleased to know. Mr Harriman: We have checked. Q6 Chair: Right. That presumably covers all of these, or just that one? Q2 Chair: You have? Good. We have had a number Mr Harriman: Just that particular one. of submissions about the use of firearms in the United Kingdom. Can you give us an overview individually Q7 Chair: 500,000? Half a million. And the other please as to what these firearms are used for ones? What is this one? legitimately? Mr Penn, if we could start with you? Mr Harriman: That’s a self-loading shotgun, sir. That is much the same as the double-barrelled one but it Mr Penn: There are three main legitimate uses. has a magazine where the ammunition is stored and Chair: Sorry, you will need to speak into the instead of it having two barrels—which is effectively microphone—the acoustics are very bad—and as just two guns put together—it is a single barrel which loudly as possible. Thank you. is fed by a magazine. It’s increasingly used these days Mr Penn: There are three main legitimate uses. There for wildfowling because they’ve been built in heavy is quarry shooting which is hunting and included in configurations making them suitable for use with the that vermin control, deer control, rabbit control. There large cartridges used on the marsh, which is also a is target shooting and then there is collecting. There pretty hostile environment. are a wide range of other uses; for instance veterinary purposes, dart guns which are used to deliver either a Q8 Chair: How many certificates are there for this lethal dose or medicine to an animal, the slaughter of one? animals, humane despatch of wounded animals, Mr Harriman: They will be within the total that I starting sports events, signalling, life saving, gave you earlier. equipment for aircraft or boats, film, theatre and Chair: Within the 500,000. television productions, battle re-enactment, which is Mr Doe: The total number of shotguns covered by the very popular, and trophies of war. Self-defence is not certificates at the same date, which is March 2009, considered a legitimate use in Great Britain but it is in was 1,366,082. Northern Ireland where they have separate legislation. Q9 Chair: Okay, and the third gun that we have Q3 Chair: Do you have any other categories to add, there? Mr Doe or Mr Harriman? Mr Doe: For the firearms being shown to you now, Mr Doe: No. one needs a firearm certificate as well as a shotgun cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 14:58] Job: 006950 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_100914 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Ev 2 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
14 September 2010 David Penn, Geoff Doe and Bill Harriman certificate. For various purposes—target shooting as control, pigeon control, that sort of thing. For pistols, well as vermin—at the same date in March it was the maximum permitted energy is 6 foot pounds and 138,728 certificates relating to firearms. anything that goes above 6 foot pounds in an air pistol immediately becomes a prohibited weapon. Q10 Chair: How many firearms? I have the figure of— Q15 Bridget Phillipson: There have been a number Mr Harriman: 435,383. of cases in my constituency and in Sunderland of people being seriously injured or maimed through the Q11 Chair: So if we add those two together we have use of air weapons. I’m not clear whether those were 1.8 million firearms or shotguns in existence and held by people that were entitled to hold them or had 600,000 certificates covering both, is that right? got into the hands of others, but there can be serious Mr Harriman: I think with the firearm and shotgun consequences, would you not accept, of air weapons certificate additions there is bound to be an overlap being used inappropriately or very dangerously? with people having both. Various estimates suggest it Mr Penn: Obviously any firearm can be misused and is between 10% to 15%, so you can’t do quite the we don’t in any sense accept that people should be simple addition but there is an overlap. anything other than thoroughly responsible with their Chair: Okay. Thank you very much. Bridget firearms, but given the very large numbers of air Phillipson. weapons in the population at large the incidence of injury is relatively small and the figures for air Q12 Bridget Phillipson: Thank you, Chair. The weapon misuse have been dropping steadily since the legislation around firearms is quite complex and 1980s. They’re going down and down and down, so varied. Could you just briefly outline to us what is things are getting better. banned outright, what you can legitimately hold with Chair: Thank you. a licence and those firearms that don’t require you to have a licence? Q16 David Winnick: On the open question of the Mr Penn: No firearms are banned outright. availability of firearms, on 2 June this year 12 people Chair: Sorry, you will need to speak up, Mr Penn. were murdered in Cumbria by a taxi driver who had Mr Penn: My apologies. No firearms are banned a licence for his firearms. Do you feel, bearing in mind outright. A wide range of firearms such as fully that and other such atrocities carried out by private automatic weapons, centre-fired self-loading rifles or individuals—sadly and with the loss of life—that pump-action rifles, small firearms, which covers there is any case at all for loosening the legislation pistols and small firearms of that ilk, are covered by on firearms? a prohibited weapon authority which comes from the Mr Penn: Loosening the legislation? The legislation Home Office. This is normally only given for people could be made more efficient if rifles were licensed in who are commercially buying and selling such a similar manner to shotguns. It would create far less weapons, or occasionally for people who have to act work for the police, but the controls would still be as expert witnesses in court and therefore need to there because every firearm or shotgun you acquire handle this sort of firearm on occasion as part of their has to be declared to the police by both you and the daily business. vendor and every one you sell has to be declared. So Conventional repeater rifles, single-shot rifles and there is always an audit trail. There is a simpler shotguns and muzzle-loading pistols are covered by system that could be adopted. section 1 firearm certificates. This also covers certain sorts of shotguns with larger magazine capacity than Q17 David Winnick: So on the legislation that was three shots. The other class of firearms, which is very introduced by the previous Government following a widely owned and requires no certificate whatsoever, previous atrocity in which school children had their is the air weapon that is not especially dangerous. lives taken from them, as well as some teachers in These are in considerable quantity in the countryside. Dunblane, you’re not arguing—tell me if I’m wrong in my interpretation—that such laws should be Q13 Chair: How many airguns do we have? This is repealed? You want what you have just described as a one of the airguns, is it? more efficient way of applying the law, is that correct? Mr Penn: We believe not especially dangerous air Mr Penn: That is correct, but it is the policy of the weapons, which have to be certificated, about 7 British Shooting Sports Council that we wish to see million. the return of competition pistol shooting. Chair: Seven million. Mr Winnick: Thank you. Chair: Thank you. Nicola Blackwood. Q14 Bridget Phillipson: Obviously you refer to air weapons as not especially dangerous weapons. I don’t Q18 Nicola Blackwood: Thank you, Chair. As I know whether you regard every air weapon as not understand it, legislation that governs possession of especially dangerous? firearms includes the Firearms Act 1968, the Firearms Mr Penn: The law specifies that an air rifle which Amendment Act 1997, the Anti-social Behaviour Act delivers more than 12 foot pounds of muzzle energy 2003, the Criminal Justice Act 2003, the Violent is specially dangerous. By comparison the .22 rifle Crime Reduction Act 2006 and the Crime and you were shown earlier, depending on the ammunition Security Act 2010. Now we have received written it uses, has about 90 foot pounds of energy. That’s a evidence from both the Countryside Alliance and lot more. The 12 foot pounds will do for rabbit ACPO saying this is quite a jumbled picture and they cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 14:58] Job: 006950 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_100914 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 3
14 September 2010 David Penn, Geoff Doe and Bill Harriman would like a review and perhaps a consolidation Act. something wrong your intent is not relevant. You can What is your personal view about how be guilty of doing something without any evil intent comprehensible the legislation is for your average at all. user? Would your battle re-enactor really understand Nicola Blackwood: Yes. this kind of complex legislative picture? Mr Doe: The Home Office guidance—the Mr Doe: I’m afraid you probably left out about 30 interpretation for the view of the Act—runs to 200 other Acts of Parliament. pages and it is now eight years out of date, and we Nicola Blackwood: Right. Thank you for clarifying have six Acts of Parliament amending it. That is how that. complex the legislation is. Chair: Well, we won’t hear about all of them. Mr Doe: I just want to make the point that there are Q20 Chair: So you would like to see it consolidated. in fact 34 Acts of Parliament that amended the In answer to Nicola Blackwood’s question, you would original 1968 Act and some of them are as diverse as like to see all these various Acts of Parliament in one the Atomic Energy Act 2004, so that gives you a feel Firearms Act? for the problems of interpretation and how the Mr Doe: Yes, it’s very important that is done before Government perhaps intended the legislation to be. It any other review of it is taken. is very difficult to interpret. It’s a long audit trail quite often to arrive at the answer, with all the amendments. Q21 Chair: Have you brought to the attention of the We are fortunate that we have a book here that I’m Home Office the fact that its guidance is out of date? going to show you—the Act with all the amendments. Mr Doe: On a routine basis, sir. We are involved with Joe Public doesn’t really understand it and many them at the moment, we are rewriting various chapters police forces don’t understand it when amongst but it seems to be a very long process. themselves they have to discuss and take a view on Chair: Thank you. Steve McCabe. interpretation. I know we all have been invited to help police licensing authorities to have a view on the Q22 Steve McCabe: I wonder if you could just legislation. It would be useful to have one single explain the processes by which an individual is document that we all understand. licensed to own and use a firearm or a shotgun. Mr Harriman: As a practitioner and an expert witness Mr Penn: To some extent the process for licensing a in the courts I often find that my role goes a lot further section 1 firearm will depend on the applicant’s good than the technical matters and I have to help barristers, reason, whether it be target shooting or hunting or solicitors and, in very occasional circumstances, the whatever. In every case, the intention is to ensure that judge to work out what the law is. In Archbold, which the applicant can be permitted the firearm and is the standard legal text, the section on firearms is ammunition without danger to public safety and the extremely thick—and growing—and it is very difficult to comprehend it. You have to go from one Act to police. That’s the bottom line as far as the police are another to learn any facts and there is a long trail concerned. The application is made on form 101 that goes back to get an answer. Even then people are where all details have to be included of any uncertain. It is very complicated and it reflects the convictions the applicant has had; convictions cannot way in which the legislation has developed since be spent for the purposes of a firearms licence. There 1920, which was the first formative Act that we have is also a medical declaration and the police will then that has been bolted on to, added, amended and follow up these points. They will check criminal changed. Then not only do you have the primary records, they will check police intelligence. If they legislation but there are a large number of orders, have a concern over any medical aspect they will statutory instruments and secondary legislation, which consult the applicant’s GP and provided they are add some of the infrastructure to that. I can send you reasonably satisfied then— some. It is very complicated and it’s a mess. Q23 Chair: There is no consultation with the GP Q19 Nicola Blackwood: Do you think that unless there is concern? complexity means that there is more likely to be a risk Mr Penn: That is correct. of licences being granted inappropriately? Mr Harriman: No, I think the complexity means that Q24 Chair: Do you think that there ought to be in it is very difficult for people to understand. I don’t every case? think it necessarily entrenches the licensing function Mr Penn: That is not our view, no. We think the but a lot of the work that my team does at the British balance is about right at the moment, whereby if there Association of Shooting and Conservation, is advise is concern the GP should be consulted. Having gone people who phone us up to ask “What does the law through these checks the police will then arrange a mean, what can we do, what mustn’t we do?” We can visit by a firearms inquiry officer to the applicant and put out as many fact sheets as we like; we can put he will then receive advice on the security that is articles on the website and in our magazines, but still found and the firearms inquiry officer will come to people are very confused. conclusions about the applicant to make sure that he Mr Doe: Most of us are motorists and we get along is satisfied that the person is suitable. perfectly fine without a detailed knowledge of motoring law. The difference between firearms Q25 Steve McCabe: Are you aware of any legislation and motoring legislation is that firearms difficulties or ambiguities in terms of the way these legislation is strict liability legislation. If you get kinds of qualifications are applied? cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 14:58] Job: 006950 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_100914 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Ev 4 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
14 September 2010 David Penn, Geoff Doe and Bill Harriman
Mr Penn: Generally, no. There are variations from for a shotgun certificate, regard it as a huge privilege force to force but they still go through a process which to be given that piece of paper by a firearms inquiry is intended to ensure that the applicant is suitable. officer. I suspect they are probably a lot more They may do it in slightly different ways. responsible in their behaviour with a firearm than perhaps somebody who is a bit older and perhaps a Q26 Steve McCabe: I notice that one of the bit more blasé. I think it also goes on through older organisations that makes up your group or consortium life—having created that sense of responsibility when is Young Shots. What’s the average age of a member they are younger, they will carry that through as they of—is it Young Shots, or Young Shooters, sorry? go through life. What is the average age of a member of Young Shooters? Q31 Steve McCabe: I just wondered if I can clarify Mr Penn: I’m afraid that is not one of our member who is responsible for Young Shots? I don’t want associations. anyone to disown them. I understand they’re part of the British Association of Shooting and Conservation Q27 Steve McCabe: I’m sorry, I thought it said in who are one of your associations, so in effect you are your—my apologies. I have it here. I thought it said, responsible for them. “A brief overview of shooting in Britain, the British Mr Doe: Can I come in on that? Shooting Sports Council.” So you couldn’t comment Chair: Yes, of course. on it—you don’t know anything about it? Mr Doe: You touched on shotguns but also obviously Mr Harriman: I can give you a steer, sir. The Young there are a lot of young people who are taking up air Shots programme is part of BASC’s programme to rifle shooting and cartridge rifle shooting. Now the encourage responsible firearms use by young people National Small-bore Rifle Association have a youth who have expressed an interest, and we train people proficiency scheme, which has been running since who range from between 10 to 18 on average. I can’t 1990 funded by the Sports Council, that has qualified confirm that but they are the very best average that over 8,000 people—adults—to coach air rifle and you would get in any group of young people who are pistol shooting. The National Small-bore Rifle interested in anything, whether it be model aircraft or Association is the only national governing body of go-karting, it’s very much a spread of age. sport, which is recognised by the Duke of Edinburgh’s award scheme as an access organisation. The Scout Q28 Chair: The minimum age for holding a shotgun movement also offers shooting in a very large manner licence, one of these guns over here, is 10 years of and in three weeks’ time there will be nearly 800 age? Scouts at their national championships. They will be Mr Harriman: There is no minimum age. over the order of 14, 15, 16 in age.
Q29 Chair: There is no minimum age? We were Q32 Chair: But just to go back to the law, there is a given figures under the Freedom of Information Act minimum age for applying for a firearms certificate, that there are 1,000 under-18s that have licences. Are is there not? Of 14? those figures correct? Mr Doe: There is. Mr Harriman: I suspect they are. There are certainly Chair: But no minimum age for a shotgun. to my knowledge a small number of young people who have been given shotgun certificates, having Q33 Mark Reckless: Mr Penn, you mentioned some subjected themselves to the proper process. Also variation in approaches by police forces and I because they’re minors their parents are involved, and wondered if you felt that they put a different priority quite often you find a firearms licensing manager will on this area or if perhaps any forces had better ask if the school might want to make some comment processes than others? as well. So whilst the process is the same for an adult Mr Penn: On the administration of firearms licensing, it is slightly broader, and the certificate, once it has it is our experience—and we work very closely with been granted to a young person, does not allow that ACPO on firearms licensing matters—that there is youngster to use a shotgun without any supervision every effort made to introduce good practice or best until they are 15. I think the reason that people apply practice across the board. One of our great concerns for shotgun certificates is because the law is so badly at the moment is that if there are substantial cuts in written as to how somebody who doesn’t hold a the next Budget, which we fear will be the case— certificate may borrow one legitimately and use it. the consistency, quality, efficacy and general speed of licensing will all suffer because they won’t necessarily Q30 Chair: That is a concern, is it not? Obviously be seen as high priorities in a force who has young people of the age of 15 vary in their maturity significantly reduced budgets. and if there is no under-age limit as to how old you can be to have one of these guns it does cause Q34 Mark Reckless: In that respect do you think we concern, not maybe from the person who has the gun can assist the police through a consolidation of the but if it is misused. Is that a concern to your law perhaps in merging some of these categories? organisations? Mr Penn: Yes, a consolidated Act would make life Mr Harriman: Any form of misuse is always a much easier for everybody. considerable concern, but it is my experience that young people who have gone through the process of Q35 Steve McCabe: Some people may find it strange being trained and taught, and perhaps having applied that we have an age restriction for when we can obtain cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 14:58] Job: 006950 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_100914 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 5
14 September 2010 David Penn, Geoff Doe and Bill Harriman a provisional driving licence, buy alcohol, cigarettes, information technology it will quite often come from get married, and yet you can have a firearms the courts into the National Firearms Licensing certificate at 14. Do you have any observation on that? Management System. Every morning the licensing Mr Penn: A lot of people start to learn to shoot when department will look to see whether there are any hits they’re big enough to lift the firearm and handle it on their system, and it will say, “Mr Smith convicted safely, so it’s not at all unusual for people around that of whatever in the magistrates court.” They will then age to start shooting. It’s pretty traditional in this look at that and they will probably go and speak to country and I have to say that it does not appear to Mr Smith and get some more facts and if they think be a problem where licensed firearms are concerned, that what he has done is sufficiently serious to make because people, as Bill has explained, do have to go him potentially a danger to the public safety or the through a lot of checks and they do appreciate the police then his certificate will be revoked. He will importance of safety. The problem, and it is a reducing have a letter to that effect served upon him and he problem, is with unlicensed air rifles, but we must will be required to give up his certificate and also his emphasise that considering the large numbers out firearms. Now that brings him a right of appeal to the there the misuse of air rifles is getting smaller and Crown Court within 21 days of the notice being smaller, which is a good thing. served. It’s a system that generally works pretty well and over the years we have seen an improved response Q36 Chair: If there is not a minimum age for when people have come to the attention of the police. shotguns why should there be a minimum age for It might not necessarily be a conviction, it might be firearms? local intelligence, perhaps a domestic violence unit Mr Penn: I think the reasons for that are probably lost reports something, perhaps a concerned neighbour in history. might make a report. The number of revocations are very small and they’re generally well less than 1%, Q37 Chair: But you wouldn’t object to it being 14 and I would suggest that doesn’t indicate that there’s for shotguns as well as firearms? slackness or anything in the system, it’s simply that Mr Penn: No, we think the present system is fine people are well behaved and that somebody who has because the younger persons under 14 certainly are a certificate knows that if they come to the adverse always supervised. People can use an air rifle in an attention of the police, the chances are they will lose unsupervised manner on land with permission from it and they will lose it pretty quickly. the age of 14 onwards, but for a proper firearm people are supervised at a young age, so there really is not Q39 David Winnick: Despite that, Mr Harriman, and a problem. arising from Dunblane and more recently the tragedy Mr Harriman: If I could comment on that, Mr in Cumbria, there is a feeling—obviously this will be Chairman. I think part of the problem at the moment part of our inquiry—that the application is not being with young people making applications for certificates as rigorously applied as one would like. One is that the law is uncertain as to who may lend a suggestion is that the medical authorities, the GP in a shotgun to somebody, and it’s hedged about with four particular person’s case, should be asked for his or her tests. It has to be the occupier of private premises, and view on whether a licence should be given. we are not told what that means and it is very difficult Mr Harriman: If we go back to the terrible business to work it out. There is a good definition in the at Dunblane, everybody knew that there was Wildlife and Countryside Act but that doesn’t something extremely strange about Thomas Hamilton necessarily transfer to the firearms licence. It then has and the Central Scotland Police had the opportunity to be the occupier’s gun on the occupier’s premises in to revoke his certificate and didn’t because the then the occupier’s presence. I can remember in the days Deputy Chief Constable was worried that he might of the Firearms Consultative Committee, that wasn’t renewed in 2004, one of the last pieces of business go to appeal at the Sheriff’s Court and win it. In my that we looked at was to try and find a workable and experience that is most unusual. My experience is if simple piece of legislation that said, “If you are a there is any doubt then a certificate will be revoked person who is licensed to hold a firearm or a shotgun and the former certificate holder then has the right then you may lend it to anybody else who may then of appeal. use it under your supervision on land where you have permission to be.” That would be so much easier and I Q40 David Winnick: What do you say about the taxi think that would remove the necessity for some young driver who murdered in Cumbria? Why on earth was people who apply for certificates because they want a licence given to him? to stay absolutely within the law and they find it very Mr Harriman: Without having the police reports from difficult to satisfy those four tests in what is really that incident I don’t think that it’s proper that we quite an archaic bit of legislation. should comment on it, because the only information that I’ve had is what I’ve read in the newspapers. Q38 Bridget Phillipson: Could you just explain the process by which someone might have a firearms Q41 David Winnick: We come back to my original licence certificate revoked, either temporarily or question a moment ago. Do you believe that there is permanently? a case for a much more rigorous investigation by the Mr Harriman: Certainly. The police will have had police before a licence is given for firearms? some form of intelligence that there has been some Mr Harriman: I think the current system is form of misdemeanour and in these days of improved sufficiently rigorous. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 14:58] Job: 006950 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_100914 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Ev 6 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
14 September 2010 David Penn, Geoff Doe and Bill Harriman
Q42 David Winnick: Sufficiently robust despite pass it on to the local police force to do their inquiries. Cumbria? The club is required to have a proper constitution, be Mr Harriman: Yes. But we don’t know what the facts insured and to control and keep note of the firearms on Cumbria are. and their condition, and the amount of use that the member has. A new person has to do three months’ Q43 Chair: Sufficiently rigorous but not clear, that’s probation and the police have to be advised of any the message to this Committee. There needs to be membership applications. If a member leaves again more clarity as far as the law is concerned, updated the police have to be advised and if they don’t use guidance which is missing which you’re helping to their firearm police have to be advised. rewrite. Is that right? A newcomer has to go through a probationary period, Mr Penn: I think certainly the guidance is very at least three months. My own club does six months— important, because it’s regarded as the benchmark of their choice—and when you do go down to a club interpretation between firearms licensing departments initially you do have to have a course of instruction and other organisations and the Home Office and it on the proper handling and control of firearms. has proven to be a fairly useful document. Q47 Chair: Do you think it is sufficiently rigorous? Q44 Chair: Does it worry you when you obviously Mr Doe: Yes. Very much so. see incidents like Cumbria and Whitehaven and what Chair: Thank you. Mr Winnick, I think you have a happened elsewhere, that there will be a clamour for question. there to be tougher gun controls? Mr Penn: Yes, it does worry us because nearly all the Q48 David Winnick: You said a moment ago to the legislation has been reactive to some incident that has Chair that legislation has come about because of what occurred and in our view this does not make for good tragedies have occurred. Surely the point is, is it not, legislation, either in this sphere or in any other. that the Government of the day should be willing to legislate without waiting for such incidents to occur? Q45 Chair: Can I ask you a final question about the Mr Penn: We agree with you on that point. The regulation of the various shooting clubs and ranges problem appears to be the amount of time that it which there are. Who regulates these clubs? would take to rewrite the very complex legislation that Mr Doe: For target shooters? you have seen before you today. One estimate I heard Chair: Yes. We will be going as a Committee to have is that it would be about two years’ preparation time a look at some of these, but who regulates you? Is and one years’ parliamentary time to produce a there a regulator? complete new Firearms Act. Mr Doe: For those people who want a firearm for Chair: Gentlemen, thank you very much for coming. target shooting purposes it is a requirement that they We will of course be continuing with our inquiry. We belong to at least one Home Office-registered club. will be hearing evidence from some of the families of There are 1,366 registered clubs currently. The club the victims in Whitehaven and elsewhere, but also we has to conform to a number of conditions. will be coming to visit one of your shooting Chair: If they are many just send them to us. establishments. I am not sure whether we will Mr Doe: Indeed, yes. participate but we might just watch. It depends what the target is, of course. I thank you for coming in. I Q46 Chair: Who inspects? We accept that there are thank Mr Bonner, Tim Bonner, for bringing in his conditions but who inspects to make sure that you firearms at very short notice and I also thank others are— for attending. That concludes this session. Mr Doe: There are 23 conditions and the club applies to the Home Office for approval. The Home Office cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [SO] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:54] Job: 006950 Unit: PG02 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101026 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 7
Tuesday 26 October 2010
Members present: Keith Vaz (Chair)
Nicola Blackwood Alun Michael Mr Aidan Burley Bridget Phillipson Lorraine Fullbrook Mark Reckless Dr Julian Huppert Mr David Winnick Steve McCabe
In the temporary absence of the Chair, Mr David Winnick was called to the Chair for part of the meeting. ______
Examination of Witness
Witness: Professor Peter Squires, University of Brighton, gave evidence.
Q49 Mr Winnick (in the Chair): Thank you very Q51 Mr Winnick (in the Chair): This has always much, Professor Squires, for coming along as part of been one of the most controversial topics, because, our inquiry into firearms control. Obviously, there will whatever gun control legislation has been brought in be a number of questions for you to answer. Our time by whichever Government, there has always been is rather limited, because we have a number of quite a lot of opposition outside Parliament. So, are witnesses today. You are the second witness, and you you not surprised that there are those who want to see are giving evidence on a topic different from that of a relaxation of the current laws? the witness we’ve just heard from. Professor Squires: Of course I am not surprised. You have taken quite an interest in gun control, and, There is a shooting lobby in this country and, on every obviously, that is the reason for your giving evidence occasion that the issue is discussed, they come to to the Home Affairs Committee today. Do you, first argue, sometimes with a usual list of what I feel are of all, feel that there’s any argument whatsoever for half-truths, confusing evidence and a series of vested loosening the controls as far as gun licences are interests. concerned? I have studied this independently, as an academic— Professor Squires: Absolutely not. I think that it’s much like your previous speaker. I think there are bizarre that, in the wake of an incident such as three contributions to make. The first relates to Cumbria, anyone would seem to think so. It’s bizarre evidence, which I have already alluded to. The second that we are seeing arguments for loosening controls or is a question about horizon scanning and looking at synthesising them at a lower standard. I think that is what the issues coming up are—I think we have some quite perverse. serious problems there, too. The third is to ask some of the questions that no-one else asks. That is partly Q50 Mr Winnick (in the Chair): In your very addressed in my current submission. The suggestion, interesting paper you make the point that, following for instance, that people should keep weapons and Dunblane and the recent tragic incident in ammunition in their private homes—where even Lord Whitehaven, the mass murderers all had licences to Cullen’s inquiry suggested they are most at risk from carry guns. Is that the position? misuse by their owners, or from theft—is something Professor Squires: That is absolutely the case. In the that we seriously need to address. As we have seen, paper, I go back further than that to the evidence three shooting outrages, 14% of gun crime and one in submitted by the Home Office to Lord Cullen’s three domestic firearm homicides were committed inquiry in 1996. A supplementary analysis was made with legal weapons, which is a problem that we have of gun homicides that showed that 14% of gun to take seriously. homicides are committed with licensed firearms. If Mr Winnick (in the Chair): Thank you. I hope you you take that picture further and look at domestic understand that we have quite a large number of homicides, 18 out of 60, nearly a third of domestic witnesses today, to the extent that my colleagues, homicides, which are often a continuation of domestic including myself, are being relatively brief. If you are violence, are committed with licensed weapons. too, it would help us to make progress. Mr Reckless Many people would like to state a position that there has a brief question. is a clear, watertight differentiation between legal and illegal weapons, but that is not the case. I’d go even Q52 Mark Reckless: Professor Squires, I am slightly further and say that most gun crime in Britain is confused. I thought you said just now that 14% of committed with weapons that are licensed or homicides were committed with licensed firearms. otherwise legal. For instance, roughly half of gun The Cullen data that we have here say that between crime is air weapon crime. Such weapons are not 1992 and 1994, only 9% of homicides were illegal and they are part of a much bigger and more committed with firearms at all. Only 14% of those 9% complicated problem that we need to look at in a were with licensed handguns. There seems to be a much more coherent and systematic manner. huge disconnect in the data, wouldn’t you say? cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:54] Job: 006950 Unit: PG02 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101026 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Ev 8 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
26 October 2010 Professor Peter Squires
Professor Squires: Fourteen per cent. of firearm stated that it is 21%—the largest single category—of homicides were committed with legal, licensed weapons that it now deals with, and it is fuelling the firearms. problem of gun crime on our streets. Mark Reckless: Firearm homicides. You said “homicides” initially, I believe. Q56 Lorraine Fullbrook: Professor Squires, I would just like to ask a supplementary question. There are Q53 Bridget Phillipson: Many of the submissions hundreds of thousands of responsible gun owners in that we’ve received have argued that the UK already this country who use weapons responsibly and store has some of the most stringent gun controls in the them responsibly. How would you filter the illegal world. What do you think about that? Do you agree? firearms out from the hundreds of thousands of people Professor Squires: I think they’re true, but we have a who are responsibly using firearms for leisure or in veritable patchwork of controls that have arisen for a their work? range of reasons, in a range of situations. We have Professor Squires: I wouldn’t go about it that way. I not, in this country, anticipated the massive shift in would simply suggest that I have absolutely no the illegal gun stock in this country. That now clearly problem, as you say, with the responsible use of includes imitation weapons, BB guns, a whole range firearms in agriculture and in sport. I know that many of weapons designed to fire CS gas cartridges, and the people who like to have weapons like to keep them at problem of conversions and reactivations. It is a multi- home, and that is part of the essence of being a gun layered problem, and we need a systematic overview owner. I do not think, however, that they should have of it. large supplies of ammunition available at home. The We didn’t anticipate this; I mentioned earlier the problem of the use of ammunition in agriculture can important role of social science in doing some of this be treated as part of a job, and for sport shooters horizon scanning. People were saying in the early ’90s attending events, the ammunition should come to the that the problem of imitations, conversions and event. The problem is not of firearms in the home, but reactivations was already an issue for the country. It ammunition and firearms together. took us 10 years to legislate on it. I hope we won’t take another 10 years to do something about the Q57 Lorraine Fullbrook: How sensible is it for problem as it is today. hundreds of thousands of people, particularly in agriculture, who live on large farms, for example, to Q54 Dr Huppert: Can I follow up on what you were travel miles to get their ammunition to come back to just saying, because it is actually what I was hoping their land? How practical is that? to ask you about? In your submission, you talk Professor Squires: How else do they get large extensively about replica weapons, convertible quantities of seed or fertiliser? I would order it. weapons, reactivated weapons and weapons brought back by soldiers as well, as a side route. How much Q58 Lorraine Fullbrook: But they order it in bulk. do you think we should be focusing on those routes Professor Squires: Yes, and when they use it, they and what we can do about them, rather than on return the surplus. We are on practicalities here. Some discussing licensed firearms themselves? chap on a radio show, talked to me about how he woke Professor Squires: It is all part of a similar picture. up one morning and wanted to go shooting rabbits, We should certainly be addressing those routes but felt that it would be very inconvenient to have to because they are the problem of gun crime in the acquire the ammunition. I don’t think that public streets, but I don’t think the problem of licensed safety should be put aside for the convenience of a weapon misuse is insignificant and it needs to be part farmer. of a wider consideration. Around 1,000 weapons are stolen from private homes. They immediately become Q59 Mr Winnick (in the Chair): Arising from what part of the complicated problem of guns on the street. Mrs Fullbrook has said, you don’t believe that there is Shotguns are sawn off, weapons are converted, and any particular problem for the agricultural community. weapons are smuggled home. There are many trickles Professor Squires: I am sure they will say that there and I don’t think there is one particular trickle I would is a problem. I am sure it is a problem that can be concentrate on. We need a rather more concerted look overcome if we are serious about taking public across the board. safety seriously.
Q55 Dr Huppert: Given that there is a lot of Q60 Mr Winnick (in the Chair): Along the lines legislation on replica, convertible and reactivated that have been indicated, what do you mean when you weapons already, what new legislation do you think say “overcome”? might be useful? Professor Squires: That when a farmer or a land agent Professor Squires: I have suggested in the evidence wishes to undertake some shooting, the ammunition that, in relation to converted weapons, we need to is provided, quantified and used, and any surplus is work more closely with Europe and address the returned, which would occur in the context of an production, supply and distribution of a whole range organised shoot. of new CS gas weapons that are trickling their way into this country. That seems to me to be an important Q61 Lorraine Fullbrook: What percentage of issue. The Forensic Science Service now says that accidents have happened with agricultural or leisure converted weapons are becoming its largest crime gun use? You are talking about public safety. Can you give referral for analysis. A recently published survey me examples and numbers of accidents that have cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:54] Job: 006950 Unit: PG02 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101026 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 9
26 October 2010 Professor Peter Squires happened with legally held firearms and with Q66 Alun Michael: You made a distinction between responsible use, for agriculture and for leisure? the dangers that arise from weapons and the issue of Professor Squires: With respect, that is not what I ammunition. Another issue is the use of replica have been talking about. weapons in crime. Just as people like to have weapons, people like to be collectors. What has been Q62 Lorraine Fullbrook: You mentioned public the impact of the Violent Crime Reduction Act on safety. reducing the use of replica weapons in crime? Professor Squires: I have been talking about public Professor Squires: It seems to have bought it down safety in relation to domestic homicides and spree significantly. I say that with the caveat that I don’t shooting. They have all involved people who had think we ever had a very good picture of how many replicas were out there in the first place, but they were access to a weapon and access to ammunition. My rising rapidly until about 2005, in terms of the concern has not been accidents at shooting events at frequency of their involvement in crime. The numbers all. I am quite sure that there are relatively few. have started to drop equally rapidly since 2007. That suggests to me that some forms of intelligent gun Q63 Mr Winnick (in the Chair): But if you feel, control can work, but for a long time they clouded the arising from the questions that have been put more picture of gun crime in this country and allowed many locally over the claims of the agricultural community people to suggest that the legislation after Dunblane generally, that they are exaggerating, if that is your had not worked, whereas in fact it had. view, which it seems to be, you could always write to us accordingly, and we would listen, as with all other Q67 Alun Michael: You have commented on the witnesses, whichever viewpoint they happen to take. importance and quality of data. If you are collecting So, if you would like to take that as an offer, it is data, it needs to be the right data. Do you have a view genuinely meant. of how we should determine what data we collect and how they are analysed? Q64 Steve McCabe: I have two quick questions, one Professor Squires: It ought not only to emanate from of which you have just touched on with Julian police action, because it is then, rather like the Huppert. You have called for a more proactive and problem of knife crime, a record of how much the preventive approach to the problem of converted police do rather than of what the problem is. The best weapons. Is there anything more that you want to say survey we had in this country was undertaken by about what that means in practical terms? How would colleagues in Portsmouth in a piece of work for the we recognise that? Home Office that looked at the market in illegal Professor Squires: It means two kinds of things. The firearms, but also went to the lengths of interviewing first is that some of the contributions of the academic convicted gun offenders to talk to them about where community and the science community could be they got the weapons and how they used them. drawn upon in doing more of what I call horizon I think we need to move the debate on beyond just scanning to look at the emerging problems. No one reports of crime to reports of gun possession, gun was talking about imitation and conversion weapons transfer and the access that the criminal community 15 or 20 years ago when they were surfacing. has to firearms. It is a more complete picture with that Secondly, it means better sharing of data. I made this kind of intelligence and I know that it exists. I worked comment in the evidence that I submitted. The with Greater Manchester Police on a project on gangs problem of firearms is only scarcely addressed by and guns. They have intelligence. It is not evidence, current gun crime statistics, which clearly only record but it gives a more complete picture of the multi- gun-enabled crime. Possession of illegal weapons is layered problem of guns on our streets. not recorded as a gun crime. We need to have better Alun Michael: That is very helpful. Thank you. data and they need to be shared with relevant science Mr Winnick (in the Chair): I now leave you to the tender mercy of Nicola Blackwood. communities to take a better look into the future at the emerging problems. Q68 Nicola Blackwood: There has been some speculation in the wake of the Raoul Moat shootings Q65 Steve McCabe: So is that a call for more that there might be a role for medical assessment prior accurate recording and greater access to that data? I to the granting of licences. There has been some think that the problem that you cite is that they tend concern about that from patient groups, which believe to be held by the authorities and it is difficult to that it might breach data protection, and from doctors subject them to the academic rigour that I presume who feel that they might then be liable for any adverse you have in mind. outcomes. I understand that you are also sceptical Professor Squires: It is certainly a request for greater about this proposal. Why is that? sharing. My concern is related to the police authorities Professor Squires: There are important issues about and forensic science. I know that we now have data sharing and I can see that when the police are NABIS, which is busily filling a gap in our firearms calling at homes at which there has been an incident, intelligence, but it seems to me that it is late to the a national firearms database might assist them to know party. We need to take a more proactive look. There that the householder on whom they are calling has needs to be more engagement with and access to the access to a firearm. Officers have been shot at and available evidence that is already there, which is not killed when attending such an incident. I am wary being adequately considered. about the legality of that level of data sharing across cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:54] Job: 006950 Unit: PG02 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101026 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Ev 10 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
26 October 2010 Professor Peter Squires a range of agencies in the community, and I am not Professor Squires: No. Part of my concern to address convinced that any health practitioner worth their salt the problem of weapon misuse is a concern that we would ever want to get into a crystal-ball gazing can retain, as far as possible, unarmed policing by exercise to predict anyone’s future mental health. I see consent. That is a very important principle of British that whole issue as something of a red herring. It is law and order. The more that the police are armed, the not something I have wanted to get into. I think it is more that they will resort to those arms. I heard on of relatively limited value to us in this kind of the radio this morning a feature about the new anti- exercise. My concern has been with the regulation of terror protocols for the SAS. It seems to me that we the instrument, not so much the person. are in a situation where there is a kind of gun culture trickling down into our community. I do not think that Q69 Nicola Blackwood: So if you are in favour of we are at the point where the police need to be strengthening legislation in some way—we have routinely armed to tackle it. They have capacity to already touched on the issue of storage, which I believe you have quite specific views about, and we respond as the need arises. The number of armed have looked at some of the problems with that—do responses is going up quite dramatically, especially in you have any other particular areas in which you think London, and problems arise from that kind of that we should be strengthening legislation prior to policing. It is more expensive. It is more dangerous. licence? We have to work to prevent that becoming the norm Professor Squires: There is still the problem of the in policing response. So I would say no now. I think market in deactivated and reactivated weapons. That the police believe they have the capacity to respond is a glaring gap in the system of gun controls in this to problems as they see them. We have to avoid the country and why it was never included in the Violent drift towards a more armed society requiring a greater Crime Reduction Act 2006 I do not know. We’ve gone armed response capacity to fight it. some way to address the problem of conversions. Air weapons which, as I said in my evidence, are Q72 Bridget Phillipson: If I can just return briefly responsible over the decade for roughly 10 fatalities to the issue of the recording of gun crime and data, and roughly 1,000 serious injuries, need to be brought which you talked about quite a lot. I am aware of into the same category of firearm regulation as rifles incidents where victims of crime feel that either a real and shotguns. or a replica firearm was used in an offence, perhaps to intimidate, but that that offence was not recorded Q70 Mr Burley: You mentioned air weapons offences, which have decreased in recent years. I think as a gun-related crime because the police were not there was a 19% reduction in 2008–09. Does that able to obtain a weapon, recorded as a public order represent a real decline in offences and how does that offence, or not even recorded as a crime at all. What decline relate to recent legislation? do you think about that, and what do you think could Professor Squires: It’s a complicated picture. I am be done to improve it? It also raises the question, satisfied that the increase has as much to do with the when individuals know or have good reason to believe criminal damage inflation of cost because the majority that someone is holding a fire arm illegally, of how of air weapon offending is when the weapon is fired they would go about ensuring that action is taken. and criminal damage results. However, offending by Professor Squires: In the past, I have worked with firearm is grossly under-reflected in terms of a whole Crimestoppers and for a while it had a gun crime range of threats, attacks on animals and other criminal hotline. Members of the public could ring in if they damage. But the trend is moving in the right direction. felt that someone was in illegal possession. You’re That may well be as a result not so much of firearm absolutely right. For some years, it has been true that legislation but of antisocial behaviour legislation, around 40% to 50% of armed robberies are committed which has tried to tackle that lower-level nuisance in with replica or non-firing weapons, even those that communities. That is perhaps the solution there. have been retrieved at crime scenes and incidents. The whole reason why I got into firearms issues as a This is corroborated by testimony from prosecuted criminological question came as a result of a piece of armed robbers. They may have a vested interest in work I was doing for Sussex police in a community saying that, but the problem is clear. It seems to me in Brighton. We found that lots of neighbours pointed that in law we have embraced the principle that the out that their pets had been shot; their doors and victim’s perspective is the one that counts. We have windows were peppered with pellet holes; and other embraced it in relation to hate crime and racist crime. people admitted to us that they had bought weapons for personal defence in their homes. There is my If a victim asserts that they have had a gun pointed at horizon scan. We have a problem here if people see them, whether the gun is real is not necessarily the this as a genuine solution to safety in communities. main issue that they want resolved, but that should be something that the police record. Q71 Mr Burley: A final question: you’ve obviously Mr Winnick (in the Chair): Thank you very much done a huge amount of work around the issue of indeed, Professor. That has been very useful indeed. firearms and society. You’ve talked this morning about You can rest assured that when our report comes out— the under-recorded explosion in replicas and I’m not quite sure when that will be—you will receive reactivated weapons. Do you think that now is the a copy. It will be of interest to have your comments time to consider routinely arming the police in this included. Whether we will disappoint you or not country? would be premature for me to say at this stage. We all cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:54] Job: 006950 Unit: PG02 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101026 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 11
26 October 2010 Professor Peter Squires have decided views on what I earlier described as a The meeting will adjourn for a very small time. There very controversial topic. Thank you very much. is no need for anyone to leave the room.
Examination of Witnesses
Witnesses: Tom Davies, Independent Police Compaints Commissioner, lead on firearms licensing issues, and Jane Furniss, Chief Executive, Independent Police Complaints Commission, gave evidence. Mr Vaz took the Chair.
Q73 Chair: I welcome Mr Davies and Ms Furniss as asked—and a reference for his suitability went our first witnesses in the firearms inquiry. Do through a proper process, as did the only check that members have any further interests that they need to they could make medically, which was if something declare? came out and they could then go and ask the doctors. Alun Michael: I ought to say that Tom Davies is a constituent of mine and I know him well. Q76 Chair: Why did the IPCC decide to begin an investigation into firearms licensing in 2007? Q74 Chair: Mr Davies, as you know, the Committee Jane Furniss: As Tom says, there is a requirement is conducting its inquiry into firearms. The IPCC has for police forces to refer matters to us when someone just completed an investigation into a current issue, dies following contact with the police. That is that concerning Mark Saunders, the barrister who irrespective of whether any member of the public recently died. Can you enlighten us on any makes a complaint, so where a person dies or is conclusions that you might have about that inquiry? seriously injured. We’d become aware of a small Tom Davies: Certainly, Mark Saunders’ case has number of cases where, as a result of the misuse of a recently gone through its inquest and is now being licensed firearm, either the holder themselves had died reviewed by the Crown Prosecution Service, but many at their own hands or at the hands of the police and/ facts during the course of the inquest came out that or they had killed someone else—another member of may be pertinent to the inquiry that you are doing here on firearms licensing. A little background is that Mark the public. It became evident to us that there was an was a lawyer who lived in Markham square in issue about whether the system was working; that was London. He went home one evening after being out our question. In the cases that we investigated, we for the day and started firing a firearm out of his discovered that there was a great deal of information window. A siege ensued for some four hours and at about the person’s previous behaviour that should the end of it, sadly, Mr Saunders was shot by the have alerted the licensing officer in the police to Metropolitan police. During the siege, Mark fired concerns. Those were people who had firearms three times out of his window; shots that, on one licences despite the fact that they were regularly occasion, went into the house of a neighbour that was drinking to excess, which had led to their being back to back with his house. convicted or behaving in a violent manner towards Of particular relevance to this inquiry might be the other people in their family or neighbourhood. Such fact that Mark was a licensed firearms holder. He lived behaviour should have fallen under the words in the in a highly populated area and had obtained his Act detailing those of “intemperate habits or unsound licence in September 2006. In the run-up to his licence mind”. Any of you looking at those cases will application, which he applied for in August of that conclude that those individuals fell into that category, year, he had been in the hands of a consultant treating and, for whatever reason—the reasons were different him for depression and for a tendency occasionally to in the different cases—it hadn’t come to the attention drink more than a sensible limit; he had been referred of the licensing officer. there by his GP. Sadly, on his application for a firearms licence, he filled the form in saying that he Q77 Chair: So what were your recommendations? had no such health problems. You may be aware that When you made your recommendations, were they those questions are asked on the application for a followed up by the then Government? licence. Jane Furniss: What we recommended didn’t require The case was only one of about a dozen that have legislation. What we worked on with the Association come to our attention over the six years that I have of Chief Police Officers and the Home Office was an been in this role. One has to put it into the context of it being a very, very rare occurrence for a large improved system for the guidance that underpins the number of licences. firearms Act. So it was about how the information is gathered by the officer making the licensing decision. Q75 Chair: It would be helpful if there were conclusions that are relevant to the inquiry, if you Q78 Chair: But was that practice followed? could write to us with that information. On the process Jane Furniss: It has been in part, but not finally. One that you’ve discussed, was the process for the of the things that we suggested was that officers application of a licence properly conducted? should take into account behaviour that falls short of Tom Davies: Yes, the inquiries about the purpose of a conviction, which has been implemented. There is a having a firearm, the security that was to be afforded system, the national firearms licensing management it in his own home—the main questions that are system, that allows them to do that. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:54] Job: 006950 Unit: PG02 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101026 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Ev 12 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
26 October 2010 Tom Davies and Jane Furniss
Q79 Chair: What about the bits that weren’t Jane Furniss: In a second, Tom can give you some enacted? detail of the individual cases. If I can very briefly set Jane Furniss: The key piece that hasn’t yet been that in context, we receive some 2,500 referrals each finalised is the issue of sharing information from the year from the police under the Police Reform Act medical profession. 2002, which requires the police to make a referral where a death or serious injury has occurred, or a Q80 Chair: What’s the hold-up? criminal offence has occurred. Of those 2,500 referrals Jane Furniss: I think that “hold-up” isn’t quite the a year during our six-year life—so something in right phrase. excess of 15,000 referrals—only about 25 or 30 have involved the misuse of a licensed firearm. So—it’s Q81 Chair: But it’s been three years since you made important to keep this in context—the probability of your recommendations, hasn’t it? that happening is small, but when it does happen there Jane Furniss: No, we started the work in 2007 and can be deadly consequences, which is why we were concluded it about a year later. The hold up is a concerned to see whether there were general lessons dispute over the best way of sharing such information to be learned from the cases that we investigated. and the properness of doing it. Tom Davies: With that caveat in mind, perhaps I could highlight two cases that were detailed in our Q82 Chair: Who is involved in that dispute? submission. Jane Furniss: The discussion is between the BMA and the Association of Chief Police Officers. The Q87 Chair: Yes, you can, Mr Davies. You can Information Commissioner has raised concerns about always write to us and we will consider the cases, but the propriety of using medical records for a matter you can now give us the highlights. that is not necessarily related to the health of the Tom Davies: In one a man living in an urban area was individual. It would be wrong to suggest that anyone arrested peacefully at the end of a similar siege during is getting in the way of making it happen, because which he fired 53 shots, 17 of them at a police van there is a proper discussion about the balance between where police officers were trying to get people out of privacy for the individual and the risk that is posed by the area. He had eight guns, which had been taken off that person. him over a period of years and subsequently reinstated by magistrates. The process, both of his discharging Q83 Chair: You made recommendations two years his duty to say he had a medical condition and of ago. Some of those recommendations have been bringing the intelligence together through the police implemented, and some have not been implemented forces, was not tied up as well as it might have been, because there is an ongoing discussion between and we have lessons to learn from that. various agencies. Is it a never-ending discussion, or The second case, of a similar nature but sadly does it have a timetable? resulting in death, was the very sad death of Tania Jane Furniss: I think that there is an intent to resolve Moore in the midlands. Again, the cocktail of medical the matter. Your Committee will help, which is one of records from previous years, which might have given the things that we said in our submissions. an indication of a lack of stability, were not fed in by Chair: Good. That’s nice to know, thank you. the applicant and were not then picked up by the police. Neither were several behaviours, among them Q84 Mark Reckless: I was just going to note that threatening and matters of harassment, which had a there seems to be a body—I don’t know whether it is relationship to the final act of his shooting Tania a trade union or a representative body—for the senior Moore. police on one side and the doctors on the other side. Chair: Thank you. Further details in writing would Wouldn’t it be more appropriate for elected and accountable politicians to give a view on this? be very much appreciated. Jane Furniss: I think that that would be very helpful. It wouldn’t be quite correct to characterise ACPO as Q88 Bridget Phillipson: How commonly do you a trade union, but it will speak for itself when it comes think that firearms licences are held by people who here to give evidence. perhaps should be regarded as unfit to hold them? What do you think about the systems in place and the Q85 Alun Michael: It is a very strong trade union. response of the police when they receive reports that Jane Furniss: I’ll leave that to your judgment, but someone’s mental state and well-being are no longer there is certainly a role for Parliament in this, whether as they should be to hold a licence? it is through legislation or expressing a view on the Tom Davies: I am not in a position to answer the first guidance. one. I am well aware that through the very good works of people who run the shooting lobbies—their Q86 Nicola Blackwood: I think that all of us in this education, their restrictions on their members and room have in mind certain tragedies involving guns, their following good practice are commendable—out which have prompted this inquiry, but it would be of hundreds of thousands of licence holders, we only helpful for the Committee to have some idea of the have a very few, very highly impactive cases. detail of the cases that led you to start your 2007 There are two areas in which things might tighten up. investigation, so that we can have some idea of the First, as we have said already, if people who applied problems that you identified and the lessons that you knew that what they said about their medical have learned. condition would be checked as a matter of course— cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:54] Job: 006950 Unit: PG02 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101026 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 13
26 October 2010 Tom Davies and Jane Furniss that is what we have put forward as our submission— sometimes legitimately held, but often not that might improve the situation. legitimately held. Victims don’t necessarily feel that Secondly, if the kind of decision making that is done those reports can be followed up. by the 43 individual licensing officers across the Tom Davies: If it would help, I can send details of the police forces in England and Wales were carried out case of Mr Munt, who lived in Canvey Island, where to guidance with more consistency in it—again, this domestic violence was the indicator, and where his Committee can help greatly in developing that—it family didn’t believe it would be followed up, and I might enable them, without too much bureaucracy, to can also send further details of the Tania Moore case, put in the right kind of safeguards. When they are both of which fall into that category and may be of judging these people from reports about whether they guidance to the Committee. can be deemed suitable to hold a licence, it is often Chair: If you could do that, that would be very on the basis of intelligence rather than convictions. helpful. There are various other parts of the police disclosure unit that are far more sophisticated than firearms Q91 Mr Winnick: Hungerford, Dunblane, licensing departments in bringing that information and Whitehaven, Mark Saunders. In all those cases, those intelligence together. We have some suggestions to responsible for mass murder—although not Mark make about that on the basis of our cases. Saunders, where the victim was himself—had authorised gun licenses. Isn’t it a matter of concern Q89 Bridget Phillipson: If I could ask a question on that unsuitable people—leading on from the question a slightly different topic, you talked earlier about the that my colleague has just asked you—are given cases that have informed your approach and some of permission to hold guns? In all those tragedies, the the recommendations you have come to. In terms of victims lost their lives as a result of someone, a mass domestic violence—again, there have been a number murderer, who had perfectly legal permission to hold of tragic cases where the police have been called but and possess guns. the response has not been allowed for whatever Tom Davies: That is an observation that can be made. reason—for example, the protection and safety of We have already put it in the context, as I am sure officers—what kind of comfort or reassurance could others will, that there are almost 1 million license victims of firearms offences take that, when they call holders. the police, the police will actually come? While I am sure that the individual officers are mindful of their Q92 Chair: It is a fact. It is not an observation. Mr safety, they will equally want to do their jobs and Winnick is stating a fact. People have died in those protect the public. circumstances. Tom Davies: That is a very pertinent relationship that Tom Davies: Of course they have. we have found; domestic abuse is often a precursor to many of our cases that end up in this kind of violence. Q93 Chair: And the people who have had the There are many other indicators, of course, that sadly weapons are unfit, exactly as he said. people who get into this difficulty also hit other Tom Davies: There are similar restrictions to buttons that the police are looking for. safeguard vulnerable young children, and there are On domestic abuse, most police forces are now similar restrictions on people who hold poisons. In the putting in a more sophisticated method called DASH, case of firearms licensing, thankfully these cases in for every case that is reported. As I am sure you know, this country are very few and far between. We hope a case of domestic violence in a household is reported that our investigations will show some indication of nearly every minute of the year, and for every one a how it can be tightened up. Of course, it is thoroughly short form must be completed by the officer who goes and rightly in the hands of parliamentarians to get the to it. Whether it results in an arrest, a conviction or proportionality involved in the argument that you are being forgotten or not dealt with, whatever happens putting forward. those forms are cumulative, and other people go back and take more time to go into the domestic violence Q94 Mr Winnick: Few and far between, but if they that is reported in that very quick incident. A similar were our loved ones who had died— process could be gone into with for firearms licensing, Tom Davies: Exactly. but not with these large numbers in so few cases. Some mix between what happens with domestic Q95 Mr Winnick: We would take the same view as abuse, as an indicator, and what happens in the rare those who have survived and found that their loved cases of firearms might be of help to the police. I ones were murdered. There are certain lessons to be know that the Association of Chief Police Officers learnt, looking into the question of firearms, about will develop that theme with you when it gives why such people as those responsible for the tragedies evidence. that I have mentioned were allowed to have licensed guns in the first place. Q90 Bridget Phillipson: I’m aware that, sometimes, Jane Furniss: Exactly as you say, it is a small number there is scepticism on the part of police officers to of people but when it goes wrong, it goes wrong in believe victims that a firearm may be held by an very tragic ways—people die or are seriously injured. individual, particularly in areas where you might not The difficulty is separating those cases that, with the expect firearms to be held—constituencies like mine. benefit of hindsight and information, should have been Sometimes there is a reluctance to accept that dealt with better in the first place, and those where it individuals can have access to firearms, which are appears that there was no information prior to the cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:54] Job: 006950 Unit: PG02 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101026 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Ev 14 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
26 October 2010 Tom Davies and Jane Furniss incident that would have led anyone to believe that it Shooting and Conservation, however, object to this, would happen. That is the essence of making a risk and I think that the Information Commissioner has assessment, isn’t it? recently raised some concerns. What is your response? Chair: Indeed. Thank you very much. Jane Furniss: The tagging option was not our proposal. Our proposal was checking and verifying. It Q96 Mr Burley: There is an issue of people not was a discussion that followed between ACPO and disclosing all the relevant medical information that the medics that suggested tagging. The benefit of that, they should do. I don’t think that anyone here would of course, is that it is enduring and not a one-off dispute that having it checked for factual accuracy as process. If the GP knows that I am a licence holder a matter of course is a sensible suggestion. One would and I start to behave in a way that causes concern, the encourage people to actually put the truth on their GP can let the police know. That is the benefit. The forms. In terms of their assessment about someone’s risk and danger is that it is an infringement of my mental fitness or otherwise to hold a gun, what privacy and the use of the medical record. I would response would you expect from the GPs when they return to my earlier point and say that that is a matter get this automatic request for information? If they for parliamentarians to judge rather than us. have a patient whom they see once or twice a year, who has a history of depression or who has been Q99 Steve McCabe: I think that the argument of involved in alcohol abuse or was a recreational drug those who raised the concerns is that the number of user 10 years ago, what are you expecting from that incidents is far too small. Do you have any GP in terms of assessing that person for fitness to hold independent information? Is that accurate? a firearm? Jane Furniss: What we know about is incidents in Jane Furniss: It was clearly not asking them to assess which a firearms licence holder misuses their firearm the person for fitness to hold a firearm. That has to be in a way that leads to the police being called and death the job of the officer making the licensing or or serious injury occurs. However, there may be quite revocation decision. We simply said that the officer a lot of incidents in which a licence holder misuses doing that needs to know whether the information that his or her gun in public, but the police peacefully they have been given is full and accurate. The resolve it, so there is no death or serious injury. We question to the GP was not whether they were suitable don’t know about those, because they are not referred to hold firearm licences, but whether the information to us. What we know is that serious injury occurs in provided by Aidan Burley is accurate and whether a very small number of cases. We are talking about there is anything else we should know to take into something like 30 cases referred to us over a six-year account when making the judgment. We don’t think that GPs are in a position to make that kind of period, so it is small. assessment or prediction of how someone might behave. Q100 Mark Reckless: We have heard the case for extending the guidance for refusing a licence to Q97 Mr Burley: Are you making any include bind-overs and potentially uncorroborated recommendations in terms of how the licensing reports of aggressive and disturbing behaviour. Is it officers judge the factual information that comes from fair to refuse a licence on that basis, and is it realistic the GPs? or sensible to expect officers to standardise things on Jane Furniss: There is quite good guidance for the the basis of large amounts of guidance? officer to use to come to their judgment, but we also Tom Davies: That is the nub of the question that faces think that they could be given further help, and you as parliamentarians. The Criminal Records drawing on cases that have gone wrong—looking at Bureau gets feedback from each police disclosure unit some of the behaviour—is one of the ways that they on the processes of safeguarding children and can do that. In the past, it wasn’t regarded as a vulnerable adults. It goes through a proper process to relevant fact that someone had been convicted of make sure that all the questions are asked and drink-driving when they applied for a firearms licence. answered in a fair way—there is a consistency about The guidance now says that it should be, because the it—and that the judgments in which the intelligence indications are that the person may drink to excess is gathered are put through a five-by-five process. That and that they break the rules. Those are two important means that the various criteria on reliability and facts for the licensing officer to know. Similarly, a ability answer the question. The crunch question, of history of depression does not mean in itself that course, is whether that process for this number of someone is going to misuse their firearm, but cases against that number of licences might be behaviour with links to their depression may suggest overkill. It is one that you, not us, need to take a view that they are not a suitable person. So it isn’t a simple on, but we can feed you—I am sure that ACPO can, question of asking the GP to judge their suitability. too—what those processes are in terms of Chair: Mr Burley, are you done? safeguarding children, what other parts of police Mr Burley: Yes. forces do on disclosure, and the sharing of that information in various parts of the police forces. They Q98 Steve McCabe: I guess that the simple are getting far more sophisticated at it and far better argument for tagging medical records is that it would at giving it and sharing it. There may be a time for the mean that significant medical information could not Home Office guidance on firearms licensing to learn be overlooked and that the individual could not something from those processes and, again, it can feed choose to withhold it. The British Association for that into you. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:54] Job: 006950 Unit: PG02 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101026 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 15
26 October 2010 Tom Davies and Jane Furniss
Q101 Chair: Mr Davies and Ms Furniss, thank you Q102 Chair: What is the timetable on that because so much for coming today. Obviously you have very one of the problems that we have identified as a important information that is relevant to the work of Committee is that the IPCC reports take a long time this Committee. Perhaps you could write to us with to compile? that information. One question about Cumbria and Jane Furniss: Yes. Quite often our reports don’t take Northumbria, which has been raised earlier: are you very long but we can’t publish them until after the conducting an inquiry into any aspects? inquest or any criminal proceedings. Mr Moat’s Jane Furniss: We are not in Cumbria, but we have investigation will be completed before Christmas, but been involved in the review that is being conducted there are then a set of criminal proceedings, including by a combination of the force, the association and the on conspiracy to murder, and at least two inquests to NPIA. But we are conducting the investigation of the be held. We will have to wait until those are all over circumstances in which Mr Moat allegedly killed a before we can publish our report. member of the public, shot a police officer and then Chair: Thank you very much for coming today. We died himself. That is an independent investigation that are most grateful. is ongoing.
Examination of Witnesses
Witnesses: John Batley, Gun Trade Association, Graham Downing, Countryside Alliance, and Mike Eveleigh, British Association for Shooting and Conservation, gave evidence.
Q103 Chair: Order. Could I call to the dais the Q104 Chair: Sure. We will explore the advantages representatives of the Countryside Alliance, the Gun of shooting later, but in terms of the medical Trade Association and the British Association of profession you are saying that people who may be Shooting and Conservation? Mr Downing, Mr suffering from some kind of illness may not want to Eveleigh, Mr Batley, thank you for coming. go and voluntarily say this to their GP because their This Committee is conducting this inquiry into licences will disappear. So you put the onus on the firearms partly because of recent events but also, person with the gun, rather than on the doctor. Do you generally, we last looked at this matter 10 years ago not think that there is an onus on the doctor to and we felt that it was appropriate to update our intervene and start checking people? reports and our thinking so that Parliament can look Mike Eveleigh: No, I absolutely agree. I have had at these issues. Can I start by asking you about the discussions with the BMA and ACPO on the matter involvement of medical professionals in the way in in earlier days and we have put some guidance out. which these licences are granted? Are you satisfied But yes, it is our concern that it might actually have with the current involvement of medical professionals the counter effect. or do you think that their role should be enhanced? Graham Downing: At present, when an application is Q105 Chair: Sorry, when you say that you put some made, the medical professional has the opportunity to guidance out, do you mean that that guidance has comment at any time, both on the application and at come from the Home Office, or from your own any time during the life of the certificate. Likewise, association? the licensing officer has to seek the—sorry, may I Mike Eveleigh: My own association, BASC, together start again? with ACPO and the BMA have had meetings because Chair: Are you all right, Mr Downing? Are you sure? their original guidance on the subject was fractionally Graham Downing: Yes. I’m okay, thank you. flawed. We will be having further meetings. Mike Eveleigh: I am an ex firearms and licensing officer myself and firearms and licensing inquiry Q106 Chair: I understand. That is extremely helpful. officer for Merseyside police so I perhaps have a But that guidance you mentioned—where does that perspective across the whole area. I recall that after guidance go to? Dunblane, the Parliamentary Office of Science and Mike Eveleigh: It is at the moment only with the Technology made an inquiry into this very matter. Its BMA, and guidance is to GPs. It is advising them conclusion was that the system we have at the moment that if there is a problem, then they have to breach would be the best balance. We would incline to agree confidentiality and tell the police, which we agree with that because we fear that if the sports shooter is with 100%. suffering from, say, a depression or perhaps his wife dies, he then worries and concerns himself about Q107 Chair: I understand that. Do you think that it going to his GP on the grounds that his certificate may would be helpful—the Committee is looking at its be revoked. It may seem a small thing to people who previous report and ways in which we can inform don’t shoot, but it is very important. To have one’s Parliament to improve to the system—if that guidance certificate revoked is a very large step for shooters. It came directly from the Home Office? takes them out of a sport that gives them relaxation Mike Eveleigh: I think it’s more directed at GPs. It’s and gets them into the fresh air. It also takes away really a BMA internal memorandum, rather than their socialisation. It also, to a certain degree, makes anything of that nature. them a pariah among those people who shoot Chair: Let me bring in Dr Huppert; he wants to ask because— a supplementary. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:54] Job: 006950 Unit: PG02 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101026 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Ev 16 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
26 October 2010 John Batley, Graham Downing and Mike Eveleigh
Q108 Dr Huppert: I am interested in what you said Q112 Chair: So you’re not talking about more about the Parliamentary Office of Science and regulation, you’re talking about better clarity. Technology having done a report arguing one way or Mike Eveleigh: Yes, I think so. another, because it is very unlike POST to take a stance. I note that in its report it says that it is unable Q113 Steve McCabe: I just wanted to check to take a stance pro or anti any of the suggestions, so something that Mr Downing said. You were stressing I am slightly concerned that you are alleging that it is the fact that GPs give out information where there are supporting your position. mental problems and so on, which I can understand. Mike Eveleigh: When I say that, what I mean is that What would happen if the GP had information that the result was that its view appeared to be, in this the applicant was a wife batterer, but the case had not case, that this was a good way to go—one of the ways actually come to court? Would that be disclosed? I say to go—and then that was accepted and used and is in that, because someone with a record of violence might use today. be more of a worry holding a licence than someone Dr Huppert: I’ll read this more carefully and we’ll who has had a mental health problem. see. I hope it will be circulated to other members of Graham Downing: If a complaint had come to the the Committee. attention of the police, it would certainly—if the police are working as they should—come to the attention of firearms licensing officers. Q109 Chair: What are the main reasons for revoking a firearms licence and are GPs involved in that? Do Q114 Steve McCabe: Yes, but I’m saying what if it you know of examples? Are GPs involved in this hadn’t come to the attention of the police but of the process? Mr Downing. GP, would you know about it? Would that feed Graham Downing: Yes. The police are required to be through, or is that something that the GP would alert to any signs of emotional instability in a protect under confidentiality grounds? There are certificate holder: any suicidal tendencies that they plenty of cases of wife beating that don’t make it to might have; signs of depression; detention under the the police, but the GP often knows. Mental Health Act 2007; guardianship orders or Graham Downing: It would not necessarily come to restriction orders under that Act. In these cases where the attention of a firearms licensing officer. If the a certificate holder has mental problems of one sort or matter had been the subject of a complaint to the another, then quite clearly this is fed back through to police, because the wife or one of her neighbours had the firearms licensing officer. Throughout the life of gone to the police, the matter would certainly— the certificate the licensing officer has a responsibility to maintain a watch for those particular issues. Q115 Steve McCabe: If the wife had regularly fallen down the stairs and seen the GP, but never been to the Q110 Chair: But it’s a lot of people to have to police, you wouldn’t know about that? That is my monitor, isn’t it? point. Graham Downing: It’s an awful lot of people who Graham Downing: No, not necessarily. need to be monitored. My concern is that this process could place a huge onus on the general practitioner. Q116 Mr Winnick: You have a legitimate point of The practitioner has this onus placed upon him—a view. It may be controversial, but the other side of the responsibility that is not directly related to his primary argument over gun control is no less controversial. concern, which is the health of his patient. I have Would it be right to say that any attempt to strengthen spoken to a considerable number of GPs and other the existing law would meet with your disapproval, medical professionals, both members and non- when it comes to gun control? members of the Countryside Alliance. They tell me Graham Downing: I am not so sure that it’s a that their overriding responsibility is to give the best question of strengthening law; it’s about strengthening advice and to guard the confidences that their patients process. What I would like to see is competent, give to them. experienced firearms licensing managers with teams of competent, experienced firearms inquiry officers, who all know their parish and know and understand Q111 Chair: But do you think, Mr Eveleigh, that the the certificate holders who they are working with. In problem is that there are a lot of people involved with that way, I would expect that the firearms licensing good intentions, but that each one of them has their process would be strengthened. own duties of confidentiality or responsibility and it One of my great fears at present, with the proposed might not be as joined up as it ought to be? cutbacks of funding within the police service Mike Eveleigh: Yes, I think that would be fair. I generally, is that if this were to impact on firearms would add a little, if I may, in that the process over licensing, we are going to see an erosion of the the years of firearms licensing has become so very numbers—at least—of firearms inquiry officers and complicated. I speak as an ex-police officer—I used firearms licensing managers. That would cause me to do that job. As a police officer you are forced to great concern. look at the shape of the bullet, the way it gets into the chamber, the length of the barrel and the place it is Q117 Mr Winnick: How do you explain how it is going to be used—so many things. It does take away possible that the mass murderers who were a degree of your time from actually concentrating on responsible for Hungerford, Dunblane and for the person himself. That is, I think, a problem. Whitehaven in Cumbria on 2 June were all given— cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:54] Job: 006950 Unit: PG02 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101026 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 17
26 October 2010 John Batley, Graham Downing and Mike Eveleigh without any difficulties at all, apparently—a licence or rough shooters or in the agricultural context—is not to carry guns? In Dunblane, of course, so many practical; it is not an issue. children as well as adults lost their lives. Don’t you Mike Eveleigh: I can add a little further to that. The feel that there is something wrong in a system where, theft of firearms is pretty well at its lowest level despite more recent legislation after Hungerford and historically. I don’t have the most recent figures, but Dunblane, we had Bird in Whitehaven? certainly, having looked at the proportion of firearms Graham Downing: Clearly, something went wrong in legally held in this country, I know that the proportion those three instances but obviously, we don’t have the of thefts has been falling over the years. I believe that reports at the moment of Whitehaven. As the lady and there was a rise last year, but some of that was gentleman from the IPCC said earlier, we are looking accounted for by a large organisation having a major at a huge number of certificate holders. You are going problem. The thefts have been declining. There was a back 25 years, sir. During that period we have had co-operative document from the British Shooting millions of certificate holders and we have had three Sports Council, the Association of Chief Police instances of mass murder—tragic instances though Officers and the Home Office on firearms security, they may be. which is well respected and used all round the country. We have also had a number of other murders committed with licensed firearms. What we are trying Q121 Dr Huppert: You say that there was an issue to do is weed out a few tens from millions and with a large organisation losing a large number of millions of firearms certificate holders. We have weapons. Can you say more about that and about how 750,000 certificate holders at present, roughly we prevent similar things from happening again? speaking. It is a very difficult process and occasionally Mike Eveleigh: I understand that it may be an the process fails. administrative loss, in that a large firearms firm had some major problems that were probably Q118 Mr Winnick: Various objections to the administrative, we do not know the full story yet. It medical profession being involved have been was in South Wales. A large number of weapons were suggested to us, because there will be some prejudice unaccounted for on paper, whether they are or not, we on the part of GPs. Do you go along with that? don’t know—that is still to come out. Chair: Just a quick “yes” here is fine. Graham Downing: Partially. Q122 Dr Huppert: Can you let us know as and when Mr Winnick: I think that could be taken as “yes”. you know more? Chair: This sounds like coalition-speak. Mike Eveleigh: I certainly will, but I do not know whether the police will actually tell me. Q119 Lorraine Fullbrook: I’d like to ask this Chair: If you can write to us? question to Mr Downing and Mr Eveleigh. We have heard in evidence so far that you are opposed to the agreement by the Association of Chief Police Officers Q123 Mr Burley: Mr Batley, your time has come. and the BMA in principle, which, of course, is What checks are placed on firearms dealers and what completely different from the IPCC’s proposals. Can checks do the dealers carry out to ensure that the you give us an idea of what you believe would be a weapons they sell will be used legitimately? workable solution to this problem? What would you John Batley: Certainly. The process for registering a be happy with in your respective positions? firearms dealer is quite stringent. It is part of the gold Chair: Sorry, may I ask both witnesses to give standard of our current legislation. First and foremost, somewhat briefer and pithier answers? you produce a cheque for £150, which will last for Graham Downing: I think I’ve explained my three years should you be registered. You then fill in position, and that is that I would like a further a four-page application form, send it off to your local concentration on the licensing process and to ensure firearms licensing office. You are put through the that the responsibility for licensing lies where it police national computer and various other checks, should, with the firearms licensing officer. I would and have to declare whether you have any problems like to make him better at his job and ensure that the on your application form. You are then visited by a guidance that he is working to is accurate and up- firearms licensing officer; you have an in-depth to-date. interview and, should that interview be satisfactory, Mike Eveleigh: I concur entirely. you will be visited by a crime prevention officer, or Chair: Mr Batley, we will be coming to you, don’t what is now called an architectural officer, about the worry. Mr Reckless. security you will have to provide. The security is very, very clearly laid down in the Q120 Mark Reckless: The police state that Home Office guidance to security 2006, which Mike nationally there are between two and three incidents Eveleigh just mentioned. Should you meet all the on average a month involving theft of licensed requirements, and very often you also have to put in shotguns. Do you think that that justifies any change a business plan—in effect all that is dealt with in to how firearms are stored and, in particular, any chapter 16 of the Home Office guidance to the suggestion that we should legislate to force them to police—and get through all those hoops, you will be stored at clubs rather than ever at people’s homes? become a registered firearms dealer. One of the crucial Graham Downing: I think that centralised storage at things about becoming a registered firearms dealer is clubs in the context of countryside shooting—be it the statutory register. Every single thing that you buy, recreational shooting by game shooters, wildfowlers sell or transfer must, by law, go on the register. That cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:54] Job: 006950 Unit: PG02 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101026 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Ev 18 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
26 October 2010 John Batley, Graham Downing and Mike Eveleigh is one of the main methods of checking the legality of comparing apples and pears. What I would say, very everything you buy and sell. quickly, is that in Scotland they’ve introduced a Assume I am a dealer. If somebody wishes to buy system where each dealer who wishes to sell knives something from me, probably a rifle or shotgun—I of a certain type is now licensed. We will get the will deal with airguns in a minute—both those items results of how that’s working and whether it has an are on a firearms or shotgun certificate. So you present effect on knife crime in Scotland in due course. yourself to the dealer, you present your certificate and the dealer will check the certificate. If he’s in any Q126 Chair: But what you’re saying is that if you doubt whatsoever, he can go to the firearms licensing want to buy a shotgun, you have to appear in person, department. If he has any doubt as to the firearm face to face? itself—if he feels it may be stolen—he can come to John Batley: Yes, absolutely. us. We have a contract with the Police Information Technology Organisation. That transaction—the Q127 Chair: Whoever you are? Even members of actual transfer—has to be dealt with face to face under the royal family have to turn up and— the 1997 Act. It must be done face to face. There is John Batley: If you have a certificate. You either have no question of internet or any other sale of that nature. to prove you have a certificate or prove you’re As a dealer, you have to satisfy yourself that the somebody who doesn’t need a certificate, and there person is bona fide. On his certificate, it will say, in are very, very few exceptions. the case of a shotgun certificate, that he is authorised to purchase shotguns. On a firearms certificate, it’s Q128 Chair: What are the exceptions? slightly more complex than that. He will have to have John Batley: Crown servants, diplomats and the like. what’s known as the right to acquire or purchase entered by the police on his certificate. For a firearms Q129 Chair: On the minimum age for a shotgun certificate, you require a good reason for each and licence, there isn’t one, is there? every firearm. It’s a very stringent process. John Batley: No, there isn’t. If we move on very quickly to airguns, under sections 31 and 32 of the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006, Q130 Chair: A child of 10 can have one. which came into play in 2007, airguns may only be John Batley: Yes. If the firearms licensing department sold to somebody aged 18 or over, and may only be is satisfied that that child may hold a certificate, he purchased by an 18-year-old or over. In particular, if may. they are sold by way of trade or business, this has to be done through a registered firearms dealer. Q131 Chair: Do you know how many children hold There is now a new type of registered firearms dealer, these guns? which is for airguns only. They’re only allowed to John Batley: It’s been the result of a recent deal with low-powered airguns; there’s some 400 parliamentary question, but I’m afraid I don’t have extra dealers dealing in airguns. If you present the numbers. yourself to a shop and you wish to buy an airgun, the Chair: We’ll find out. That’s one thing we can find dealer has to satisfy himself, if you are not known to out: results of parliamentary questions. him, of your age. Whatever proof or checks he takes may involve a credit card, a driving licence or a series Q132 Dr Huppert: Can I bring you back to some of of questions. We’ve given out guidance on ways of— the recent legislation in this area? I think—I suspect others agree—there are probably too many separate Q124 Chair: Thank you, that’s very helpful. If you pieces of legislation, and we might want to look at could let us have the requirements, it would be very trying to unify some of it so there’s more clarity. helpful. Mr Burley, do you wish to come back on any Recently, the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 and the of those questions? Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006, which you mentioned earlier, changed the rules quite Q125 Mr Burley: Governments of all colours are significantly. What effect has that had on firearms very fond of knife amnesties, where you can bring in dealers? your knives and put them in a bin, and they show you John Batley: On firearms dealers? We’ve actually these big piles. But anecdotally, they have no impact sold more airguns than we did before it was a on knife crime, because if someone wants to stab requirement to sell however one wanted. The reason someone, they will always be able to get hold of a for that is that the transaction is now face to face, so kitchen knife. It’s the person doing the action, rather there is a lot more involvement. There are no internet than the knife itself. Do you think having tighter sales of airguns any more. In actual fact, the gun trade control of guns will reduce the amount of offences is doing well. What it requires is for the trade itself to carried out using a gun, or is it just the same as knife be more proactive in helping and assisting people. crime, where it’s more about the person wanting to do This also helps with public safety, of course. The trade the damage, and they will always find a way of getting is doing well. a gun if they really want to? John Batley: I don’t think there’s a short answer, but Q133 Dr Huppert: How are these Acts actually what I would like to say is that gun and firearms enforced in reality? legislation is so different from knife legislation—not John Batley: Sorry? only ages but all the licensing requirements—that I Chair: How are the Acts enforced? Any don’t think there’s a parallel. I think we’re slightly prosecutions? cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:54] Job: 006950 Unit: PG02 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101026 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 19
26 October 2010 John Batley, Graham Downing and Mike Eveleigh
John Batley: I am afraid I don’t have the answer to weapons, could be better prevented from falling into that off the top of my head. There are very few criminal hands? prosecutions. The principal number of prosecutions is John Batley: I would like, if I may, to take this in actually on airguns—airguns that are over-powered, two parts. Deactivated firearms are one issue, and and low-powered airguns drifting over the limit: that blank firers are a completely different, separate issue. type of thing. There is no more evidence that I have seen of shotgun and firearms crime. Q137 Alun Michael: They may look very much the same to someone who is on the receiving end. Q134 Bridget Phillipson: What do you think the John Batley: They do; I completely accept your point, impact would be of licensing all air weapons, both on but from a legislative point of view and a trade point the trade and on any potential misuse of air weapons? of view they are two entirely different items. As far John Batley: That is a complicated issue. There are as deactivated firearms are concerned, we answered a several million airguns out there. First and foremost, consultation—as did a lot of other people—in 2009 it would require primary legislation to introduce a from the Home Office, and the published evidence of form of licensing, which we do not have at the deactivated and reactivated firearms being used in moment, and it does not fit either with shotguns or crime is absolutely minute. I have some figures here with rifles. It would be enormously costly and that show nine uses of a deactivated firearm between bureaucratic. 2004–08. I would suggest therefore that the vast My big concern, should this ever be introduced, would majority of deactivated firearms, which are controlled be that every single airgun—we are talking about by the proof authorities and of course by legislation, several millions here—nobody knows who they are not used in crime. They are held in the hands of belong to, apart from those that have been bought serious collectors and various people of that nature. since the Violent Crime Reduction Act commenced in 2007. There are several million airguns that would Q138 Alun Michael: There is often a dislocation require voluntary registration, which would involve an between the evidence of the amount of crime and the enormous public messaging service. It would be very views of the community and the public. What you complicated, and I think what might happen is that have said is perhaps not what we see portrayed, you would involve people unwittingly in a criminal particularly in the media, when there are one or other act, because they did not know that they had them. of these minute number of incidents. How do you Lots of people store them in their attics, garages and places such as that. suggest we deal with that? John Batley: There have been many suggestions for ways of dealing with deactivated firearms. The Q135 Bridget Phillipson: As you will be aware, principal one that has been offered to us is one of unfortunately they are often used to commit criminal licensing or registration. I feel that would be a hurdle offences either by injuring people or by injuring that would be very difficult to tackle. wildlife. In my constituency it has certainly been a big issue, where people have been seriously hurt through Alun Michael: So instead of that— the use of air rifles. Equally, they fall into the hands John Batley: I think that education is probably the of children; they are not properly stored, and there is best route to follow, which would make people more no real requirement to store them securely. They are aware of why they are keeping them and why they often bought by adults for children. have them. There is plenty of legislation in place so John Batley: First, the Crime and Security Act 2010, that they won’t be in a public place, and unfortunately which has not yet been brought into force this year, the very small number of incidents involved are a will make a requirement for safer storage. From the criminal offence. It is difficult to legislate against point of view of the Airgun Manufacturers and Trade those who will. Association, we have instigated a number of procedures, especially through magazines and articles. Q139 Chair: As you know, there is currently a We have introduced something called Lock Time, shooting going on in Malmö in Sweden where which has made airguns a lot safer than they were five somebody is wandering around shooting people or six years ago. There is a very proactive campaign specifically from ethnic minority communities. You going on through all the magazines, and the may feel that this is outside your box, but do you think associations, of training. that the current level of violent video games, which It is getting a lot better; airgun crime has dropped by show a lot of people firing guns at others—I don’t nearly half since 2004. The Home Office statistics that play video games, so I wouldn’t know—has had any I have put in my submission show that. That is partly effect on the way in which people deal with weapons? because of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003, and John Batley: Yes, I believe it has. I am quite sure, partly because of the Violent Crime Reduction Act although I don’t have the evidence to hand, that crime 2006. and the use of firearms on television and in violent games and so on have probably had an effect. Q136 Alun Michael: There is concern about the use Graham Downing: Yes, I would agree entirely with of imitation and reactivated weapons in relation to John Batley. If one is presented with a screen and crime, and it can be absolutely frightening for people interacts with the individuals on it by shooting at them who are involved in that. Do you have any with lasers, firearms and so on, I can only believe that suggestions for how legitimate replica weapons, and that will lead a person to be more violent and to want what I am told should be called souvenir deactivated to do it for real. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:54] Job: 006950 Unit: PG02 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101026 Firearms Control (corrected).xml
Ev 20 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
26 October 2010 John Batley, Graham Downing and Mike Eveleigh
Mike Eveleigh: My wife is a school nurse and teaches where they more closely imitate what they have seen shooting at a school. She finds that once children, on the Xbox. That is where a lot of the gun crime and particularly boys, come to shoot at first, they behave street culture comes from. in almost exactly the same way as they have seen in Mike Eveleigh: Absolutely correct. We even see them films or games. They wave the guns about and point imitating the incorrect ways of shooting, such as them at people, which is an absolute no-no—they are holding a gun or pistol sideways and so on. They have allowed to do it once, but if they do it a second time, seen that in the movies. they are out. Then, after starting shooting, they realise Graham Downing: There’s a big difference between that this is not real. But I believe that you are that and the proper training activities that are absolutely right: if a child gets a gun and decides to undertaken by the shooting associations and clubs, act in the way that they have seen and imitate a where young people in particular are encouraged to television programme or computer game, it has an act responsibly and safely, and are given a great deal effect. of tuition in that process. They come out better people John Batley: The problem then is that, when those as a result. kids don’t go into the formal arenas that you talked Chair: Excellent. Thank you very much and thank about and do not receive supervision, they get replicas you for that extra piece of evidence. You are excused. or handguns on the street and join gangs, which is cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [SO] Processed: [17-12-2010 12:07] Job: 006950 Unit: PG03 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101102 Firearms Control - corrected.xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 21
Tuesday 2 November 2010
Members present: Keith Vaz (Chair)
Nicola Blackwood Steve McCabe Mr Aidan Burley Alun Michael Lorraine Fullbrook Mark Reckless Dr Julian Huppert Mr David Winnick ______
Examination of Witnesses
Witnesses: Harry Berger, shooting victim, Dr Ian Chrystie, father of injured shooting victim Samantha Chrystie, Kevin Moore, brother-in-law of deceased shooting victim Darren Rewcastle, and Jude Talbot, daughter of deceased shooting victim Michael Pike, gave evidence.
Q140 Chair: This is the third evidence session in the law because I don’t know that there’s necessarily Committee’s inquiry into firearms. We have as anything legally that could be done to replace what he witnesses today some of the victims of those who did, or undo what he did, I should say, and I think were involved in the Cumbrian shootings and the the authorities have looked after—certainly, from my families of some of the deceased. point of view as a victim, and I know Dr Chrystie’s Can I begin, Ms Talbot, Mr Moore, Mr Chrystie and daughter in the same way—extremely well, and I Mr Berger, by passing on—from every Member of don’t think there is anything else that they could do. this Committee—our deep condolences at the losses I would like to make a point, if I may: I have read the that you have suffered as a result of these terrible previous two Committee meetings’ worth of notes. I shootings and, indeed, our sympathy for all of you am a firearm and shotgun certificate holder and I who have been injured by what has happened. It must regularly—and I would still use the word be a terrible experience for you. “regularly”—shoot. I find it very difficult to see how Can I begin with you, Mr Moore—and each of you in anything else can be done in the application process turn can please speak to the Committee and tell us for shotguns and firearms. Firearms obviously are a your views—do you feel that you have had an slightly more dangerous weapon, in the sense of their opportunity to put your side of the events to distance to kill as opposed to their width of kill. Other officialdom as a result of what happened in Cumbria? than the medical aspects, that I know the Committee Mr Moore: By coming down here today you mean? have looked at, it’s very difficult to tell. How does Chair: Generally, since the terrible events of June. one know when somebody is just going to flick the Mr Moore: Yes. light switch and change from being sane to insane? Mr Moore: I think the way the firearms is, it’s the Q141 Chair: Do you feel, Mr Chrystie, that all the amount of ammunition they can get hold of and have authorities dealing with the aftermath have been in stock, I think, that is worrying as well. Is it 1,500 helpful in providing you with information about rounds they can have for a 22, unlimited for a precisely what has happened, or would you like to shotgun? I think something needs to be done about know more about what happened on that particular that. With myself, if someone wants to have firearms, day? like a farm or something like that, yes, they can have Dr Chrystie: I think “helpful” is a bit of an them at home but anyone else, the public, I think they understatement. I think the relevant authorities have should be locked away in a gun club or something been more than brilliant. like that, not so any time they can get hold of them, and then something like this wouldn’t happen again. Q142 Chair: Ms Talbot, can you tell me—perhaps Dr Chrystie: I think I accept Mr Berger’s thesis, you can start on behalf of all of the others, or any of because I used to have a firearm certificate for a 22 the others might want to intervene—how you were rifle. But it is an undeniable fact that if the late Mr affected by the shootings that occurred on 2 June? Bird had not had access to firearms he would not have Ms Talbot: My father was killed and obviously it was been able to use them. I have also read the very shocking and distressing at the time. I’ve had to deliberations of the Committee and also looked a bit come to terms with the death of my father; my further. I find it interesting that if one takes the close children with the loss of their grandfather. I’ve also to 1.5 million shotguns they’re on average spread over had to support my mother, and it’s been difficult about two and a half people each. Well, quite a lot because not only has my father died but my father have only one. This means that there must be a lot of was murdered. I’ve had to deal with the emotions and people who have five or six and so on, which seems it’s been quite difficult to understand that somebody odd. The thing that struck me from the previous looked at my father and then shot him dead, and that’s meeting—I think I’m correct in saying—that your been a difficult thing to explain to my children as well. second witness related a tale of a farmer complaining Mr Berger: I’m fortunately in a slightly different to him about the suggestion that ammunition should position. I survived. Yes, I have looked into the eyes be limited, by saying that if he woke up in the of a murderer. My thoughts on it are very simple that, morning and wanted to shoot the odd rabbit then he fortunately, we never have to face him in a court of wouldn’t be able to. I don’t feel that wanting to shoot cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 12:07] Job: 006950 Unit: PG03 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101102 Firearms Control - corrected.xml
Ev 22 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
2 November 2010 Harry Berger, Dr Ian Chrystie, Kevin Moore and Jude Talbot the odd rabbit is a reasonable reason for holding a Mr Berger: Yes, I’ve thought about this and, without firearm licence. being either an MP or a celebrity, one of the most public figures you are going to get in a community, Q143 Nicola Blackwood: I would like to join the however big or small, is going to be your taxi driver. others on this Committee and say thank you so much Please don’t get me wrong, I’m not defending the guy for coming today. I know that it has taken a lot of at all here, but if somebody in as public a position, in bravery to come and speak out, and we are very the sense of the number of public that meet him, are grateful for this. I wondered if you could talk a little carried in the back of his taxi, or whatever, if that bit about the impact that this event has had, perhaps, person is seen to be—there would be reports to the on yourselves but also on the wider community, and police if anybody suspected that he was either odd if that has changed the way you view firearms or seemed to be dishonest in taking somebody on a ownership in this country. I wonder if you’d like to roundabout route. I just think that in as public a start, Ms Talbot? position as he was, in the sense of a taxi driver, he Ms Talbot: I can certainly speak about how it has had to be even more careful about what he was doing affected myself and my children, and, in particular, to maintain his shotgun and firearm certificates. I my son who’s nine. Previous to this event he enjoyed agree that if somebody is going to become insane, or pretending to be a soldier; playing with guns, and has an alcohol problem—as has been seen with a normal playground games. Following this event he recent shooting in London where there was a history has found it very difficult to engage in that kind of of a medical problem—if you’re not going to take play and also has found it hard when his friends do. away the licence for that—and bearing in mind that It’s obviously become very real to him, so it’s changed person was married to somebody in some sense of his perception and he has also packed up quite a lot authority—then who’s going to have their licence of his different Xbox games and won’t play them now, taken away? Don't get me wrong, I’m not saying take those involving violence. So take from that what you everybody’s licence away. I’m not saying that, but will. what I am saying is that he was a public figure; The wider community: I don’t live in Cumbria. I live “public” with a small “p” I hasten to add. But the and work in the Slough area in a large special school, police had no reason—other than the past convictions and the Cumbria shootings did have a very big impact of some time ago, there was no reason to suspect that on my colleagues and the parents of children in my there was anything wrong more recently than that. school, in that they did find it shocking and distressing. Q146 Mr Winnick: The last question: Mr Berger, however, the Association of Chief Police Officers Q144 Mr Winnick: Like all my colleagues—and have sent us a report, which we received earlier today, indeed all in the House of Commons—we were so and it does make the point that in 1990—as I shocked, to say the least, by what occurred and, as the mentioned—Bird had a conviction for dishonesty, and Chair said, all our sympathies go to yourselves and they say—and I’m reading—“should have caused his your neighbours. shotgun certificate to be reviewed”, and go on to say, As far as gun control is concerned, the details we “Given the length of time ago, the file has been received are that Bird was given authorisation in 1974 weeded out of any record of what occurred.” But it for a shotgun. In 1982 he had a conviction for drink does appear that if his shotgun certificate had been driving, which didn’t affect his certificate, and in 1990 reviewed at that time, 20 years ago, arising from the there was a conviction for dishonesty, after which the conviction for dishonesty, it’s possible, is it not, that police admit his shotgun certificate should have been the authorities would have decided that he should not reviewed and wasn’t. I’m just wondering—and we have continued to have a shotgun? would all appreciate your views—do you feel that, in Mr Berger: Shotgun certificates—and forgive my all the circumstances, Bird was the sort of person who brain, I’m addled with legalised narcotics at the should not have been given a certificate, which, years moment—every five years you have to reapply for later, was to lead to the terrible tragedy in your licence. So every five years the police have the Whitehaven? Mr Moore, Mr Chrystie, Mr Berger? opportunity—and I believe the report that is probably Mr Moore: No, because I think he held a shotgun sitting in front of you that is going to be released licence from about 1974, didn’t he? today, basically says that there was nothing wrong Chair: Yes, since he was 16. with the fundamental process, with the way that the Mr Moore: Since 16, yes. His 22 licence he only had Cumbria Police authorised shotgun and firearm in the last five years, hadn’t he, or something? No, I certificates. Every five years they have the opportunity don’t think there was problem with him holding a gun to review and if, after a certain number of years, they licence; it’s what he’s done with it though, isn’t it, at decide that—I have a drink driving conviction from the latter end? That’s the problem. 20 years ago. I don’t mean to put a nail in my coffin, but I have a shotgun and firearms certificate. It doesn’t Q145 Mr Winnick: One of the questions that will mean that I’ve flipped; I’ve gone mad. undoubtedly be of concern to politicians is that, arising from what occurred—and previously of course Q147 Steve McCabe: I’d also like to thank you for in Dunblane, and before that another tragedy when coming today. I know this can’t be easy for you. But legislation was tightened—is there, in your view, any if I can just follow on from the point that Mr Berger need now to further strengthen controls over the was raising. Some of the witnesses who legally hold authorisation of people to hold firearms? Mr Berger? firearms have put it to us that, intense and traumatic cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 12:07] Job: 006950 Unit: PG03 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101102 Firearms Control - corrected.xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 23
2 November 2010 Harry Berger, Dr Ian Chrystie, Kevin Moore and Jude Talbot though this event has been, events like this are fairly of my friends’ fathers had shotguns in the house and rare, and were we to take action to tighten the law as a child I would see them. They were kept in a against people who legally use firearms, for sport or safe. Now I don’t think that guns have any place in a whatever purposes, it may be disproportionate, given residential setting. My opinion is that we should not the rarity of these kind of events. What is your view have guns kept in a dwelling. Although that may be of that? difficult to enforce I see no reason why they can’t be Mr Berger: All that is going to happen is you’re going kept in gun clubs. For farmers, I’m sure they would to drive things more underground. Surely, the tighter be able to find some outbuilding or there would be the controls, the harder it is becoming for the another creative way around it. But I don’t think we authorities to police it because any member of this should be keeping things that kill and maim within a room could, I would hazard a guess, within 48 residential area, it’s too big a risk. hours—I’m not saying you’re going to try it, but I Mr Moore: Yes, I agree with what Ms Talbot said. would guess that within 48 hours somebody, if they Apart from farmers or vermin control companies, no really wanted to—really wanted to—could get hold of one else should have guns on the property, I don’t an illegal firearm. So all you’re potentially going to think, or if they have the guns on the property they do by tightening regulation is drive things further shouldn’t have the ammunition, either one or the underground. other. Maybe ammunition kept at a police station or How do you differentiate between the vermin control something like that. and the person that just shoots for sport or for any Dr Chrystie: Yes, I would agree with that. I can see other recreational reason? no logical reason, other than sport, why an individual—who is not a professional—needs to own Q148 Steve McCabe: Is that a view shared by the a firearm. If we’re talking about vermin control then rest of you? perhaps we need to have more people who are trained Dr Chrystie: That I think is one argument. But I to use them. I did toy with the idea of suggesting, so would suggest that if we all in this room suddenly I’ll suggest it, I drive a car, which is a lethal weapon. decided that we wanted to take up clay pigeon My licence doesn’t give me the right to own the car; shooting, most of us could probably currently get a it gives me the right to use it because I am supposedly licence. If the licensing conditions were changed, such competent and have demonstrated that competence. I that most of us couldn’t, we’d probably say, “Oh fine” don’t know whether a similar suggestion has ever and take up archery. I don’t think that if you’re been made with reference to firearms. You asked prevented from getting a firearms certificate you’re, about airguns. Other than the fact that I dread to think necessarily, going to go to the more seedy parts of how many airguns there are scattered around the your local big city and find a sawn off shotgun. I country, yes, I believe they should be licensed. wouldn’t even know where to start. I think it would Mr Berger: I have a completely opposite view to probably take me a year or two rather than 48 hours. everybody else, for various different reasons. One of It is a difficult one, in that there are those who enjoy the things—certainly from the farming community, shooting as a sport. I think I’m right in saying that the and I use “the farming community” as a fairly broad House had to change the rules somewhat to allow the term. I include most of the rural community. Yes okay, 2012 Olympics to take place, because a number of the slightly controversial, since the House banned hunting shooting events are illegal—but we’ve managed to with dogs, I saw a fox this morning on my way to the sort that out—and that many of those who shoot station at 6.30am. There are still lambs around. What competitively for this country have to go elsewhere to do you want to win? I would prefer to eat a lamb than practise, but they seem to be able to cope with that a fox. Sorry, I just have a very different view on this, as well. and you can’t answer it in two minutes. It’s not a two- minute answer. As this Committee understands, this is Q149 Dr Huppert: I’m interested in understanding a quite a broad discussion. bit more about various aspects of licensing. I’m Chair: All right. It is a complex issue, Mr Berger. getting some very interesting messages and thank you Thank you for that. Mr Chrystie, you had a comment? very much—as everyone has said—for coming here Dr Chrystie: I was just going to add a couple of and sharing your experiences. words, which is the urban fox. If we’re going to We’ve talked a bit about the idea of having too many control the rural fox with a shotgun, are we going to controls. I’d be interested if you have any comment control the urban fox similarly? Probably not. on the suggestion—which I think Mr Moore made— about limiting ammunition and control of that; about Q150 Chair: Ms Talbot, I want to ask you a question, control on the number of shotguns that are available based on your own personal experience as a teacher to people, if we could just touch on as well. Also rather than you coming to this Committee as an expert something which I know isn’t relevant in your on this issue. I think, you mentioned video games? particular case, which is about airguns and whether Ms Talbot: I did. you have any thoughts about licensing on all of those. Chair: Do you think violent video games have an Since we seem to have started on the right quite a effect on young people when they may or may not use number of times, can I perhaps start with Ms Talbot? firearms, and were you aware that there is no Ms Talbot: My opinion is slightly different to the minimum age for the possession of a licence for a gentlemen. Just as a background, you know I grew up shotgun for a young person? in Cumbria where it’s fairly normal to have a shotgun Ms Talbot: I was aware about the minimum age; and to go off shooting in the fields. A good proportion obviously growing up in Cumbria, there were people cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 12:07] Job: 006950 Unit: PG03 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101102 Firearms Control - corrected.xml
Ev 24 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
2 November 2010 Harry Berger, Dr Ian Chrystie, Kevin Moore and Jude Talbot
I went to school with that were joining gun clubs and games, as opposed to the more paternal practical things like that. Video games, I think it’s an easy out. handling of a shotgun that you would— I think specifically little boys have a need to express Mr Berger: Okay. I don’t want to be drawn on that themselves in that way. If you don’t let them have toy one. To be honest with you, I’ve never played them, I guns they will use a stick and pretend it’s a gun. I don’t have any experience of them. don’t think that video games are the cause of these feelings in children, but I do think they don’t Q154 Nicola Blackwood: There is little doubt that understand what they mean. there is a significant culture at the moment that glamorises gun use, whether it is rap music or film Q151 Mr Burley: I was interested in your industry or video games, and children from all experience, as a mother, that your children had backgrounds have regular access to this. Many do not stopped playing certain Xbox games, presumably have practical experience of gun use in a positive way. violent ones or ones with guns, and I wondered if you Do you think that there is a way that we can be better could talk a little bit more about that. Because we had educating that age group about the consequences of evidence before the last Committee from some experts gun use, rather than merely about the image of gun who said they felt that these very violent gun use? dominated video games do normalise a certain Dr Chrystie: It may have been at one of your last behaviour, and do normalise the use of firearms, and meetings, or it may have been something else I read, that it’s very easy for kids who think that that’s the but I recall, I think it was a teacher who had devised normal way to go about things to then take that lessons in the use of guns for—I cannot remember behaviour on to the streets, and so on. what age of children—and her experience was that Ms Talbot: Can I request that the press don’t report when presented with imitation firearms they waved on my children’s experiences before I say anything? them around in exactly the same way as Harry’s Chair: Sorry, are you going to give us those children would not because they have been properly experiences now? trained, but they waved them around in much the same way as they do on video games. Having been Ms Talbot: Well, I can talk about— through a number of lessons, they then recognised the Chair: Well, I’m afraid, Ms Talbot, everything that correct way to use a firearm. I don’t know whether you say is in the public domain. that answers or informs your deliberations in any way Ms Talbot: Okay. and of course the fact that they were then able to use Chair: Making a request to the press, although we a firearm, rather than not, has its own disadvantages. would love to believe that they would follow our request, is not normally adhered to. Everything that Q155 Nicola Blackwood: What would be your view, you say—so think carefully before you say Ms Talbot, if such events happened in your school? anything—is actually— Ms Talbot: I think it could be covered under the PSHE Ms Talbot: Okay, I won’t talk about that then. Citizenship Curriculum. It probably already is in some Chair: Okay. Thank you very much. Mr Berger? form. It is a difficult one. It’s do we leave things to Mr Berger: I live in the country now. I was born and parents or does the state try to interfere in parenting? brought up in the countryside. I have two older I think it could be covered under the PSHE brothers. I learnt to handle a shotgun at a very, very, Curriculum. I think also it’s to do with the wider very early age, far earlier than I learnt to drive. It has society and the children’s feelings of citizenship, and been part of my education—my life’s education—in even their understanding of what actually happens. At how to handle them. Does that stop me wanting to do a young age—primary age—they don’t understand that with my children? I have a daughter and a son. what happens because on the video games the people No. My son is seven. He will eventually inherit and I get up again. will teach him to shoot. When? I don’t know. But it hasn’t put me off wanting to pass on my experience Q156 Mark Reckless: We heard from Ms Talbot to my children. about guns not being appropriate in a dwelling but then the reference, perhaps from Mr Berger, to guns Q152 Mr Burley: But do you see a difference being perhaps more entrenched in rural communities between that experience, a very formal, practical than urban. Is it practical, do you think, to have a father-led tuition of how to handle a firearm, and the distinction between no guns in dwellings but farmers unsupervised computer game, ultra violence that your being allowed to have guns in, say, outbuildings? son could equally be playing when you’re not Ms Talbot: Well, currently, the police come and check supervising him in a practical sense? Does that worry where the guns are kept, so it would be secure. The you more? police would make it so as part of the licensing. I Mr Berger: He races cars so he doesn’t—to be fair, think it’s reasonable to have guns in an outbuilding in we don’t have those games in the house. That’s not a rural community. As I said before, it’s not because I necessarily don’t want them. I’m not into reasonable to keep them in a house, I don’t think, but them, so he’s not into them. It is a classic father/son in an outbuilding that would be fine. relationship. Q157 Dr Huppert: I was very struck by Dr Q153 Mr Burley: You can understand when some Chrystie’s analysis in comparison with the idea of car experts say that’s almost more dangerous because licensing. In both cases you have something which they’re unsupervised, left to these very violent video plays a very important role but can also be lethal, cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 12:07] Job: 006950 Unit: PG03 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101102 Firearms Control - corrected.xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 25
2 November 2010 Harry Berger, Dr Ian Chrystie, Kevin Moore and Jude Talbot leading to many deaths and I think the number of our thanks. It’s not easy to get down to London from deaths from cars is rather greater than what we’re Cumbria. I know, because I’ve driven up to Cumbria considering. Is this analysis, and way of thinking to meet witnesses that are coming before the about the problem, something you think this Committee shortly and it’s a very long way for you. Committee should pursue further or is it a red herring? We are extremely grateful, and we hope that we will, Dr Chrystie: Are you asking me? in some way, provide you with some of the Dr Huppert: Anybody who has thoughts on it. You information that you clearly need in order to know suggested it, so— precisely what happened on 2 June. Thank you very Dr Chrystie: I threw it out. I’m not sure whether it is much for coming. a red herring or not. It would have, I’m quite certain, Dr Chrystie: May I have a few seconds to thank you, the effect of reducing the number of licences and the sir, and your Committee for turning what could have number of weapons because people would not bother been a fairly traumatic experience into—from my to undertake whatever training was required. point of view, anyway—a very informative and almost Chair: Thank you very much, Mr Chrystie. Ms enjoyable one. Talbot, Mr Moore, Mr Chrystie and Mr Berger, thank Chair: Thank you very much. Not many witnesses you very much for coming. This must have been a say that to us I have to tell you. very difficult experience for you. Can I reiterate the Dr Chrystie: You were very kind. deep sympathy of the Members of this Committee and
Examination of Witnesses
Witnesses: Jamie Reed, MP for Copeland, Rev Richard Lee, Team Rector of Egremont, and Professor John Ashton, Joint Director of Public Health, Cumbria Primary Care Trust and Cumbria County Council, gave evidence.
Q158 Chair: Rev Lee, Mr Reed, Professor Ashton, Q159 Chair: Rev Lee, you may not have seen the thank you very much for coming today to give ACPO Report, but one of the facts that surprised me evidence to us. Obviously, we all remember the is that 10% of those who have firearms have criminal shocking details of 2 June, none more so than the convictions of some kind, and that Derek Bird had his three of you who are very much part of the community firearm from the age of 16 or 17, despite being known there. Mr Reed, of course, we saw you relate to the to the police. You know the local community. Would country the concerns of your constituents; something that have come as a surprise to people in the local I think none of us sitting around this Committee room community in Cumbria? would like to have been in a position to do, and we Rev Lee: I think some of the folk, who live within the have heard from some of your constituents here today. urban concentrations, wouldn’t be so much aware that Are you confident, Mr Reed, that the inquiries that are the folk who lived on the edge of the farming industry currently ongoing will get to the bottom of what has would be so involved with firearms, but they probably happened? Because today—I don’t know whether you wouldn’t realise how involved youngsters would be have seen a copy of the report produced by ACPO, from a very early age with other dangerous pieces of but they have sent all Members of this Committee a farming equipment: the thresher, the plough, the tractor. If you look at the number of industrial injuries very detailed report and they’re giving evidence next we have on farmland with farming procedures, it falls week with the Chief Constable of Cumbria. But are into that sort of context. So I don’t think they’d be you satisfied that what is on offer at the moment will particularly shocked and many of them know; you give yourself, and your constituents, full satisfaction can’t live on the edge of the farming communities around the events of 2 June? without hearing shotgun fire. Mr Reed: First of all, Mr Vaz, thank you very much However, that shotgun fire now—for certain to the whole Committee for establishing this hearing individuals—is deeply distressing because the sound and all of the hearings associated with it. I think it has of that weapon going off doesn’t remind them of a given this issue a momentum and an analysis, which country pursuit, it reminds them of a lethal and a most it otherwise wouldn’t have had from any other source aggressive attack upon themselves and their within Parliament as of yet, so I’m very grateful for communities. So, I don’t think they’d be particularly that. I’ve seen the ACPO Report. I’ve read it. It needs amazed. There may be people who just don’t know. closer inspection from me. I think we have to—as a But certainly, having spent many years in the Royal society and certainly as a Parliament, as a Air Force watching how carefully we train young men legislature—compare that ACPO Report, which I and young women to use weapons all the way through think is a very good report, with the existing firearms their lives, I’d be rather uneasy myself to leave legislation. That’s a job for Parliament to do, and until someone at the age of 16 with an experience of we do that I personally won’t have the satisfaction I breaking open a shotgun and firing it and saying that’s would like. I can’t speak for my constituents because the level of training they can abide with for the rest I think, as you’ve seen, there is a range of views. So, of their lives. I think there’s a question mark there. as good as the ACPO Report is—and I think it is good—it’s a very detailed starting point for the time Q160 Lorraine Fullbrook: Thank you, Chairman. being, from my point of view. I’d like to address my question to both Rev Lee and cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 12:07] Job: 006950 Unit: PG03 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101102 Firearms Control - corrected.xml
Ev 26 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
2 November 2010 Jamie Reed, Rev Richard Lee and Professor John Ashton to Mr Reed individually. Following on, Rev Lee, from remarkable, and we’re all grateful for that. The what you have just said: can you describe to the community is a community like many— Committee the impact the shootings have had on the Chair: Sorry, Mr Reed, I know you should be used to local community? these settings but some of our Members can’t hear Rev Lee: Well, it would be outrageous of me, in a you. Could you speak up a little louder? Thank you. sense, to try and sum that up in a few moments. All I Mr Reed: Sorry. Apologies. The community is a rural can say is that there is an abiding sense of—it’s not community with a long mining heritage, so it’s used quite fear, but it’s an abiding sense of someone took to large scale tragedies. Things like this are unique away my innocence; someone took away my village; and they do have a large community-wide someone took away my street; someone took away psychological effect—there’s absolutely no doubt my liberty, and they killed someone outside my front about that at all—particularly upon children, I think. door,” and one feels offended by that and very The effect upon the families affected is obvious but unsettled indeed. Even the passage of time doesn’t different for every family. I think what compounded help because for various reasons people do revisit the effect, what almost accelerated and deepened the their grief, revisit their pain, and there are certain folk, effect of the events was the frankly gratuitous, without going into any detail, who will not go past a shocking, unjustifiable, invasive media coverage that point easily. They will not pass that site on the bridge, surrounded much of it, which has left very, very that site on Grove Road, where someone lay or was deep scars. murdered. So the effect on the community, I look I’m not in a position to say more than any other upon it as if you take an enormous stone block and member of the community how it has affected the you hit it with a chisel at a certain angle; fault lines community, other than my experience is it has been will fracture throughout, and you never quite know deep and it has been profound and it will take a while where they are until you just try to move the block. to recover from, but we will recover. That’s what is happening to people. There is a transition time in which they think they’re coming to Q163 Lorraine Fullbrook: Can I just pick up the terms with it, then something is said or something point about the media. Can you explain specifically happens; such as All Saints Tide, All Souls Tide. As what you mean about that? Was it an intrusion or did you know, many churches have services where they you feel it was badly reported or wrongly reported? recall the names of those who have died over the last Mr Reed: All of those. I think one of the issues this year; that can be a pivotal point. Christmas, another debate throws up—and it’s a legitimate debate for all point when they realise that there is a space at the of us—is what kind of country are we and what kind table that was never there before. So I think the effects of country do we want to be? Do we want to be the are multi-lateral and dictated by how people were at kind of country where the son of a murder victim, on the time when things happened. Because some his first day back at school, is being hounded by the families found it more deep-seated, hurtful, then and press? What kind of country is that? What kind of now they’re just coming to terms with it and realising legislature allows that? What kind of people are we the man was a person who not only died but was that we allow those things to go by and not raise a murdered, and that brings out a certain element of hand or an eyebrow about whether or not that’s right anger, frustration. One of the words that people have or wrong? And it’s fundamentally wrong. What said to me, they’ve just felt a bit at times—although I happened in the midst of this tragedy was that news would like also to pay tribute to the work of the reporting and news reportage, very, very quickly, Family Liaison Officers, who have been superb, and within a matter of hours, became entertainment. That many other agencies have stepped into breaches. But can’t be right and that must be addressed. there was a certain sense on the day of abandonment; abandonment to violence, all the authorities that Q164 Lorraine Fullbrook: So did you feel that there should stop this happening didn’t. It continued. was nothing positive that the media could do for you Whether we like it or not, it flowed. All of the in this instance? support systems— Mr Reed: In these instances the media has a crucial role, in the first instance, in disseminating Q161 Chair: Can I stop you there: who should have information—a hugely important public protection stopped this? role in many ways. When the incident is over—this Rev Lee: We don’t know. That’s an inarticulate incident was done in little over an hour—the role of response about folk just saying, “The death of one the media changes and, of course, it’s right and proper person, two people, three people, four people, five that it should be reported upon. Is it right and proper people”, and it goes on. that people should be offered money to sell stories when, as we know, once we develop a marketplace Q162 Lorraine Fullbrook: I would like to ask the for this kind of commodity stories are invented with same question to Mr Reed, if you could describe what no regard for the people affected by what’s printed you feel about the impact of the shootings on the or broadcast? local community? I’ve spent time in the House speaking about these Mr Reed: It’s been profound. I have to say I’m very issues. I could speak much longer about them. grateful that our community had Rev Lee within it because the stoicism and the compassion, and the Q165 Mr Burley: Clearly one of the results of this remarkable way within which he has led so much of terrible incident is some kind of call for tighter the community on these issues has been truly government controls, and we’re obviously all trying cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 12:07] Job: 006950 Unit: PG03 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101102 Firearms Control - corrected.xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 27
2 November 2010 Jamie Reed, Rev Richard Lee and Professor John Ashton to tease out what that might mean in practical terms. few weeks, there was another similar kind of thing in We saw a split on the representatives of the Northumberland. So, it’s now the failure of people to community this morning between three that favoured be able to distinguish between reality television and some kind of tighter control, in terms of bullets or the 24 hour news coverage and intrusive sensationalism, way guns were kept; one who owned a licence who and descending on Cumbria as if it was a war zone didn’t. I was just wondering is that reflective of the with the anchor people from the main shows— wider community? Is there a difference of opinion locally as to what tighter gun controls might mean? Q167 Chair: What is the way around it? It’s a Professor Ashton: Can I make an offering at this fascinating explanation. stage? I should just say, to situate my position, I’m the Professor Ashton: I think there needs to be a code of Director of Public Health in Cumbria, and my areas of practice, basically. I think there needs to be a code interest and expertise involve the fact that, as a of practice. Director of Public Health, I was responsible for the Chair: For whom? The media? health service side of things, albeit I was at a WHO Professor Ashton: Yes, for the media. When these meeting on injury and violence prevention, which is a major things happen I think there needs to be a code longstanding interest of mine. I wanted to refer to that of practice. because I’m familiar with quite a lot of the evidence Another major thing where I think there is a base for prevention, and I’ve been chairing the group possibility to learn lessons and do something, I think that took over from the Chief Constable’s Gold access to method is terribly important, for injury and Command, the recovery group, since I’m dealing with violence. And remember guns are involved in the psychological side at a community level and I accidents and suicide, as well as homicide, and the have a psychiatric training as well as a public health availability of guns in households, we’ve heard— training. So that’s my context there. Chair: We have further questions on this, which I But I would like to draw your attention to two or three hope you’ll find of interest. things in terms of the evidence base. One is that a proportion of violence is preventable, and people tend Q168 Mark Reckless: Professor Ashton, I just to be nihilistic about this, but a proportion of it is wanted to question you about the issue of GP preventable. And the evidence base, I’ll leave with notification. We had, I think, the IPCC recommending you the WHO documentation on this— that there should be a check with a GP, which, on my understanding, was to give the GP the opportunity to Q166 Chair: It would be very helpful to the notify anything that hadn’t been disclosed that should Committee if you would apply all that to the have been. Since then there seems to have been an circumstances of Cumbria and tell us what was agreement between ACPO and BMA, which, at least preventable. to my mind, seems to go further than that and seems Professor Ashton: Yes. Well, what is preventable— to be a tagging of an individual record for the GP to Chair: In your view—you come here as an expert proactively raise material, either then or if it develops and you’ve been very helpful so far—what could have at a future date. What are your thoughts about that been prevented? procedure? Professor Ashton: I think you have to distinguish Professor Ashton: Well, my thoughts are informed between the specific events and violence prevention also by conversation with one of our other medical more generally, out of which this event will have directors in the Primary Care Trust, who was a GP in grown. I think that’s the problem for people, West Cumbria and has extensive experience of this conceptually, to get their heads around. I think the role issue in the past, and what we between us have of the media is terribly important in these events. One concluded on that is that a lot of GPs are very of the colleagues that I was with when this happened unhappy about being in a position of having to sign has headed up the Centers for Disease Control and off this licence procedure, when they’ve had no Prevention: injury and violence prevention centre in training for it and where they feel that they are America, for the last 10 years. I discussed it with him potentially at risk because they’re not trained in risk extensively and he has extensive experience of all the assessment. So there’s a lot of insecurity and mass shootings in America. So we were able to draw unhappiness about that. on some of that knowledge and insight and feed it into What we think is that there should be a limited Cumbria from a distance. The point I want to make, number of GPs who have specialist expertise and that which builds on Jamie Reed’s point, is that I don’t people should not be signing off their own patients, think this event would have happened if there hadn’t because it can be very difficult to refuse your own been the mass media sensationalist coverage of the— patient. I think that’s the sort of thing that needs to be Chair: That is post, isn’t it? looked at. Professor Ashton:—of the Columbine shootings and these other things. Q169 Mark Reckless: Are the GPs more concerned Chair: I see. that they may be going a bit too close to disclosing Professor Ashton: This is the context, and the media confidential information, or they may be missing coverage of this event will have sown the seeds for something and not understanding the type of medical another event somewhere else in the world, because issue that could lead to a problem with a gun? of the global satellite coverage and the Professor Ashton: I think these issues of sharing sensationalisation of it. That’s a big strand of this that clinical information have been worked through in needs to be addressed bearing in mind that, within a recent years. I’ve had to work closely with the police cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 12:07] Job: 006950 Unit: PG03 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101102 Firearms Control - corrected.xml
Ev 28 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
2 November 2010 Jamie Reed, Rev Richard Lee and Professor John Ashton myself on confidential information from the health directly related to these events. Those involve formal service, and so on, and I think there’s a more data links—as we’ve just been discussing—with the sophisticated approach to that now. I think there’s GP, mental health and police services, inquiry of the recognition that if there is a danger to the public, then applicant’s GP, funded by the applicant, talking to the there’s a requirement of disclosure under certain applicant’s family at grant and renewal, and having a circumstances. But I think if the signing off GP is not single type of certificate for both firearms and the patient’s GP and can access clinical records, then shotguns. that takes some of the problematic side of this out. Do you have any thoughts about whether that is what I was going to say, there was no evidence that Bird you expected to hear from ACPO, what you thought had psychiatric problems. would be helpful? How much notice should we take of this? Q170 Chair: But he did have criminal convictions? Chair: If we have a brief response from each one of Professor Ashton: Yes, and that’s another issue. But you that would be helpful. what I’m saying is that what we’ve heard this morning Mr Reed: I think we should take significant notice of so far is quite anecdotal, notwithstanding the it. I do think it’s a starting point. I don’t think it’s an importance of the testimony. But the evidence base exhaustive detailed end point. Could the killer have for risk assessment is not in place. There is some of killed as many people, in the time that he killed them, it here in this global review. with one weapon and less ammunition? That question Chair: It would be extremely helpful if you could isn’t answered. There are significant questions raised apply that excellent document there to the facts of this by the report still, which I think need to be answered case and let us have a note. by a question from this Committee. Chair: Indeed. Rev Lee, you haven’t seen it? Q171 Alun Michael: I’m convinced of the value of Rev Lee: No. taking a public health approach, and you may be Chair: So it’s difficult for you. Professor, have you aware we had evidence, only last week, from seen it? Professor Jonathan Shepherd about the approach to Professor Ashton: I haven’t seen it, no. violence in Cardiff. Professor Ashton: Yes. I know Jonathan Shepherd. Q174 Chair: We’re very grateful to ACPO, it’s just Alun Michael: Can we approach it from the other that they published it on the day you’re giving side then and ask the question: how could we use a evidence, so you’ve not had an opportunity to see it. public health perspective to look at the system of gun But we will have the Chief Constable in, and it would controls in this country, and are there any changes that be very helpful if you could read that report and let you would recommend in the way that we deal with the Committee know your views, so we can put some that issue? of these views to ACPO and the Chief Constable Professor Ashton: I think that I would come back to when he comes in. access to method; with violence and injury it’s access I have a final question for you, Rev Lee. When I was to method and the method in this case is guns and up there in Cumbria you were debating the kind of ammunition. There is evidence of other countries memorial that you wanted for those who had died and having different approaches and having had an impact been injured; have you all decided what kind of on levels of gun violence by having different memorial you want? thresholds of age, for example, and other methods. Rev Lee: Copeland is a very diverse area and they have not, and what is appropriate in one part of the Q172 Alun Michael: Forgive me, with all that borough is not appropriate in another. In a very small knowledge and background, are there village where there were two murders, they want very recommendations you would make for the way that little to be seen on their streets because it become we might change the way we control guns in this dominant and domineering, whereas there are moves country? now towards thinking of perhaps some form of Professor Ashton: The single, practical thing I would distinct memorial in a place—what we are going to say is that the medical certification side should be do, I think what is happening, is that when the reframed, in the way that I just mentioned earlier. anniversary of this event comes around it wants to be remembered with positivity, giving thanks for the Q173 Dr Huppert: Have you had a chance to look lives of those people who lived, not remembering how at the ACPO Report through today? they died. So I think there’s a great move in the whole Professor Ashton: No. community to do something to lift people’s morale at Dr Huppert: I’d be very interested in your that time. So that’s what’s happening. On further responses—although you haven’t read it, and I’m sure details, I’m unsighted, but could I just say a couple you will. The things which I thought were interesting of things? were, firstly, a comment that: “The details of these Chair: Very briefly. circumstances do not give rise to any immediately Rev Lee: I would like to say that when I dealt with obvious changes that need to be made, either in the the press I found them not rude or intrusive, as long Cumbria constabulary or in law, such as would have as I was straightforward and to the point, and they readily prevented the offences from being backed off very quickly. Also, I would like to pay committed”. It then goes on to say that there are a tribute to all those people who stepped in as number of changes that are considered would improve volunteers to help people on the day; extremely public safety more widely in this area, but they’re not bravely. Copeland being so isolated, the ambulance cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 12:07] Job: 006950 Unit: PG03 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101102 Firearms Control - corrected.xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 29
2 November 2010 Jamie Reed, Rev Richard Lee and Professor John Ashton service was just impossible but there were some very Chair: Indeed. What would be extremely helpful: we brave individuals who have now gone back into the are looking to the future, obviously, to try and prevent twilight and I think they’ve done amazingly well and this kind of thing happening again. If you have any I pay tribute to them indeed. suggestions of ways in which the Committee can do Chair: Yes, Mr Reed, very quickly. this, we would very much appreciate your comments. Mr Reed: One final point, Mr Vaz. As a parent, there We hope to have our report, subject to the progress of are tighter controls on the number of bottles of Calpol Committee business, by Christmas of this year, and I can buy at any one time in the supermarket than we hope it is a report that is worthy of the people who there are on the rounds of ammunition I can buy as lost their lives. Thank you very much for coming the owner of a 22 rifle. That cannot be right. today.
Examination of Witnesses
Witnesses: Gill Marshall-Andrews, and Dr Mick North, Gun Control Network, gave evidence.
Q175 Chair: Ms Marshall-Andrews, and Dr North, Q177 Mr Winnick: Can I put this to you—if you thank you so much for coming to give evidence to us like as the Devil’s advocate—the gun lobby, if that’s today. You’ve heard some of the testimony that we the right description, would say, “You can virtually have received so far. But can I start with you, Ms ban all firearms but it won’t alter the fact that those Marshall-Andrews? You argue that a significant who are determined to commit mass murder would do proportion—a significant proportion—of gun offences so by using illegal weapons and, therefore, the are committed by those with legal weapons. What is tragedies that we know about and that your the basis of that assertion? organisation came into being as a result of—I think Ms Marshall-Andrews: There are two different kinds of Dunblane and now Whitehaven—will occur all the of legal weapons: there are those that are licensed and same.” What do you say to that? there are those that are held because a licence is not Dr North: As someone who lost a daughter at necessary. First of all taking the licensed weapons, Dunblane, I’m well aware of the damage that licensed almost all of the mass shootings around the world— weapons can do. I also sat through the Cullen Inquiry including the three that we’ve had here since 1987— at the time, and Lord Cullen made comments in his have all involved licensed gun owners and licensed report to the effect that the Dunblane massacre was guns. In this country we don’t collect figures for planned in the context of Thomas Hamilton owning licensed guns that are involved in crime. We can’t get the weapons that he did. He did not consider it likely hold of that information; freedom of information that he would have been able to commit that atrocity requests are routinely rejected. But looking to another in any other way. Neither do I feel that there is any country, Canada, a third of all traced murder weapons evidence that Thomas Hamilton, nor Derek Bird, are licensed. So it is clearly not the case that licensed would have been able to get hold of weapons illegally. weapons are not part of the problem. They are part of They did it in the context of holding their weapons the problem. legally. Chair: Dr North, would you like to comment? Ms Marshall-Andrews: That is borne out by the fact Dr North: Of course, I agree with what Gill has said. that almost all mass shootings are committed with legal weapons. Q176 Mr Winnick: Ms Marshall-Andrews, you Mr Winnick: As were the three tragedies, which I argue in your organisation that the bar should be mentioned. raised so only those who meet the strictest criteria Ms Marshall-Andrews: Yes. should be allowed to have guns. Do you think that that is feasible, bearing in mind the need for people Q178 Steve McCabe: Am I right in thinking you’ve in the agricultural community, as they constantly tell found some common ground with representatives of us, to have weapons? the shooting lobby who also argue for a single Ms Marshall-Andrews: I do. I think that the starting licensing system for shotguns? Is there much point should be that guns are lethal weapons and the difference between what you’re proposing and what onus should be on the applicant, somebody who wants they’re saying? to own a gun, to prove that they are okay to have a Dr North: I think it’s news to us that we have gun. It shouldn’t be that the police have to common ground on something, which is encouraging. demonstrate why somebody should not have a gun; it Certainly we had for a long time advocated a single should be the onus on the applicant to say, “I’m an system, not only to include shotguns and Section 1 okay person to hold this gun in every respect, and I firearms but also air weapons as well. can prove that every two years”. We suggest renewals Steve McCabe: I think air weapons— every two years. Dr North: I suspect that the gun lobby would differ I think that the essence of licensing should be that a with us on that. gun licence is a privilege and not a right. If you start Ms Marshall-Andrews: I think— from that point, then you can raise the bar and say, Steve McCabe: And just tell me—sorry. “We are only going to have very particular people that Ms Marshall-Andrews: Just one thing: I think that we are going to allow to own a gun for a particular would depend upon whether there is a common purpose”. system, a common licensing system that seems to cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 12:07] Job: 006950 Unit: PG03 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101102 Firearms Control - corrected.xml
Ev 30 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
2 November 2010 Gill Marshall-Andrews and Dr Mick North coalesce around the shotgun procedure, as opposed to Dr North: Yes. the Section 1 procedure, which is much more Chair: Excellent. demanding. Q184 Nicola Blackwood: Just to follow up on that Q179 Steve McCabe: Okay, yes, that’s fair enough. airgun point slightly, there are an estimated 7 million Tell me, what is the benefit you expect to achieve with airguns currently out there unlicensed. If you want to a shorter renewal period for licences? start addressing that, how would you go about it? You Dr North: We’ve seen a number of instances over the can obviously license people who can buy new ones, years of people whose behaviour has changed over a but what about the 7 million that are already out there? short time period. In five years a lot of things can Aren’t they responsible for the majority— change. I have had a look to see what other countries Ms Marshall-Andrews: We have been talking to the do. New South Wales, as far as I can tell, does ask for police about that and what we’ve suggested is that the renewal every two years. So it’s not unusual. Of new airgun, as you suggest, is brought into a new course, it was a shorter time period in this country as system of licensing. And that over a period of, say, well until comparatively recently. two years, you allow an amnesty where people can hand in their airguns or license them. After that period Q180 Steve McCabe: Just so I am clear on this, is it would be an offence to be holding an airgun after a the two-year figure based on what you’ve seen licence. So you have to phase it in. We recognise that elsewhere rather than the fact that there’s any obvious it’s a very big problem and that it would have to be immediate benefit from that period of time? phased in, but it is done. You know, Australia licenses Ms Marshall-Andrews: It’s a compromise because it’s airguns. A number of other countries are moving expensive—it’s labour- intensive—but it would be a towards that. New Zealand is very, very concerned reasonable period in our view. about the high powered airguns now, and the growth in airgun crime. Q181 Lorraine Fullbrook: Thank you, Chairman. I would just like to pick up something that Gill Q185 Nicola Blackwood: We have received mixed Marshall-Andrews has just said. You said all mass evidence on exactly how GPs and the medical shootings were with legal weapons. The staff of the profession can help ensure that only those who are Committee requested an up-to-date figure of the use appropriate to be holding licences should retain them. from the Home Office and received the following The main difficulties seem to centre around data responses, “In 2008–09 there were 39 shooting protection issues, but also around the ability of homicides. Four of these deaths involved a weapon individual GPs to actually make an assessment of that was held on a firearm or shotgun certificate.” So deteriorational behaviours which may occur outside that is contrary to your evidence a minute ago. their time with the patient. How exactly do you think Ms Marshall-Andrews: No, no, we’re talking about we can get around those problems? mass shootings. That is the Hungerford, Dunblane, Ms Marshall-Andrews: I think that you have to Cumbria here, plus the international ones from establish a very clear protocol for GPs. I have two Australia, France, Germany, Finland. This is a sort of GPs in my family, my daughter and my daughter-in- syndrome of the mass shooter, the loner who loves his law, and I’ve talked about this extensively with them. guns, who goes berserk and kills a lot of people. What GPs are frightened of losing the good will of their you’re talking about, these are individual murders. patients, obviously. So it has to be taken, in a sense, You have managed to get information that we haven’t out of their hands. There has to be a clear protocol managed to get, if you’ve had that from the police. which says—for instance it might say, “If you are We are always asking, in the case of a serious gun prescribing this drug for somebody” or, “This kind of crime, “Was this a legally held weapon?” and we are level of drug for somebody”, then that should trigger never given that information. some sort of notification as a matter of course. So it is taken out of the individual hands of the GP, who Q182 Lorraine Fullbrook: It is clear that the figures doesn’t have to make a proactive decision to say, “I will change because of the Cumbrian shootings, for don’t think this person really should have a gun; I’m example, but 17 of those 39 shooting homicides going to tell the police about that”. That won’t work, involved a weapon where a certificate was not held. I don’t think. But if it is done as part of a protocol, Ms Marshall-Andrews: Right. Well, you know more which takes it out of the hands of the GP— than we do, but in terms of the broader figures, if you Chair: Thank you. look at the figures for slight injury in the UK it’s— sorry, I haven’t got them. Q186 Nicola Blackwood: Sorry, could I just Dr North: 67% involved imitation guns and airguns, interrupt? which don’t need any licence at all. Chair: Yes, of course. Ms Marshall-Andrews: 20% of all serious gun Nicola Blackwood: The slight problem I see with this injuries in this country are committed with airguns. So is it is predicated on the principle that people regularly if you want to do something about gun crime you do see their GPs. In order to assess a change of behaviour need to think about airguns. you would need to see a pattern over time, and I haven’t seen my GP for at least two years. So I just Q183 Chair: And you have put that in your written wonder how you address that. evidence to the Committee? Ms Marshall-Andrews: I think the change of Ms Marshall-Andrews: Yes. behaviour is probably not a change; I think it’s cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 12:07] Job: 006950 Unit: PG03 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101102 Firearms Control - corrected.xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 31
2 November 2010 Gill Marshall-Andrews and Dr Mick North probably got to be much more about, “This person is Dr North: I think there’s a lot of evidence that the depressed and, therefore, should not be owning a criminal fraternity know already. We had an article gun”. I think that to ask a GP to assess somebody’s from the Northern Echo this morning, a police changed behaviour is probably not viable. warning to gun owners after two break-ins at farms in that area. Q187 Mark Reckless: Ms Marshall-Andrews, in Lorraine Fullbrook: That’s my point. your final recommendation in your memorandum to Dr North: Well, there’s no public information that this Committee, you recommend notification to there were guns there, but they would have known— present and indeed former, up to two years, partners. and a warning from the Metropolitan Police about Ms Marshall-Andrews: Yes. shotgun thefts in London last year. These things are Mark Reckless: Could you tell us a little more about happening now. Breaking the secrecy has nothing to how that would work in practice in light of the do with letting the criminals know, and neither is it Australian and Canadian experiences you cited? going to be information that is available for the Ms Marshall-Andrews: Yes. Do you think— general public. It is so it can be checked by those who Dr North: On the application form for anyone might be at risk in going into a house where there is applying for a firearms licence, there is room for a a weapon. current spouse or an ex-spouse of up to two years to Ms Marshall-Andrews: Could I just add one thing complete and sign, and if they fail to do so then that about openness? That is that there is a culture of triggers an additional level of investigation by the secrecy here and there is collusion between the police registering authorities. and the gun owners to keep it all very quiet. It is our belief that if it is exposed to the light, first of all there will be fewer gun owners; secondly, they will be much Q188 Mark Reckless: To a spouse or ex-spouse? more careful about their guns and how they store Ms Marshall-Andrews: Or a partner. them, and it will provide communities with a clear Dr North: Or a partner. I think it is “consummal” or route to register their concerns about inappropriate something are the words that are used on the actual people that they think might be holding guns. application form. But it is up to the applicant to declare their partners for that past two years, and get Q191 Mr Burley: Just following on this argument, I each one of them to sign the form. If they don’t then am not sure I follow your logic, because at the an additional investigation—it doesn’t veto the moment you obviously have criminals who probably application but it ensures that additional investigations take a punt that certain types of households may have take place. a gun in them, a farmer or so on, and as you heard from the Northern Echo there, they are obviously Q189 Mark Reckless: Are we reliant on the targeting certain houses where there is a probability. applicant to give the information as to who those Under your proposal you are going to make that even individuals are? easier because the information is going to be made Dr North: I assume so, yes. I don’t know the details available, and it says here one of your suggestions is beyond looking at the application form itself. that members of the public can find out who has a Ms Marshall-Andrews: In Canada, where they licence. So isn’t that just going to lead to— brought this in in 1995, in the ensuing eight years the Ms Marshall-Andrews: Certain members of the gun murder rate of women went down by 40%. In public. We are not suggesting— New Zealand, where there is also what they call a “spousal hotline” that is— Q192 Mr Burley: My point is that if it is more open Dr North: That’s in Canada that, sorry. The hotline is you are going to have more criminals targeting more in Canada. premises where there are known guns to steal. Ms Marshall-Andrews: No, it’s also in New Zealand Ms Marshall-Andrews: That is clearly an argument. there’s a spousal hotline. Our view is that where a criminal clearly wants to go Chair: It would be very good if you could let us have after guns they will know where they are anyway. The a note about that. criminals already know where the guns are. We have a lot of evidence from the police that says that there Q190 Lorraine Fullbrook: I would just like to ask is an increase in burglary and the theft of legal about the recommendations of changes to gun controls weapons. There is an increase, which implies that from the Gun Control Network, your organisation, people know where they are already and that they are specifically about lifting the secrecy about gun not being cared for properly. They’re not being stored ownership and making it available to members of the properly. So what we have to try and do is to open it public, so they can find out who actually has a licence, up so people know where they are and the guns are and a hotline for those who wish to record their kept very, very tightly stored. concerns about a gun owner, and where it is Chair: I think you have made that point very clearly, appropriate they should prompt a review. Don’t you Ms Marshall-Andrews. think this information is making it easier for the criminal fraternity to know, without a bit of digging, Q193 Mr Burley: I have a question on the GP issue, who has guns and where they need to go and find because we had some evidence last week saying that them and therefore, would increase robberies and, if someone was depressed that in itself would not be therefore, theft of legal guns, legally held by a reason for revoking their licence, or not issuing one responsible owners? to them. I’m just wondering from your conversations cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 12:07] Job: 006950 Unit: PG03 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_101102 Firearms Control - corrected.xml
Ev 32 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
2 November 2010 Gill Marshall-Andrews and Dr Mick North with your family and other GPs what sort of very frightened of going into that house because I conditions would prompt a GP to say, “Right, we think that person is a bit unstable and I believe they should revoke that person’s firearm licence”. I am have a gun”—that sort of thing. thinking, for example, if they were neurotic, if they Chair: We get the point. were depressed, if they were drinking alcohol to excess. All of those things? Q198 Steve McCabe: Can I just ask a very minor Ms Marshall-Andrews: It can’t be left to the GP to point about the organisation? We’re often asked about revoke the licence. That’s not what this is about. This groups who give evidence. I know that the network is about the GP having the information on a record came out of the aftermath of Dunblane. Can I just ask, that somebody has a gun licence, and with a proper you are a not for profit organisation, where do your clear protocol that says to them, “I am prescribing finances come from? something for this person who is depressed, therefore, Ms Marshall-Andrews: We run on empty basically. maybe I should call the police and let them know”. If We don’t employ anybody. it’s to work it’s going to be very prescribed how the Steve McCabe: Okay. doctors have to behave and not in their—it’s not going Chair: I think that’s fair enough. to be a matter of, “Should I? Shouldn’t I?” It’s going Mr Winnick: He wants to make a contribution. to have to be prescribed, a bit like doctors at the Chair: Mark Reckless has the very final question, if moment have to record gunshot injuries in hospital. he is very brief.
Q194 Mr Burley: Just in practical terms then: Q199 Mark Reckless: Ms Marshall-Andrews, you someone loses his wife, he goes to his GP, as Nicola stated a few minutes ago that there was collusion said, who maybe he hasn’t seen for a year, two years. between the police and firearms applicants. Could I He’s put on some mild antidepressants. That GP under ask you to clarify what you meant by that? your system would then have to notify the police that Ms Marshall-Andrews: Well, we try and get they have— information repeatedly about the legal status of guns Ms Marshall-Andrews: It depends on what the used in crime, and we can never get it. What’s said to protocol said. us is, “Oh it’s not in the public’s interest” or, “It’s insecure”. I forget what the phrase is but it’s a threat Q195 Mr Burley: Okay, is that what you’re to public safety to tell us whether a particular gun was suggesting the protocol says? Because that would be a legal gun or not. Having worked in the business for a mental health issue. 14 years there is collusion between the shooters and Ms Marshall-Andrews: I don’t want to define the the police to keep things quiet, to keep things secret. protocol, but I— I think that festers and it’s not good. Chair: Thank you, Ms Marshall-Andrews, Dr North. Q196 Mr Burley: Well who does? For you in particular, Dr North, your daughter died at Ms Marshall-Andrews: Well, that’s for the doctors to the age of only five in Dunblane; she would have been do. But there needs to be something which is very 19 this year. This is something that you would clear which says, “If you pass this threshold, if this obviously never forget and the sympathies of this happens to a patient I’m going to tell them this”. Committee are obviously with you as well, as you think of her and as you pursue your campaign. You Q197 Nicola Blackwood: On this point of making it can never get her back, but we do respect the fact that possible for certain professionals and members of the you have come here and that you have shared your public to find out, what kind of professionals and views with us. members of the public do you mean? Dr North: Thank you, Chair, and could I just use this Ms Marshall-Andrews: We get a lot of paramedics opportunity to offer my sympathy to all those who who are shot at when they’re called into a street to have lost loved ones in Cumbria in June. help, as they come out—airguns that might be used to Chair: Thank you very much. shoot at them. Care workers sometimes say to us, “I’m cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [SO] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:33] Job: 006950 Unit: PG04 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 10 (redacted transcript).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 33
Tuesday 16 November 2010 (Morning)
Members present: Keith Vaz (Chair)
Nicola Blackwood Steve McCabe Mr Aidan Burley Alun Michael Mr James Clappison Bridget Phillipson Lorraine Fullbrook Mark Reckless Dr Julian Huppert Mr David Winnick ______
Examination of Witnesses
Witnesses: Assistant Chief Constable Sue Fish, ACPO lead for the criminal use of firearms, Paul James, Head of the National Ballistics Intelligence Service, and Matt Lewis, Acting Head, Knowledge and Communications, NABIS, gave evidence.
Q200 Chair: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Q204 Mr Winnick: One of our witnesses, Professor Thank you very much for coming to speak to the Squires, argued that, rather than wait for each new Select Committee. You have asked for this first part weapon type to surface on the streets, a more of your evidence to be in private, and we have agreed proactive and preventive response is called for. Do to that. Could you tell us why? any of the witnesses take the view that that should Sue Fish: Yes, Chairman. The knowledge that we’ll be so? be providing to you today is based on intelligence that Sue Fish: Certainly, with blank-firing weapons, we predominantly comes from the National Ballistics think that is essential. It was set out in statute in the Intelligence Service and other law enforcement and Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006, that a police forces across the UK. We want to share that specification should be formed around blank-firing with you, because we know that it will help you with weapons, so that they were less able to be converted your deliberations. Some of the matters are sub judice, to be live firers. That has not yet taken place, and it is a great concern to ACPO that there has not been and some are extremely sensitive, given the nature of speedy progress on that. the cases that we might want to discuss with you. Working with the gun trade earlier this year, we took some action around a blank-firing weapon, Q201 Chair: And how would you like this note to manufactured by Bruni in Italy, but specified solely appear when we publish the report? As a précis? for the UK market, apparently to comply with what Sue Fish: My understanding is that we will be was required here. That was deemed readily consulted to ensure that a redacted version is convertible and had been used across the country, but appropriate for wider public dissemination. predominantly in London, to cause very serious harm to individuals and therefore communities. Q202 Chair: I am going to talk to you, first of all, about deactivated weapons. On what evidence do you Q205 Mr Winnick: When you say “no progress” base your recommendations to bring pre-1995 what is stopping progress? The previous Government, deactivated firearms in line with the 1995 standard the present Government or what? and to consider a licensing or registration scheme for Sue Fish: It is hard for me as ACPO to say. My sense deactivated weapons? was that it was not a priority. Matt Lewis: Chairman, if I may deal with the issue of deactivated firearms. The pre-1995 specification of Q206 Mr Winnick: That is what Ministers were deactivated firearms is an issue that has been talked saying: is that the case? about for some period of time. We have become aware Sue Fish: I think probably officials. I am not sure that of a change in criminal activity related to pre-1995 Ministers were cited on that. deactivated firearms. Q207 Mr Winnick: If I can get the position clear, Assistant Chief Constable, you would like Ministers Q203 Chair: Why were attempts by the previous to recognise that this is a matter of some urgency. Government to tighten controls in that area opposed Sue Fish: Absolutely. by the shooting lobby? Matt Lewis: It is very difficult for us to go back in Q208 Mr Clappison: Could you say a little more time and discuss what was done under a previous about your concerns about shotgun theft? What is Administration. Certainly, NABIS wasn’t established your evidence that shotgun licence holders have been at that point in time, so perhaps they weren’t offered targeted? the evidence base that we are able to offer you today. Sue Fish: We were made aware of a rise in shotgun We understand that there are a large number of pre- thefts, particularly in the Metropolitan Police area, 1995 deactivated firearms in private collections and earlier this year. As a result, we did some national that they hold a significant value for the individuals analysis to understand that problem. There is little who own them. evidence of targeted thefts. None the less, it is my cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:33] Job: 006950 Unit: PG04 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 10 (redacted transcript).xml
Ev 34 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
16 November 2010 Assistant Chief Constable Sue Fish, Paul James and Matt Lewis view that the majority of shotgun holders are not in primary colour, as per the Violent Crime Reduction high burglary areas, so it is very much an opportunist Act 2006. If you look at the Olympic BBMs, they will act, stealing property once thieves are in a dwelling. be orange in colour.
Q209 Mr Clappison: One incident in Gwent Q218 Dr Huppert: If I can just understand what you apparently accounted for a large proportion of shotgun would like the situation to be, is it that legislation thefts. Can you tell us what happened there? could prevent this from happening or that legislation is needed in order to appropriately punish the people Q214 Mr Burley: It’s fair to say that we have had who are doing this? conflicting evidence about this targeting of legitimate Sue Fish: There are a range of issues. First, I have owners. We have had, if you like, the anti-gun lobby already talked about the specification, which is really come and tell us that people are absolutely being important. The second issue relates to a type approval targeted for their guns, and we have had evidence process to make sure that new weapons coming into from people such as yourself and the pro-gun lobby the market, or indeed, modifications by the saying they are not. I have to admit I am confused manufacturer, can stay in tune and in keeping. The where the truth lies. third point I’d like to make is about tools. We need to One of the proposals from the anti-gun lobby was that change the legislation around the tools that are all registered owners should be made public in the available, because the wording currently reflects an form of an online database that is readily accessible age that simply doesn’t exist any longer. to the public so that people can know who is keeping shotguns legitimately. The point I put to the anti-gun Q219 Bridget Phillipson: Why do you believe that lobby is that if they were saying that people were current offences governing the importation and supply being targeted, surely such a database would only of firearms are inadequate? Will you also comment make the targeting process easier for criminals. Do on whether you are concerned about British soldiers you have any thoughts on that proposal? bringing guns back from conflicts abroad? Sue Fish: I have to say ACPO has a view, and I have Paul James: Certainly, on the situation with British a view, that it depends what you want it for. I think soldiers, we are not seeing any widespread evidence the unintended consequences that you outline are very at all of weapons that have come back from theatres real. The wider points about understanding who owns of war being used in crime. The forces work very a shotgun and being able to appropriately approach a closely with us in relation to this. There have been a licensing authority or a doctor with concerns around couple of odd incidents. However, as far as criminal the welfare and the suitability of an individual to hold usage of arms is concerned, there has been no a firearm are slightly different. I am not sure they will evidence to suggest that it is a significant problem. be well served by a public database. On importation offences and also, the offences of possession with intent to supply a weapon, which we Q215 Mr Burley: The other point the anti-gun lobby have a very strong view about, legislation is currently made on that was they felt there was some kind of very limited in relation to people bringing guns into collusion—almost a sinister or shady relationship— the country. Offences that are committed at the between gun owners and the police to keep this moment carry a maximum 10-year sentence. If you information covered up, and they wanted it out in the look at sentences for bringing drugs into the country, open. Do you have any comments on that accusation? they do not show the same degree of harm. We feel Sue Fish: I’m not entirely sure it is worthy of that the sentence should represent the serious harm comment, frankly. I think it is absolutely laughable. that these weapons actually pose. Chair: That is very helpful. Q220 Bridget Phillipson: On the issue of CS gas Q216 Dr Huppert: I have a slightly more open weapons, what action are you taking in regard to that? question. I would be interested to understand more Matt Lewis: I’m happy to cover CS. Certainly from about the process by which imitation firearms become the point of view of the National Ballistics more of a concern. Can you tell us a bit about how Intelligence Service, CS sprays are not something that people can change an imitation firearm into one that we necessarily deal with on a day-to-day basis. One can be fired? What is that process, how easy is it and thing we do as part of ACPO CUF and NABIS is to how prevalent is it? work closely with partners such as the UK Border Matt Lewis: I will just draw on our experience that Agency on trying to target certain things like CS we have with the Olympic BBM, which was an sprays, as well as Taser devices, on the grounds that, imitation blank firing weapon. They were readily yes, they are dangerous and prohibited weapons, but available, and you could purchase them— sometimes, they can also be a precursor to other things. Q217 Dr Huppert: Imitation blank firing—does that Chair: Well, we might come and visit before the mean it did not actually fire blanks? Committee is completed. We will now go into open Matt Lewis: It fired blanks, but it is classed as an session. imitation blank firer. It is not realistic because it has a cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [SO] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:49] Job: 006950 Unit: PG05 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 35
Examination of Witnesses
Witnesses: Assistant Chief Constable Sue Fish, ACPO lead for criminal use of firearms, Paul James, Head of National Ballistics Intelligence Service, and Matt Lewis, Acting Head, Knowledge and Communications, NABIS, gave evidence.
Chair: Order. This is the penultimate session in the a firearm discharged in a street or a public place that Committee’s inquiry into firearms. Our next session is not reported to us. The experience of communities will take place at 2 pm today when we will take is that it is more widespread than recorded crime evidence from the Attorney-General for the District of allows, but NABIS has enabled us to have a much Columbia, who is in Washington DC. Could I refer more coherent picture of the nature and threat of everyone present to the Register of Members’ firearms crime. Financial Interests where the interests of all Members are noted? Q228 Lorraine Fullbrook: So in that instance would you talk specifically about airguns, for example? Q225 Lorraine Fullbrook: I would look to explore Matt Lewis: Not necessarily. Just in support of Sue’s a bit more the use of firearms in crime. The Home point, yes, there is a clear identification between those Office evidence suggests that the vast majority of homicide-related crimes which we do get to know crimes involving firearms are carried out with illegally about and other incidents. NABIS has shown us that held guns. Given that information, what do the often those other incidents use the same firearm that NABIS data tell us in general terms about the use of has been used in many incidents. They are put through legal firearms in crime? a middleman, a person within a community who will Matt Lewis: It will be very difficult for me to describe loan or lease a firearm to others and therefore the to you what the current NABIS statistics look like in impact on the communities is great, but the number terms of the information we gather about what we call of firearms that are available to criminals is very low. inferred firearms, where we know that that firearm is As you will know, we have made a recommendation present because we have recovered ballistic material around possession with intent to supply, to directly that allows us to know it is there. Certainly if there is target those individuals who have a disproportionate anything that would say that it was a 9 mm calibre effect on communities because this small number of weapon, we would expect that item to be illegally weapons that NABIS shows us is being used time and owned, on the grounds that it is the most common time again is out there. handgun and submachine calibre and therefore we know that it would be illegal. If we draw our attention Q229 Bridget Phillipson: to shotguns, we are aware of a number of shotguns How do you think we deal that are currently inferred by NABIS and we are with the issue of firearms being used but because the happy to share that with the Committee in private as firearm is not discharged or recovered that is not then a statistic. recorded? How do you think that we support police What is difficult to understand until you recover that forces to record that as a firearms-related offence? If weapon is whether it is legally held or whether it has the weapon was used to intimidate or was discharged been stolen or criminally acquired. We don’t suspect but didn’t cause injury, would a police force feel that there are many legally held weapons that are confident in recording that as a firearms offence or being crossed over and used in crime and then go back would it say, “Well, we couldn’t establish if it was an into legal possession. We think it is much more likely air weapon or a shotgun? that a shotgun, for example, has been stolen from a Sue Fish: Absolutely. The Home Office counting residence and is then shortened and used in crime. We rules about how we record crime are absolutely clear. will then infer it until the point that we recover it. Whether you see a weapon or if the victim perceives that there is a firearm, it is recorded as a firearms Q226 Lorraine Fullbrook: So you would agree that crime. It is very clear on that. most crimes are committed with illegally held firearms? Q230 Nicola Blackwood: Thank you for that. The Matt Lewis: The vast majority. Home Office has given us evidence that intelligence on firearms has improved considerably since setting Q227 Lorraine Fullbrook: Just to go on from that, up NABIS in 2008. For the benefit of the Committee, Professor Squires gave evidence to the Committee could you explain a little about NABIS’s role and give some time ago that he believed that offending by an assessment of the impact that it has had on the firearms is grossly under-reflected in the crime figures. criminal use of firearms? Do you think that this is the case? Paul James: Certainly. NABIS looks at every crime Sue Fish: We have always said that there is a certain committed where there is potential to recover a bullet level that is under-reported, but let me just break that or cartridge from a crime scene. By recovering those, down. I would be highly surprised if there were any we can see the true usage of firearms, because every deaths through the use of firearms that were not single crime and bullet is logged on to a computerised known about. The same with serious injury: when a system, so that we can quickly see whether a weapon victim presents himself at hospital, hospitals are under used in a crime has been used previously. It also an obligation to report a shotgun or firearms injury to allows us to show when a gun has been used and on the police. So where individuals seek medical how many occasions. It perhaps allows us to put into treatment, that is not an issue. There is an issue in context the number of firearms in circulation that are terms of minor injury or where there is a shotgun or being used by criminals. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:49] Job: 006950 Unit: PG05 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected).xml
Ev 36 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
16 November 2010 Assistant Chief Constable Sue Fish, Paul James and Matt Lewis
The picture that is emerging is very much that there Q232 Chair: Thank you. What happens to the seized are a small number of weapons out there; handguns guns? Where do they go? Is there some great armoury are the major problem—blank firing, converted or in the sky that they all disappear to? I don’t want the deactivated weapons. They are being used on four, address, I just want to know roughly. five or six different occasions, and the guns move Sue Fish: If they’re part of criminal proceedings, around the country. NABIS allows us to say how they’re retained, but ultimately they’re destroyed. many weapons have been used. An inferred weapon is a weapon that we have recovered a bullet or a Q233 Chair: They’re destroyed. So you don’t have cartridge from, and we know that gun is being used some in stock that, as soon as a case is over— criminally within a community. If that gun hasn’t been Sue Fish: We do keep a stock, particularly of ballistic recovered, it also allows us to do some proactive work material, that we use for comparison—a bit like to change the focus on recovering that weapon, fingerprints. There is a weeding policy. targeted intelligence and other usages. We have a database built into it, so we not only Q234 Chair: Some of our witnesses commented on provide forces with individual intelligence about the nature of video games and the fact that they are crime in their own force areas, but we deliver both getting more violent, and they feel that that results in tactical and strategic products to look at the supply younger people, in particular, wanting to participate networks. Again, what it’s showing us is that there are in shooting. Do you have any views or knowledge very limited supply networks of guns—very few on that? people are involved—as opposed to something like Sue Fish: I think, as a human being as much as a the supply of class A drugs. Far fewer people are police officer, that the two are not incompatible. My involved in the supply of weapons, which gives us sense is that I find them extremely distasteful, and I real opportunities by focusing the intelligence that cannot help but feel that they cannot help the NABIS enables us to deliver. situation. The level of ambient violence, as well as extreme violence, in society today is a real issue not Q231 Nicola Blackwood: That’s a slightly different only in gun crime, but across the whole spectrum of picture from the one that we received from some of violent crime. As for the question of whether there the gun control campaigners we received evidence any evidence or any research that indicates that, not from. In particular, Professor Squires has claimed that that I have been made aware of. he finds it very difficult as a criminologist and researcher to access data to understand accurately the Q235 Chair: We are going to take evidence shortly, picture of what is going on with firearms in the UK. but, very quickly, because we have a busy schedule How do you respond to that? Is there a way in which this morning, what is the one lesson that we should we can keep sensitive information confidential while learn from what happened in Cumbria and giving a much more accurate picture of what is going Northumbria as far as weapons are concerned? on in the UK? Sue Fish: My sense is that you probably need to ask Matt Lewis: The data are extremely sensitive because that question of the chief constable of Cumbria. it is not only about individual weapons; the real benefit of NABIS is that it allows us to break into Q236 Chair: We are about to, but I just wondered categories and supply chains of weapons, so where we whether you had any thoughts. see a particular supply of weapons we can take action Sue Fish: Which I know you are. It is taking their with partners. In revealing the statistics and data, in views, and we will absolutely understand and support effect, we would be printing a guide either to convert the recommendations that they have made. or to import firearms into the UK, and the methods and how to do it. It would be very difficult to keep a Q237 Lorraine Fullbrook: In general, do you lid on what would undoubtedly be a large number of believe that UK gun control legislation is sufficiently FOI requests saying, “Please tell us how many robust Accepting that we cannot legislate for the inferred assault rifles you have at the moment”. That tragic incidents that we see where a switch flicks in would be very difficult for us to deal with at the somebody, do you believe that the current legislation minute. is sufficient to control guns in the UK? We are engaged with various other operations about Sue Fish: In our submission to you, we have made various things that are in the public domain. As those a number of recommendations, which would require trends and patterns go, I think that we would create legislation, so, inherently, the answer has to be no. Is more problems for ourselves in trying to keep a lid on the legislation fit for purpose? Broadly, but I think what we are trying to deal with. Because the issues there are some real opportunities, and perhaps the are so small, we are engaged in a large number of inquiry by this Committee provides one of the best proactive operations. I would hate to feel that we opportunities to not only rationalise, but make much would compromise anything that we are doing better legislation that actually has a real proportionate working with partners such as the Serious Organised balance between the rights of the citizen and the Crime Agency, the UK Border Agency and forces, by protection of the citizen in terms of their use of saying, “Here are some data that you can analyse”. firearms. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:49] Job: 006950 Unit: PG05 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 37
16 November 2010 Assistant Chief Constable Sue Fish, Paul James and Matt Lewis
Chair: Thank you very much for your evidence. If we need any further information, we will be in Thank you for the evidence that you gave the touch with you. Thank you. Committee in private, which we found most helpful.
Examination of Witnesses
Witnesses: Mick Fidgeon, Firearms Office Manager, Essex Police, Chief Constable Craig Mackey, Cumbria Constabulary, and Assistant Chief Constable Adrian Whiting, ACPO lead for firearms and explosives licensing, gave evidence.
Q238 Chair: Thank you very much indeed, access to all the information that a police service and gentlemen, for coming to give evidence to the the chief constable have. Committee. Can I start with a question to each of you? There is obviously concern, after the announcement Q241 Chair: But it could be part of the new national of the comprehensive spending review, about the crime agency, couldn’t it? amount of resources that can be directed towards gun Adrian Whiting: Conceivably, but the organisation licensing and gun control. Do you have any concerns that undertakes it will have to have a comprehensive about that? Do you think it will reduce the police’s national network capable of undertaking house-to- ability to ensure that licensing is properly undertaken? house, almost, inquiries. I don’t think the national Adrian Whiting: Sir, I would say that I have a number agency would be in a position to want to undertake of concerns. I have already had to recommend to chief that. It would be potentially at some odds with the officers that, in particular, things such as home visits, remit that I understand that agency is likely to take which are part of our national policy on both grant on board. and renewal, are conducted in person. A number of Chair: Mr Mackey, I will turn to you now. Mr Burley forces conduct them by telephone and, in some cases, is going to probe you on a number of specific postally. It gives me some concern that, in the questions, but on behalf of the Committee we would forthcoming climate in which policing will operate, like to recognise the work of the Cumbria police after arrangements such as that will be placed under the incident occurred. I was at the police awards last increasing pressure. Thursday when you and your men and women were Therefore, any opportunities that can be taken to duly recognised for the work they did. reinforce—that is one example, of course—the Craig Mackey: Thank you. necessity around some of the administrative processes linked to public safety in this regard are well worth Q242 Mr Burley: Mr Whiting concluded that the taking. I don’t foresee a wholesale collapse, for decisions taken by Cumbria constabulary to grant example, in relation to this, but I do see that there is Derrick Bird a shotgun firearms certificate were a risk of erosion around some of the practices that we reasonable, and that all appropriate checks took place. currently recommend. Obviously, we have heard evidence before the Committee that that individual had convictions for Q239 Chair: Because of some of these changes that drink-driving; that he had come to the attention of the you are going to have to make, do you feel that police over an argument with his girlfriend; and that somebody might slip through the net, who otherwise he had been arrested with regard to payment with would have been discovered as undesirable? menaces, two counts of theft and handling of stolen Adrian Whiting: Sir, I think there is a clear risk, but goods. trying to quantify that is incredibly difficult. That is It seems that Derrick Bird was known to you, and I why I maintain the policy position nationally that I guess the Committee is wondering whether you are do. Although it is difficult to quantify that risk, that is satisfied that, at every appropriate opportunity, checks clearly my motivation. were made on him as to whether he was still fit to hold that shotgun licence. Q240 Chair: Should there be a national licensing Craig Mackey: I’m as reassured as I can be. I don’t authority to deal with these issues? One suggestion is think you are ever going to be happy or satisfied about that the various application/licensing systems ought to the events of 2 June. All I could ask for, and all I be rolled into one, so that it is very clear to whom you wanted, was reassurance that the proper processes had have to apply. been followed at that time. It is important to put in Adrian Whiting: I don’t think that any intending context the later unsubstantiated matters. certificate holders, applicants or those who hold Many members of the community have things certificates approaching renewal or are looking for reported about them that never end up before a court. variation are in any doubt as to where the application That is not uncommon in work like taxi work. I is to be addressed. As for a national body, I am not suspect that if you looked at the number of times he generally speaking in favour of that. I don’t think the was also reported as a victim, where people made off evidence at the moment points to there being such a from his taxi—there would be incidents like that. significant opportunity for improvement, if that were What it does is use it as part of building a picture to taken from the police service and placed into a make an informed decision about the individual, based separate organisation. I bear in mind the fact that that on the information you have at the time. That is all separate organisation would presumably have to have you can do. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:49] Job: 006950 Unit: PG05 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected).xml
Ev 38 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
16 November 2010 Mick Fidgeon, Chief Constable Craig Mackey and Assistant Chief Constable Adrian Whiting
I wanted the reassurance that the processes and What I have recommended in relation to wholly procedures, as they existed, and the legislation had suspended sentences would require, I believe, some been followed. The important thing—as it said in the greater clarification than that, because it is based on report, and it is my own conclusion, having looked at the interpretation of the law as the 1968 Act is worded it—is that a licensing system can only ever reduce and in a particular judgment in the Fordham case. I risk. If we wanted to eliminate the risk of something highlighted mine because it requires a greater like 2 June, there would have to be a completely and administrative step to make that change, but we are fundamentally different relationship with the public certainly in agreement. availability of firearms. It is not a matter of simple changes to the licensing system. Q248 Alun Michael: There’s always an approach that asks, “Where are the gaps in the law and where Q243 Mr Burley: The corollary of that answer is are the gaps in the guidance?” Do you agree with a whether, if all the proper processes took place and we comment made to us in a recent evidence session that still had the incident, we need more robust processes what we need is more of a public health approach that in place to reduce the risk even further, accepting that considers the whole environment in which these you could never eliminate it altogether. We have heard events take place? suggestions that perhaps GPs should be contacted on Adrian Whiting: Yes, that’s why I have made a more regular basis. Should police licensing officers recommendations on things such as a more formal have more discretion to make these decisions to speak framework around those who are consulted in the to people? Should they have to come into your station process of application and renewal, to include family once a year? Are there things we can do? residents who are perhaps resident at the same Craig Mackey: I would support all the suggestions in address. I think there are opportunities in terms of the part 2 report in terms of that. I know some of the taking forward a more complete, holistic approach to challenges it will present. the licensing question that moves us on from some potentially process-driven arrangements that look Q244 Chair: Even if those suggestions were down a list and ask, “Does this or that apply or not?” followed, do you think this still would have happened? Is that what you are saying? Q249 Alun Michael: Could I ask Mr Fidgeon in Craig Mackey: What I am saying is that, if you want particular whether the guidance for police officers in to eliminate the risk completely, it is a fundamentally this area, with the clarification that you are seeking to different relationship around the availability of make, is clear enough in terms of what it says? Is the firearms in a community. legislation—in some cases, there are different rules for different weapons—a problem in relation to the Q245 Chair: But if you accept what Mr Burley guidance that police officers have to follow? says—that all these processes should change—are you Mick Fidgeon: I would say that the guidance is saying at the end of the day that this would still have almost fit for purpose. It is undergoing a review at the happened? moment, and part and parcel of the IPCC’s Craig Mackey: What I’m saying is that there is no recommendations are going forward towards the guarantee it won’t happen. guidance. The main thing for us is that guidance is not always upheld by the courts, which is one of the Q246 Mr Burley: In terms of minimising, are there reasons why part of the submission is actually to give more processes that we can put in place? it some legal status as an approved code of practice, Craig Mackey: Absolutely. I think that the issue about such as health and safety legislation. minimising the risk is absolutely right. The work with health and the issue about prohibited persons and Q250 Steve McCabe: I want to ask not specifically suspended sentences are an opportunity to clear up a about the guidance for the IPCC, but whether Mr whole range of these things that minimise the risk of Fidgeon is familiar with the evidence that Mr a future event. Eveleigh, who is now with the British Association for Shooting and Conservation, gave the Committee. He Q247 Alun Michael: Mr Mackey just referred to is a former firearms licensing officer. prohibited persons. May I ask—this is primarily for Mick Fidgeon: Yes, sir, I have read Mr Eveleigh’s Mr Whiting—how you respond to the proposals of the submission. Independent Police Complaints Commission in respect of prohibited persons? Q251 Steve McCabe: He basically told us that the Adrian Whiting: Yes, sir. We are largely at one, but process of determining whether someone is fit to have the Independent Police Complaints Commission and a licence is too complicated, and he was very ACPO certainly support my proposals in relation to exercised about having to look at the shape of the wholly suspended sentences. Similarly, I take note of bullet and the way that it gets into the chamber. He and am in agreement with their proposals in relation seemed to think that that was taking time away from to bindovers and weighing up the accumulative effect concentrating on the fitness of the individual of convictions that might otherwise seem unrelated. I themselves. Is that your experience? didn’t include that in my report, because the issue, as Mick Fidgeon: No, sir, I would say that in my they recommended it, was to see a change in the experience we are talking about the individual and the Home Office guidance, which I think is relatively firearm. We are talking about the individual and straightforward if people are so minded. whether they are a danger to public safety and to the cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:49] Job: 006950 Unit: PG05 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 39
16 November 2010 Mick Fidgeon, Chief Constable Craig Mackey and Assistant Chief Constable Adrian Whiting peace and whether they are fit to be entrusted with Q255 Chair: Basically, should they not be firearms. Good reason is a separate matter and is consolidated? That would be much more useful. dependent on whether an individual has good reason Adrian Whiting: There is scope to align the systems, for that firearm, not on whether that individual is a but, essentially, it is by dint of history that they are danger to public safety or to the peace. different.
Q252 Mr Winnick: I go back to what one of my Q256 Steve McCabe: Mr Whiting, I accept the colleagues has already asked about the character of historical argument, but presumably, as a senior police Derrick Bird. We can all be wise after the event, and, officer, you wouldn’t advocate that a 14-year-old be obviously, it goes without saying how deeply shocked given a provisional driving licence. How do we justify the whole country was by those terrible killings. giving a licence like this to a child? Let us look at the character of that mass murderer: in Adrian Whiting: When the certificate is granted it 1982 he was convicted and fined for drink driving; in does not give the young person the ability to purchase 1988 he came to the notice of the police following an firearms and ammunition, nor does it give them an argument with a girlfriend; in 1999 he was released opportunity to shoot other than when they’re supervised. without charge after being arrested in connection to an investigation into allegations concerning the making of a demand for payment with menaces; and Q257 Steve McCabe: But in theory a provisional in 1990 he was convicted on two counts of theft and driving licence does the same. It doesn’t allow you to buy the car, and you have to drive under supervision. one count of handling stolen goods. Adrian Whiting: Yes, but— How is it possible—I am sure that this question is Chair: Are you telling the Committee that it is an being asked by the loved ones left behind, as well as anomaly that needs to be looked at? the rest of the country—that a person such as that Adrian Whiting: No, I am saying that the difference could be allowed to have a licence? between firearms certificate age restrictions and Chair: Mr Mackey, can we have a quick answer? shotgun certificate age restrictions is an anomaly. The Craig Mackey: The reality is that, in relation to each fact that young people can obtain a certificate is not of those incidents, as far as we know from the records an anomaly because they shoot under supervised that are left, his firearms suitability was reviewed and conditions where the risk of coming into conflict with it fell entirely within the guidelines. The issue with his other people is hugely minimised, which would not making off without payment, to which you referred, is necessarily be the case on the road with a provisional completely unsubstantiated. It is an allegation such as licence holder where there are any number of hazards is made against many people every day of the week. to contend with.
Q253 Mr Winnick: Yes, indeed. If the guidelines Q258 Dr Huppert: There is general agreement that were observed, which doesn’t seem to be in question, it is too confusing at the moment, with lots and lots then, inevitably, the question arises of whether there of different ages. I lose track slightly of what you can is something wrong with those guidelines. do at what age and who you can borrow something Craig Mackey: I think that that comes back, sir, to the from and how old they have to be. If we are to have point that your colleague made about looking at and a unified system, what ages do you think should apply tightening up the guidelines. That was highlighted by in that? the review, and we welcome that. Adrian Whiting: The evidence in relation to young people shooting does not give any cause for Q254 Mark Reckless: With respect to the age concern—I am talking about section 1 firearms and section 2 shotguns—around the current system which, restrictions, why does a child have to wait until they for example, enables children younger than 14 to are 14 to have a licence for a firearm, when they can possess a shotgun certificate in order to shoot when get a shotgun licence at any point? Why, if I am they are being supervised. correct, can you give a firearm to a child at 14, but Chair: We understand that, but what Dr Huppert is not a shotgun until they are 15 and not an air rifle asking is, as you acknowledge that it is an anomaly, until they are 18? what would be a sensible approach to bring these Adrian Whiting: They are products of the history of various pieces of legislation together? What is the age the development of the legislation from approximately that we should allow people to apply? You are the 1920 onwards. I believe that the age restrictions in ACPO lead on firearms, so presumably you have a relation to firearms certificates stem from the then view on this. popular cadet shooting movement and the age of Adrian Whiting: I have a view that, because children admission to that, as do a number of other things, such as young as 10 have been able to shoot perfectly as the minimum calibre for miniature rifle ranges. safely with a shotgun certificate, there is no reason to In relation to shotguns, of course, they are subject to interrupt that, and I suppose the difficulty is that the a different system of control, because they were not corollary follows that if there is no evidence to originally covered by that legislation. The legislation suggest that children of that age, properly supervised sought to cover what we would now call section 1 in appropriate conditions, can shoot safely, why would firearms. Section 2 firearms—shotguns—were you not apply that to the firearms certificate? What I brought under a separate system of control at a later would say there is that the nature of the shooting— time. the environment in which it takes place—is different. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:49] Job: 006950 Unit: PG05 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected).xml
Ev 40 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
16 November 2010 Mick Fidgeon, Chief Constable Craig Mackey and Assistant Chief Constable Adrian Whiting
Chair: Of course, but if you were looking at medically qualified. It is down to force medical consolidating this and making it one age, so it is not examiners or appointed medical practitioners to make confusing to members of this Committee and the a decision whether that information is information that public when they don’t know at what age they can we can rely on in court should they subsequently apply, what age would the ACPO lead on firearms appeal. suggest would be appropriate? Adrian Whiting: The minimum age would be 10, I Q261 Bridget Phillipson: Returning to the question would suggest, Sir. that Mr Winnick asked earlier in terms of looking at Chair: Okay. the cumulative nature of offences, or perhaps even allegations, if I were to apply for a job to work with Q259 Bridget Phillipson: If I could turn to the issue vulnerable people, for example, and was subject to an of medical records of licence holders, you will be enhanced CRB check, if I had been arrested for an aware that a number of concerns have been raised by offence, that would come up even if I hadn’t the shooting community, doctors and the Information necessarily been cautioned or convicted and that could Commissioner about the tagging of medical records. determine whether I was offered a job—although I Do you still feel that it would be useful to pursue that appreciate that that would be subject to employment proposal and why is that? law. Do you think there is a rule there, in terms of Adrian Whiting: Very much so. I know the using the cumulative nature of offences even when Committee has had evidence from other parties, that person would not necessarily be prohibited from notably the IPCC on this subject. We commenced this having a licence, if cumulatively that would give you work in 2007, looking at the system that I know you a picture of someone that perhaps is having difficulties are familiar with around tagging medical records so in their life or is an unfit person? there is an enduring record for a general practitioner Adrian Whiting: Absolutely, it would. To a greater or to have access to. Because people tend to see doctors lesser extent, that would currently be the process. That who are not necessarily their specified GP and would be taken into account. because the licensing takes place every five years for renewal, there would, in my view, need to be an Q262 Bridget Phillipson: So you’re confident that, enduring record that they can refer to. Subsequent at the moment, the cumulative nature of concern, even work when the IPCC became involved a number of if that wasn’t conviction or caution, would lead to that months after we had commenced this—some issues licence being reviewed? arose about the difficulty of holding that record within Adrian Whiting: Yes. Issues outside of conviction, or an NHS records system—simply looked at an option caution, are currently taken into account. My licensing of notifying the GP at grant and renewal. manager, by way of example, would submit a file to Certainly, I think it would be beneficial to have a me that might contain arrest information or other stepped approach to this if it is difficult to have an information—some of it potentially sensitive that enduring system on an electronic record. I think that wouldn’t wish to share with the applicant or to let the issue at hand is that it provides an additional them know that we know—and I would make opportunity for a health concern to be raised. The decisions taking that information into account, and, in issue with that is that, currently, police are advised cases, I have either refused or, indeed, revoked. only to approach a medical practitioner when we have cause to do so, as opposed to speculatively to see if Q263 Nicola Blackwood: Mr Whiting, I am there is a concern. Clearly, the applicant is expected interested to know how the IPCC’s recommendations to detail certain medical conditions on their in 2008, which were that the licensing force should be application, and if they chose not to, this would required to approach the doctor and that the applicant, provide an additional safeguard against somebody rather than police, should have to pay for any fee that doing that, which I would also advocate ought to be the GP might offer, turned into recommendations from an offence. So it is quite important, I would suggest. ACPO and the BMA, which are that patients’ records should be tagged and that there should be an onus on Q260 Bridget Phillipson: Mr Fidgeon, how useful or the GP to raise concerns if there was a change in the important is the information you would receive from status of the applicant. Could you explain how one medical practitioners when determining someone’s thing turned into another, the second of which has lots fitness to hold a licence? of data protection issues around it? Mick Fidgeon: At the moment, all we receive is Adrian Whiting: Yes, in fact the second issue had information regarding their signs and symptoms, and actually been in existence prior to the IPCC’s in most cases these are referred to the appointed involvement, but the IPCC would not necessarily have medical practitioner, in the case of Essex, and in many been aware of that. The initial work with the British other forces to the force medical examiner. Then a Medical Association was to look at tagging the record, decision is taken regarding that information on so that there was that enduring marker, and so that if whether the individual is still fit to be entrusted with a GP changed during the life of a certificate holder, firearms, or whether they are able to hold firearms or if a locum was acting, because an issue arose in without a danger to public safety or to the peace. That someone’s mental health, for example, during the life information is conveyed to us, but we are not of a certificate, the GP service would have some cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:49] Job: 006950 Unit: PG05 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 41
16 November 2010 Mick Fidgeon, Chief Constable Craig Mackey and Assistant Chief Constable Adrian Whiting indication that that person was a certificate holder, as Q266 Lorraine Fullbrook: Mr Mackey, I would like opposed to having to wait until the next notification to ask you a bit about shooting facilities and miniature renewal. That was already under consideration, but it firing ranges under section 11(4) of the Firearms Act was difficult for the very reasons that continue to be 1968, and indeed Home Office-approved facilities. an issue at the moment. Although, at that point, it was Can you confirm whether Derrick Bird was a member very difficult, because of the nature of record holding of a shooting club? by the NHS, and there were no assurances that I could Craig Mackey: Not that we know of, although it is be given that that information about an individual important to point out that you can be a member of could be held securely on the GP’s record system. a club or a syndicate, providing every member is a At that point, I had been involved in some certificate holder, and we would not necessarily know investigative work on behalf of the IPCC, and they about it. We have no record of his being a member of have detailed some of the investigations that were a shooting or gun club. relevant. In conjunction with the IPCC, we looked at the potential of, if you like, lessening that opportunity Q267 Lorraine Fullbrook: Do you have anything to one of simply notifying the GP at grant and further to add about Mr Whiting’s conclusions on the renewal. Of course, the work around the enduring decision to license Derrick Bird? Would you like to marker has continued, as it were, in the background, add anything? and we have now got to a point, as I understand—I Craig Mackey: I don’t think there is anything further am at a meeting tomorrow—where assurances around I can add in relation to that. What I asked, going back the security of the information storage are now much to the start of the process, was about ascertaining whether the steps taken were reasonable and in line stronger. That work has continued, because I think with the process around licensing and legislation. That that that is a better opportunity— was the assurance I sought. Obviously, in a rural county such as ours, with a large number of shotgun Q264 Chair: Could you write us a note following and firearm certificate holders across the county, I your meeting? It might be helpful. wanted some reassurance that the system worked. The Adrian Whiting: Of course. system, as it was at the time, worked.
Q265 Mr Burley: On that last point, I am interested Q268 Chair: I have asked most of our witnesses in these conditions that people could have that would about the content of violent video games and their prevent them from having a licence or would get their effect on young people. Do you have any views on licence revoked. As always, I think the devil’s in the this? detail. If you have a GP saying—I don’t know if Adrian Whiting: It’s difficult directly to correlate Derrick Bird was clinically depressed, but that was in between violence on video games, in films and on some of the media reports—that someone is television and people’s immediate activity, depressed, perhaps temporarily, because their wife had particularly in relation to the use of firearms. I think died, would that be a cause for having their licence probably it is linked, but in a much broader revoked, and, if so, for how long if they were taking sociological spectrum. I don’t have any strong view Prozac, which can have a very strong effect on that participation in such games leads inevitably, as it were, to some sort of crime commission. I can people? If they have some history of alcohol or understand why the concerns are there—as a parent recreational drug use, is that a cause? It is not clear to myself, I share them—but I don’t have a strong view me what medical conditions, or, indeed, to use the that there is a clear link. analogy with criminal records, cumulative number of Chair: Mr McCabe—only for the final 10 seconds. medical conditions, would lead to someone having their licence revoked. Q269 Steve McCabe: Given your earlier comments, Craig Mackey: I was just going to pick up, if I may, what do you think should be the age restriction for on Derrick Bird first. There is no suggestion from access to violent video games? anything that we’ve got from the GP or the NHS that Adrian Whiting: That is a very different issue from there was an issue in relation to Derrick Bird. I think the age at which people can shoot supervised, as I the sort of circumstances you describe allow an have indicated. Please don’t get me wrong when I assessment to be made of the potential threat around have given that indication of a youngest age for a an individual. If I presented before my GP in a certificate; they would still have to be supervised. I severely distressed state and the GP could see on a would point out that in the entire country there are screen in front of them a flag that says that I am a only 26—some might view that as too many—10- certificate holder, and I have a selection of shotguns in year-olds with a shotgun certificate. the cabinet at home, they might make some different In relation to your question, I think the current decisions about passing information on. This is about certificating system for age-related content would informing that professional judgment. You touched on appear to be fit for purpose. The issue—quite the point earlier; if the licensing system is the clearly—is in applying it, particularly in the home gatekeeper to allow people access to lethal weapons, environment, and ensuring that it is in some way it is incumbent on all of us to make sure that those upheld. That is largely an adult’s responsibility systems and processes are right and there are as many towards the younger people who would use such checks in that gatekeeping as possible. games. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:49] Job: 006950 Unit: PG05 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected).xml
Ev 42 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
16 November 2010 Mick Fidgeon, Chief Constable Craig Mackey and Assistant Chief Constable Adrian Whiting
Chair: We will write to put some more points to you; much for coming in today; I know you have there are a number of other points that we couldn’t postponed a number of meetings, and we are most raise because of time constraints. Thank you very grateful.
Examination of Witnesses
Witnesses: Dr John Canning, GP in Middlesborough and Chair, Professional Fees Committee, and Professor Vivienne Nathanson, Director of Professional Activities, British Medical Association, gave evidence.
Q270 Chair: Thank you very much for giving the world will tell you that you cannot predict future evidence. I am afraid that we are skipping on because dangerousness. of time constraints, so I won’t go into the background Chair: Yes. as to why we are holding this inquiry, but the role of Professor Nathanson: So, a GP would certainly feel GPs is obviously very important indeed as far as the unable to. granting of licences is concerned. Do you think that Chair: We will probe a number of those issues with this overstates the importance? Is too much colleagues. responsibility now being placed on a GP in respect of the judgment as to whether or not somebody should Q272 Nicola Blackwood: Just to pick up on exactly own a firearm or a shotgun? that point, obviously, you cannot accurately predict Dr Canning: Yes, especially in the way that you the future, but GPs do make an assessment about the phrase that in terms of responsibility and judgment. mental health of a patient and whether they are likely As a GP, I can give no judgment to someone’s fitness to pose a danger to themselves or others, because you to hold a weapon, particularly forecasting the future. recommend if a patient needs to be sectioned. Do you What I can do is provide factual evidence about the think that that is analogous to this situation? Does that past. It is impossible, and I have spoken to other role of GPs inform your judgment on this issue? colleagues in specialities such as psychiatry who say Dr Canning: The circumstances of being involved in equally that it is impossible to predict the future. the detention and potential forcible treatment of a patient are incredibly rare compared with the risk assessment we are making day in, day out about Q271 Chair: You have heard the catalogue of issues people with mental illness who may be at risk of self- that have been raised by colleagues, Professor harm. Self-harm is, unfortunately, much more Nathanson. My colleague, Mr Winnick, who is much common that we would like. Those assessments are wiser than I am on these issues, has said that hindsight made rarely whereas—20 to 25% of people will see is a wonderful thing. Looking back at somebody’s their GP at some stage in their life with a mental record, you will say, “Why on earth did they get the health problem. That is an awful lot of people, and we licence in the first place?” When the applicant is are seeing an awful lot of people and making a lot of asking for his or her GP to fill in the appropriate judgments about risk. It is very rare—in my reference, there is a view that GPs are actually experience, certainly less than once a year in my prejudiced against shooters. Do you think that that personal practice—to be involved in sectioning view is correct? someone. Those are usually very major, often Professor Nathanson: I don’t believe that GPs are psychotic, illnesses. prejudiced against shooters. I think there are several things going on. First, doctors see the health Q273 Nicola Blackwood: But it does fall within the consequences of the misuse of weapons and they role of a GP to deal with those kinds of incidents and recognise just how difficult it is to treat gunshot those kinds of assessments. wounds and so on. So there is a feeling that, in terms Dr Canning: Yes. of primary prevention, the world would be a better place if there were fewer guns around. But that is not Q274 Mr Winnick: In your day-to-day work as a GP, a prejudice against people holding weapons and using are you frequently asked about giving a reference for them legitimately for hunting, pest control or the use of guns? whatever the other purposes are. Dr Canning: I practise in inner-city Middlesbrough The other side of this, though, is that GPs will have where there may be guns, but they are not the sort that very serious concerns about the nature of the we are talking about here. I have never personally certificate that they are being asked to complete. If been asked to provide a reference or sign a certificate, they are being asked, as somebody who is a friend of nor have I been asked by the police to provide any the applicant and who knows them socially or semi- medical evidence. But, obviously, I represent a larger socially, to talk about what they know about them, group of people, whose practices include rural areas then that is legitimate and that is easy. The problem is where this is much more common. People are asked when they are being asked as a doctor. They worry to sign certificates and provide medical evidence— that if, as a doctor, they say that they know of no not very often to provide medical evidence, but that reason not to give this person a licence, then that will happens from time to time. be read as, “This person is not going to be dangerous in the future.” Given that there is no way that you can Q275 Mr Winnick: Generally, would it be right to predict that—even the best forensic psychiatrists in say that a doctor is not under a strict code of cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:49] Job: 006950 Unit: PG05 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 43
16 November 2010 Dr John Canning and Professor Vivienne Nathanson confidentiality like priests? Perhaps Professor Q278 Nicola Blackwood: Have you done any survey Nathanson would answer the question: if a doctor— or made any collation of the response to this from clearly not in the area where your colleague practises, your membership? but in other areas—concludes that it would not be Dr Canning: Only through the contacts that I have desirable, indeed could be dangerous to the public, for had with doctors nationally. I was speaking to a the person to have a shotgun or any firearm, would representative of the doctors in Cumbria last week that doctor feel obliged to tell the authorities? about their concern that this becomes a situation for Professor Nathanson: Indeed. The obligation of which doctors get the blame. confidentiality extends beyond the death of the patient, but it is never absolute. The doctor has to Q279 Dr Huppert: As I understand it, the BMA, in judge whether the individual poses a risk of serious discussion with ACPO, came up with the idea of harm to themselves or others. In those circumstances, tagging medical records, so if somebody applied for a they would tell others to prevent that harm, whether licence or renewed a licence, that fact would be that is about a shotgun or something else. passed around. The commonest one is somebody continuing to drive What are your current thoughts on how that would who should not be driving a motor vehicle— work? Do you think that it would be a sensible way forwards? Are you concerned, first, about the fact that potentially another dangerous weapon in the wrong it might deter mentally ill patients or people who are hands. Frequently, doctors will try to persuade the concerned from seeing their GP at all, and, secondly, patient to stop driving, but the alternative is that they about the data issues of having a register on the NHS will tell the DVLA so that the individual is of every gun owner? immediately stopped from driving. In that sense, a Dr Canning: There are a number of questions there. shotgun or other firearms licence is the same, in that I’m not entirely sure that we came up with it together, you’re making a judgment that at this moment the but it has been discussed by us and ACPO—in fact, individual is a risk—and perhaps that is the key; it is we’re meeting tomorrow with Mr Whiting and people a little like the mental health consequences in that the from the Information Commissioner’s Office to risk is at this moment. discuss the data issue. It has been said to me that it You can say that with a little bit of confidence, will dissuade some people from seeing their GP, if because the person is usually acutely depressed. It is they believe that the consequence is that they will lose the risk of harm to themselves that is the commonest their licence, and there seems to be a certain logic in risk, and that is when you would tell the appropriate that just in the way people behave. There is a authority. In most cases the GP— perception, I have been told—though I have no evidence personally—that once you have lost your Q276 Mr Winnick: Thank you. So from a licence or certificate, getting it back again is much professional point of view, it would be appropriate for more difficult, even if there was a simple episode of a doctor to notify the police, in what would obviously illness that may be related to that. be exceptional circumstances, and it would be There are practical issues about tagging: not professional to do so. everybody sees their GP, although many people do. Professor Nathanson: Absolutely, yes. There are now in England many other ways of obtaining initial medical treatment, not just at A and E and from GPs, as is the case in the other three Q277 Nicola Blackwood: My experience is that countries. There are walk-in centres and other centres doctors get nervous when what they’re required to where people may choose to go and the record would assess widens beyond their normal sphere of not be available there. There is the practical issue that experience. As their representatives, what are your our systems don’t have a means of doing that at the assessments of how GPs have been responding to moment, not necessarily transferring information on some of the proposals? Do they have concerns about to the next GP as well. licensing officials coming to them automatically? Dr Canning: I think the major concern is that we may Q280 Dr Huppert: Do you think GPs would treat be considered to be the people who will be responsible people differently if they had a tag? for making the decision. That is something that we are Dr Canning: I think we should treat people all in the not competent to do. It is not that we don’t want to same way. do it, but we aren’t able to do it and we are not the fit people to do it—that’s a society judgment. Q281 Dr Huppert: We should, indeed, but that is not Giving factual information is a day-to-day part of the question I asked. practice—for example, information to life insurance Dr Canning: No. I would hope that they wouldn’t. companies for people taking out insurance polices. One has to be aware of the information, but be able There is a standard way of doing that, and we provide to deal with it. The relevance would be quite difficult facts. Providing facts is not a problem; it is the to interpret because of the prediction of the future. interpretation of them that becomes the problem. If we are, for example, in the very unusual circumstance Q282 Mr Burley: I have asked this question of a of having to breach confidentiality, we would be number of witnesses and not got very far, but now we taking advice from colleagues as well and would have some doctors in the room, you might be able to usually be talking to partners—the BMA or our help me. I am interested in the actual type of medical defence organisations. conditions that would cause a GP, such as you, to alert cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:49] Job: 006950 Unit: PG05 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected).xml
Ev 44 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
16 November 2010 Dr John Canning and Professor Vivienne Nathanson the authorities that the person may not be suitable to Q287 Bridget Phillipson: To return to the analogy hold a licence at the moment. The examples we have around driving licences, do you think that someone is been given include someone who might be depressed less likely to come to you if they are suffering from because their wife had passed away, which is mental ill health, and they think that their licence or obviously a temporary thing. You also might have certificate will be removed, than someone who has a someone to whom you are prescribing Prozac, which medical or physical condition that would render them is a strong drug. unfit to drive? Chair: We don’t need all the medical conditions. Professor Nathanson: There is no evidence that they would not come forward. The evidence is actually Q283 Mr Burley: It could be a recreational drug clearer that men—middle-aged men in particular—are user. What sort of conditions would apply? relatively unlikely to see their GP. Most people see a Dr Canning: That has to be based on the individual doctor within a three-year period, but the group who person who is sitting in the consultation with you. If are least likely to are middle-aged men, who, as I someone has a florid psychotic illness, they are understand it, tend to be the people involved in these probably going down the route for me to discuss it cases. So GPs are less likely to see them. with a secondary colleague. I would not be the only Why don’t they come? We don’t really know, but they one involved in the sectioning; it would also be a present late. They present late even when they are specialist doctor. suffering pain, including mental pain. There is no Moving down that route, if the person wanted evidence—and it would be very difficult to gather treatment, would be a worry. It is much more difficult any—on whether a worry about a licence would stop with the person who has had a bereavement—who has them, but worrying about the impact on your driving had something that many of us cope with very well, licence does not stop people from seeing their GP. So but individuals don’t. Predicting who will and who that should give us some degree of comfort. won’t is very difficult. Q288 Bridget Phillipson: In terms of tagging Q284 Chair: So, a florid psychotic? Any advance on medical records, how would you respond to concerns a florid psychotic? about protecting those data within the NHS more Professor Nathanson: That is absolutely one broadly? example. The other one, of course, is an acute and Professor Nathanson: There is the meeting severe depression, where you do have somebody who tomorrow—it will include the Information is talking about suicide, and where you believe that Commissioner—and it needs to bottom that out in there is a chance that they will pursue that action. detail, but of course we do need to make sure that that Obviously, access to a weapon is a very effective way is protected. of committing suicide. People who are depressed are I note that in a few of the submissions, people are far more likely to hurt themselves than others. concerned that the data could be leaked—it seems that Chair: Mr Burley, are you satisfied? it is almost as if data could be leaked to become part of conspiracies in which people burgle houses where Q285 Mr Burley: I don’t understand what “florid” there were known to be guns. That is certainly not is; I shall look it up when I go away. Apart from those something that we have thought about in terms of two conditions, people who are alcoholics could go medical records. The approach to confidentiality is all home and get the gun out. It is a very difficult line to about the fact that the information gathered for health draw, isn’t it? purposes is sensitive—not always, but it may be Professor Nathanson: In terms of things like alcohol sensitive for the individual, and they have a right to or other drug abuse— privacy. We would need to ensure that that privacy applied. Q286 Mr Burley: A cannabis user? Professor Nathanson: It is about the way in which Q289 Alun Michael: You were both quite clear about that impacts on people’s behaviour and mental state. knowing where the line is drawn on confidentiality For example, some cannabis users are pushed into a and when you would have a public duty to share frank schizophrenia from the level of cannabis use, or information despite confidentiality rules. Do you think there is a relationship. It would be their behaviour, in GPs are sufficiently aware of those guidelines? other words—their psychosis or schizophrenia—that Perhaps a better way to put it is whether you think led you to the concern. The fact that it was caused by that all GPs are sufficiently aware of those guidelines, or made worse by cannabis is incidental. particularly where the background might not give an It is the same with a person who is an alcohol or other understanding of the culture of certain areas. drug abuser; it is their behaviour and their mental Dr Canning: There are two words that we never use state. It is not the cause of it. Whether it is organic or in medicine. One is “always” and the other is “never”, drug induced, is in a sense slightly irrelevant to the because there are always exceptions. I cannot say that doctor. It is that this person is a danger to themselves for all GPs, but— or others, and we need to remove them from society. Chair: It would be helpful if we wrote to the BMA, Q290 Alun Michael: With respect, Professor and some of these other issues were explored. I think Nathanson said that a doctor would, which rather Mr Burley has raised a very important point. Are you implied universality among the profession. satisfied with that, Mr Mackey? Thank you. Bridget Professor Nathanson: There are pretty good levels of Phillipson. understanding, certainly around things such as cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:49] Job: 006950 Unit: PG05 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 45
16 November 2010 Dr John Canning and Professor Vivienne Nathanson driving; obviously, doctors do understand driving regulations would enable us to push out more advice rules. Having said that, we have, with the Department to GPs to make sure that they are more aware of how for Transport, just produced a new version of “Fitness the new rules affect them. to Drive”, so that all doctors can look and check the latest information on different drugs or medical Q291 Chair: But GPs, of course, watch television as conditions. Certainly, there is always an ongoing need well, despite being very busy. They would have seen to keep refreshing people. what happened in Northumbria and Cumbria, so this We get a great number of phone calls from GPs on a kind of event would have an effect on their decisions. regular basis who ring us up and say, “I have a patient Professor Nathanson: Absolutely. with x. Can I just talk it through with you and check Chair: Dr Canning and Professor Nathanson, thank that I am right to do the following?” That suggests to you very much for coming in. We will write to you, us—and, okay, maybe a select group ring us—that the because we have some further questions around what majority of GPs know there is an issue and they also Mr Burley has raised. We would be grateful for a know that it is just a good idea to check with someone quick response. that this is the right person to be phoning. Whether it is the police or another agency, they are just checking that through. Again, any change in the
Examination of Witness
Witness: James Brokenshire MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for crime prevention, Home Office, gave evidence.
Q292 Chair: Minister, you are the penultimate On firearms, you’ve obviously had a chance to look witness in our inquiry into firearms. I welcome you at the Whiting report. When will the Home Office be most warmly to the Committee. This is your first in a position to respond to it? appearance as a Minister and even though it was six James Brokenshire: Certainly, I very much welcomed months ago, I congratulate you on your appointment. the report produced by the assistant chief constable. I As you are the first Home Office Minister to come think it’s been an informative and useful review of the before us since what happened last Thursday with the tragic events that we saw in Cumbria. I have met the disorder, is there any update you can give the assistant chief constable since his report was issued. Committee on what has happened? The Home Office is examining the various different recommendations that have come from it. James Brokenshire: Obviously, the policing Minister We see this as a measured process. We are looking at gave a statement to the House last Thursday. I do not the recommendations coming from the peer reviews. have any further update to offer at this time. As the Equally, we want to ensure that Parliament has an Committee is aware, the Metropolitan police are opportunity to debate firearms issues and, of course, to undertaking their review of the intelligence and examine recommendations from this Committee. The handling of last week’s events. Obviously, we await report is part of that process, and we anticipate any initial indications from that review, but we responding formally once each of those three elements certainly commend the statement made by the has been concluded. Metropolitan Police Commissioner and await information that may be forthcoming from the urgent Q295 Chair: Indeed. One of the concerns was that, review that is being undertaken. on behalf of the relatives of the victims, the Home Secretary promised a debate on firearms in the Q293 Chair: When you say “urgent review”, is there autumn. Do you know why it has not taken place? Is a timetable? We know that the commissioner will have it likely to take place after this Committee reports? to send his report to the Metropolitan Police Authority Do you know when it will take place? and no doubt you will see a copy when it gets to the James Brokenshire: The Leader of the House of Home Office. Do we actually have a timetable? There Commons has restated the commitment to have the is a possibility of further demonstrations taking place, debate, and it is very important. The timing needs to and we obviously need to learn the lessons of what be confirmed, but, clearly, we are committed to having happened. that debate. I see it as an essential part of the three- element process to ensure that, as part of our careful James Brokenshire: Clearly, we do need to learn the and measured examination of the terrible events that lessons of what happened. I don’t have a specific took place, parliamentarians have the opportunity to timetable at this stage, but my officials and Ministers contribute and to inform debate before we consider all are liaising. We await the outcome to see whether the facts and the evidence. there are lessons that should be learned in terms of these events as we move forward. Q296 Chair: I accept that you will want to respond to the recommendations, but one issue that was not Q294 Chair: On behalf of the Committee, could I covered—it has been raised by several witnesses—is ask whether you could find out whether there is a the age limit on when young people can apply for timetable? That would be helpful. licences. We have taken evidence today from the cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:49] Job: 006950 Unit: PG05 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected).xml
Ev 46 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
16 November 2010 James Brokenshire MP assistant chief constable, who is the ACPO lead on In relation to NABIS, because that deals with firearms, and it caused me concern because there are forensics I suppose that it is a slightly different issue, obviously different ages at which young people can albeit that pilots are being examined in Manchester apply. For shotguns, it can be any age; for other and Greater London where shotgun owners are firearms, it is 14-plus. You’re a parent of two young effectively providing—or having available—spent children. Do you have concerns that there are so many cartridges. That could be loaded on to the NABIS different age limits? system if there were thefts or other issues that might James Brokenshire: The thing that concerns me is arise at the time. There is starting to be a linkage in whether there is any misuse or risk attached to the that way, albeit that the information I have received age limits. There is no indication of misuse from the indicates that the use of legal weapons—section 1 information and evidence that I have received to date. shotguns—in the context of crimes is limited. The Even if someone is entitled to possess a weapon at a scheme being created is interesting. I am certainly particular point in time, there is the requirement for monitoring with quiet interest what ACPO is doing in supervision, and there are certain other issues that the area. relate thereto. My focus is on ensuring that we look at the potential Q299 Mr Burley: We have had some conflicting harms in the evidence that is there, but, clearly, we evidence on the issue of legal firearms being used rule nothing in and nothing out at this stage in terms illegally. Some evidence suggests that that is of the recommendations and any other information everywhere, but other evidence says that they are that may be forthcoming. hardly used at all. I am still quite confused about the reality. One of the suggestions was that firearms Q297 Steve McCabe: Minister, when pressed by the should not be kept in a domestic dwelling and that Chairman to identify a common age for access to cartridges and ammunition should be separated from weapons under supervision and for licensing, assistant the guns and kept in secure locked houses in the chief constable Whiting said that, on balance, he country. Do you have a view on any of those points? thought it should be 10. Would you agree with that? James Brokenshire: Certainly, I have heard some of James Brokenshire: The current position, as I the evidence that has been given to this Committee. I understand it, in relation to shotguns is that the age is think that there are issues to be balanced between the 10. Clearly, we will reflect on the evidence provided practicalities of location and what can be delivered. to see whether any harms, dangers or risks emerge. I Again, I am genuinely reflecting on all the information am not aware of any directly, but, clearly, we will and evidence being provided, and we will form a view need to reflect on the evidence that’s provided to us once the relevant steps have been undertaken in terms in forming our response to the recommendations that of our analysis of what has been forthcoming. may or may not be made. Q300 Lorraine Fullbrook: I am very concerned Q298 Mr Burley: There are lots of different IT about the suggestions that have been made to the databases involved in this area. There is the police Committee about keeping firearms away from national computer, the national firearms licensing dwellings and so on. If we have legislation that puts management system, NABIS, and so on. Tony firearms into buildings, and the criminal fraternity McNulty famously said that he didn’t think there know exactly where they are, would that not lead to a would be any value in linking those systems together. higher rate of theft of firearms? It would obviously involve some cost to do so, James Brokenshire: I think it is these very practical because of the low instances of legally held firearms issues that need to be considered and thought through used in gun crime. properly. For example, if you were to prescribe Is the view of your predecessor one that you share, or weapons to be put in outhouses rather than domestic do you think that now there is a business case for dwellings, that might increase or change the risk that linking up the different IT silos to get better may be attached to thefts under those circumstances. information and try to stop some of the tragedies that We need to examine all the options, take all the we have seen happening? evidence and think the issue through very carefully. James Brokenshire: I am sorry that I smiled slightly, As a Government, we need to have that element of but I may be the author of the question that was posed public protection at the forefront of our minds in and which produced the answer from Mr McNulty. I examining such issues. Therefore, the facts, and the am now in a position to answer my own question, example that you have given, are quite pertinent as to which is an interesting situation to be in. why we need to tread carefully when examining what Chair: Give us the answer. options may or may not be appropriate. James Brokenshire: I did raise the question; this is probably going back two years in terms of the relevant Q301 Mark Reckless: The Committee has been told different databases that exist. It is a question that I that the possession and use of firearms is governed by posed to officials on becoming a Minister with 35 separate pieces of legislation. We heard earlier that responsibility in this area. There is a linkage between even Dr Huppert struggles to recall all the interlinking the police national computer and the national firearms provisions. Has the time come to consolidate licensing management system. There is an existing firearms legislation? interface that operates in that direction so that criminal James Brokenshire: There are a number of issues at records can be checked, and we must ensure that that play here. I appreciate that this was, I think, a operates effectively. recommendation made in a previous Home Affairs cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:49] Job: 006950 Unit: PG05 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 47
16 November 2010 James Brokenshire MP
Committee report. It is about balancing off complex firearms and so on. Do you know why those areas of law versus ease of access and guidance that recommendations have not been implemented may apply to assist in that process. Clearly, if there is although they were accepted? guidance there—and there are issues around whether James Brokenshire: I cannot comment about why the guidance itself should be updated, as I understand that may have been the case under the previous that it has not been updated since around 2002, and Government. I can speculate that a number of changes various legislative changes have taken place around were brought in during that period in terms of the that—what is the optimum way to deal with any national firearms licensing management system. concerns that may be forthcoming? Various other pieces of legislation were introduced It may be that, by creating new law, you add over what now amounts to virtually a 10-year period, uncertainty. That is always the risk when you seek to as well as the creation of NABIS. I can only speculate consolidate or legislate. Sometimes that might add the that the previous Government felt that there were opportunity for new legal arguments to appear and other priorities, or that the complexities or some of therefore greater uncertainty in law to exist. I hear a the changes that were brought in perhaps deserved a number of the points that have been made in the past re-look in relation to those pre-existing and I know have been made in evidence given to this recommendations. Clearly, this Administration are not Committee to date. jumping to any specific conclusions. We are seeking The issue needs to be examined quite carefully and to take a measured, not a knee-jerk, approach. we have not formed any conclusions on this. There Therefore, we will examine carefully any further are risks attached to going down one route, as recommendations, or re-establishment of contrasted to another and where the guidance itself recommendations, that this Committee may wish to might actually be an effective way of dealing with at make. least some of the concerns that have been identified. Q304 Mr Winnick: All Governments make, they Q302 Alun Michael: You referred, in relation to say, measured approaches—we wouldn’t expect any Mark’s question, to consolidation, but isn’t there a other expression. You will be pleased to know that case for some simplification? We have heard evidence neither I nor my colleagues hold you responsible for that officers who are dealing with firearms issues often the actions of the previous Government, positive or find it difficult to understand all the different negative as the case may be, but it would be useful if requirements—in respect to different weapons, you could send us a note about what recommendations different age groups and all the rest of it. Some were accepted by the Government at the time and simplification might enable more effective what the present Government intend to do when those enforcement of the requirements. recommendations have not been put into effect. James Brokenshire: Questions have been flagged by James Brokenshire: If I may, Mr Winnick, it may relevant witnesses to this Committee on whether there well be that this Committee may wish to take a is a need for simplification and whether putting different view from the recommendations that were everything in one place would aid some sort of ease of made in the original— access. Again, it is just thinking this through carefully, about what is appropriate. If it is about ease of access, Q305 Mr Winnick: That may well be. Nevertheless, it may be a question of guidance that would facilitate the recommendations were accepted at the time and that in a more speedy and perhaps more efficient way. were far from party political. They were accepted, The question is whether any new areas need to be either at the time or now, but they have not been put addressed in a different way; obviously, that might into effect. Could you send us a note on that? lead you in a different direction. However, I caution James Brokenshire: If I could just say, I think it is on changing the law for the sake of it, unless there is important that the Government provide a response on an identified need, because of the legal uncertainties the basis of all the evidence that is subsisting, so the and the case law practice that can emerge based on a evidence and recommendations that this Committee specific use of language. Sadly, as a lawyer before itself produces and, indeed, the parliamentary debate entering the world of politics, I know that the turn that we wish to see, will inform our decision-making of language— process. Therefore, it may be almost premature to Chair: You don’t have to be sad about that. reach a formalised conclusion on a recommendation James Brokenshire: It is a confession, Chairman. when other factors may come into play. Sometimes just a very small change can have a very significant effect. So I hear the genuine evidence that Q306 Chair: Can I suggest a way forward? We will is being provided on this, but we need to examine this produce this report very shortly, and, when we do so, very carefully. That is why I have not formed any we will make reference to our previous view, because of the potential risks that may emerge recommendations. You can then respond to both of as a consequence of going down that particular option. them at the same time. Would that be helpful? James Brokenshire: Yes, I would certainly be pleased Q303 Mr Winnick: The previous Government to do that. It is very much our intention to respond in accepted a number of the Home Affairs Committee’s that way. recommendations at the time on one or two matters which have been raised already about firearms, Q307 Bridget Phillipson: Minister, if I could turn to including clearer and more up-to-date guidance for the the Raoul Moat case and the Northumbria force area, police, raising the age of the unsupervised use of questions were raised about intelligence sharing cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:49] Job: 006950 Unit: PG05 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected).xml
Ev 48 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
16 November 2010 James Brokenshire MP between the prison service and the police on the will consider them very carefully in terms of the release of Mr Moat. I appreciate that the case itself is existing licensing arrangements and any other steps under investigation by the Independent Police that may be appropriate. It is a multifaceted approach Complains Commission so you probably won’t want and there is not one single issue. Clearly, licensing, to talk about it specifically, but more generally do you how we deal with criminality, the supply of illegal think that the processes in place are sufficiently robust weapons—all of those things together—are important for sharing that information? to provide the protection that we all want to see. James Brokenshire: There are robust systems in place to gather, use and share intelligence. All prisons have a full or part-time police intelligence officer, and Q311 Chair: I have asked a number of witnesses this protocols exist around the sharing of intelligence question. As I have said, you are the parent of two between the prison service and police forces. Clearly, young children. What effect do you think violent we will wish to learn from any recommendations from video games have on the way in which people the IPCC report, but we are confident that there are behave? Obviously it is not a Home Office robust measures in place to ensure that intelligence is responsibility, although the Home Office is involved. properly shared with the police. It is a Culture, Media and Sport responsibility. Do you have any views on this? Q308 Dr Huppert: Minister, you have the wonderful James Brokenshire: It is interesting looking at the title of Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for personal view and as a parent I have my own personal Crime Prevention. What is your strategy for long-term concerns about the possible impact of violent video violent crime prevention? games on my children and children more generally. Chair: In five minutes. But it is then a question, I suppose, of the Government James Brokenshire: I was going to ask how long you analysing whether there is robust evidence that would have got. The Government will produce their crime support further restrictions. This was something that strategy shortly, which will answer in detail a lot of Professor Tanya Byron looked at as part of her review. the question that you, Dr Huppert, rightly identify. I Indeed, changes have been proposed in the Digital think it is an equal combination of strong Economy Act 2010 in terms of age restrictions on enforcement, early years intervention and stopping video games. So changes are now coming through in young people who are going down a path that leads relation to video games and it is a question of them to gang crime or violent crime. It needs to be reflecting on what impact those changes may have in multifaceted. I am sure that when you read the this context. strategy once it is published, you will see that it covers Chair: It may be appropriate to have further research enforcement, prevention, early years and ensuring that on this before coming to a conclusion. The people we effectively deal with violent crime, which remains far too high. who are strongest on this argument are the shooters. When they came to give evidence to us they were very Q309 Dr Huppert: I look forward to reading that in concerned about the impact of violent video games on detail. To what extent do you see tackling the supply young people. of firearms as part of the solution to that? James Brokenshire: Supply is part of that, which is Q312 Mr Winnick: When Conservative Ministers one of the reasons why we have announced the state, as you just have, that we have the strongest proposal to create the national crime agency to ensure firearms controls in Europe, do you accept that there that our borders are more effective and that we have may be a degree of suspicion that that means that the a strong response to organised criminality. Supply is Government do not necessarily have the open mind part of the issue, but it is not the only issue. I think that you and the Home Secretary have spoken about there are other factors in preventing young people on the possibility of extending controls in view of the from becoming involved in gangs, ensuring that we horror that took place in Cumbria? take firm action against gangs, as well as organised James Brokenshire: I have said very clearly to the criminality, which is why I think the National Crime Committee that we have not ruled anything out and Agency is an important step forward. we have not ruled anything in. We are reflecting very carefully on the recommendations in the report that Q310 Dr Huppert: You have talked about the supply Assistant Chief Constable Whiting has produced. As of firearms in terms of criminality and gangs, but not I have said, I have already discussed some of his in terms of the general supply of firearms. Do you have comments on that? findings with him. We will examine the responses that James Brokenshire: Clearly, we have some of the come through from this Committee and indeed, issues strongest laws and restrictions in relation to firearms that may be highlighted. We need to be proportionate. in Europe and arguably the rest of the world. I think We need to examine any gaps or risks that may be that is why we are focusing on the recommendations highlighted. It is a question of taking a measured that will be coming forward and considering those approach and, as both the Prime Minister and the issues carefully and whether any appropriate changes Home Secretary have highlighted, we are not going to might need to be made to improve on that. So I would take a knee-jerk approach but we will consider not like to give the impression that we think carefully and responsibly issues that may be everything is perfect or that things might not need highlighted and respond in that proportionate and some form of modification. If risks are identified, we measured way. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 15:49] Job: 006950 Unit: PG05 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected).xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 49
16 November 2010 James Brokenshire MP
Q313 Mr Winnick: The gun lobby is pretty strong Mr Winnick: Let’s hope so. in Britain, although nowhere near as strong as in the Chair: You mentioned the United States. The States. Is that not so? Committee’s final witness in this inquiry is the James Brokenshire: I can only comment on the Attorney-General in Washington DC. We will take Government’s position. We are looking at these issues evidence at 2 o’clock today. The Committee is extremely carefully. Naturally, the Government take adjourned until then. May I thank you, Minister, for their responsibilities to protect the public seriously. If coming to give evidence? factors are emerging, it is our duty to consider them James Brokenshire: Thank you. appropriately. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [SE] Processed: [17-12-2010 14:58] Job: 006950 Unit: PG06 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected) afternoon.xml
Ev 50 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
Tuesday 16 November 2010 (Afternoon)
Members present: Keith Vaz (Chair)
Nicola Blackwood Alun Michael Mr Aidan Burley Bridget Phillipson Mr James Clappison Mark Reckless Lorraine Fullbrook Mr David Winnick ______
Examination of Witness
Witness: Peter Nickles, Attorney-General for the District of Columbia, gave evidence.
Q314 Chair: The time is 2 o’clock in London. Mr is that we have many, many more firearms that are Attorney-General, thank you very much for giving illegally possessed in Washington DC. evidence to the Home Affairs Committee of the House Chair: Thank you. I’m now going to turn to a of Commons. We are most grateful. We know you are Member of Parliament on our Committee. You will extremely busy, but we felt that this was the best not be able to see her on the screen, but you will hear method for taking evidence from you. her voice. The Select Committee members around me—I will not introduce all of them—are here to see whether you Q315 Lorraine Fullbrook: What have the District of can help us with our inquiry into firearms. We are Columbia’s experiences over the years led the conducting an inquiry looking at the law of firearms authorities to understand about the relationship so that we can make recommendations to our between gun ownership and the criminal use of Government. What we would like, if possible—we firearms? have a half-hour session—is to ask you about what is Peter Nickles: It is interesting that although happening in Washington DC and how you think it politicians generally, as I am sure you know, agree on may be of relevance to the inquiry that we are very little, here in Washington DC every politician conducting here. running either for Mayor or for the city council since Perhaps I can start with a question to you. What 1976 has supported the ban on handguns. I think that proportion of the population of Washington DC the authorities in Washington DC, including the police currently own a gun? What is your estimate? department, felt that there was a very direct Peter Nickles: The estimate of the number of correlation between the possession of firearms and the individuals who own a legally registered gun is less use of those firearms in significant crimes of violence. than 5%, but let me provide some qualifiers. In 1976, Possession offences are simply based on a person’s the city of Washington DC imposed a ban on firearms. being in possession of a firearm illegally. That Prior to 1976, there were in excess of 45,000 firearms happens very often here, because we have so many that were privately owned. They were registered, people who receive or buy firearms in another state allegedly, for life. Those firearms are probably out and bring them into Washington DC without there somewhere. We estimate that maybe 30,000 appropriate authorisation. They can be arrested for firearms are out there. We had a decision by the possession. United States Supreme Court in June 2008, the very What we’re really concerned about is the use of firearms in connection with crimes of violence— famous Heller case, which held that there was a assault, robbery or homicide. We have found that Second Amendment right to own firearms for when you register a gun, and when you have the kinds protection in the home, and that struck down the ban of records that we have with respect to the guns that that Washington DC had imposed. are registered and the individuals who are registering Starting in summer 2008, the city, working with the those guns, those guns—those registered firearms— police department and the federal Government, has have very rarely, if ever, been used in crimes. So when been developing a scheme of registration of firearms we have crimes that involve firearms, we have found in various conditions, a precedent to registering a that when we trace the firearms back, they’re firearms firearm legally. What makes it so difficult, and what that relate to purchases in other jurisdictions around makes Washington DC so interesting as a laboratory the United States. That is a significant problem for us. for the whole issue of what do you do about firearms, We have also not found a situation in which registered is that we sit between two states, Maryland and firearms have led to shootings intra-household or Virginia, which have very different views on firearms. within a home, but the bottom line for your inquiry We have very significant evidence that folks are here is that when you register a firearm and have the buying firearms in Virginia, for example, and bringing kind of conditions that we have imposed in or transferring those firearms into the city of Washington DC, you rarely, if ever, find that crimes Washington DC, where they are not registered. The of violence involve those registered firearms. The complexities of what is going on in Washington DC problem is getting your hands on firearms that are not are difficult, but if you are looking at the legally legally registered. registered firearms, there would be less than 30,000, Chair: Thank you. Our next question comes from Mr in a population of about 600,000. But my own view David Winnick. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 14:58] Job: 006950 Unit: PG06 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected) afternoon.xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 51
16 November 2010 Peter Nickles
Q316 Mr Winnick: Attorney-General, how many been out of line with many other states in the country firearms homicides take place in DC each year and is that effectively have no gun laws. there a comparison with cities across the US that Mr Winnick: Thank you, Attorney-General. That was operate looser or tighter gun controls? most useful. Peter Nickles: Our data show that about 75% to 80% Chair: Before Mr Burley comes in, this session needs of our homicides in a given year are committed with to end at 2.30 pm: you will hear a lot of bells going guns. The FBI estimates that, generally speaking, on at 2.30 pm, which is when Parliament starts. So some lesser percentage—67% to 68%—of all we’re going to try to get all our questions in briefly homicides are committed with firearms, and that, of before then. course, varies from urban areas to suburban areas. Once again, the problem is that so many of the Q318 Mr Burley: It is fair to say that America has firearms used in violent crimes have not been some of the loosest gun control laws and here in registered in DC, but have been bought in Ohio, Britain we have some of the strictest in Europe if not Virginia or Pennsylvania and brought illegally into the world. Why do you think we still have so many the city. problems with guns being used in crime in this country, with all of our tight controls? Can I ask you Q317 Mr Winnick: We’re rather surprised—if I can about stopping weapons crossing state borders? We just make this comment by way of a question—about have heard lots of evidence about guns coming in to how loose the firearms controls are in your country. the UK from Europe. Is that analogous to your There is a general feeling abroad, certainly in Britain, problem of guns coming in from other states? that the gun lobby is very, very strong in the States. Peter Nickles: We have had very little success in Peter Nickles: You’re absolutely correct. The NRA— stopping the illegal transfer—the illegal movement of the National Rifle Association—is one of the most guns across state borders. I suspect that is a problem powerful lobbying organisations in the United States. that Britain is having now in the common market, It regularly develops a list of politicians who are where guns move around among sister states in the acceptable to it, based on their votes on gun matters. EU. There has been an effort by Michael Bloomberg, It is literally impossible to get through Congress any the mayor of New York, and the mayor of DC, Adrian Fenty, and some of the other leaders on the east coast, kind of national legislation relating to firearms. to impose some kind of regional ban. We co-operate So that brings us to the individual states. I think it fair with the states of Maryland, New York, Virginia and to say that most people in the United States regard so on. I think the answer to your inquiry is that guns Washington DC as the jurisdiction with the strictest move across borders. If in fact guns are used in crime, gun laws in the United States. If you go out to states they will move, and there is a lot of money involved such as Oklahoma, Texas and Wyoming and a number in the movement of guns. We have been following of other states, there are literally no gun laws. One is that for years here in DC, because we have the entitled to purchase as many guns a month as one strictest gun laws. We literally have thousands of guns would wish. One is entitled to carry guns openly into in this city that have not legally been registered. public places; one is entitled to carry concealed weapons. Q319 Mr Burley: What, if anything, can you do to One of the problems that we have in Washington DC, try to stop that? is that Congress has plenary power over Washington Peter Nickles: One of the things we can do is seek to DC. Congress can effectively do whatever it wants impose conditions on the registration of guns. We with our laws. A year or so ago, in light of the have had a gun tip line, which people can call composition at that time of Congress and the anonymously, no questions asked. There is a presidency, there was an effort to bring voting rights significant reward. I think we’ve received some 5,000 to Washington DC. As you may know, we have no or 6,000 guns through this tipping hotline, but until voting rights at all in DC. That was for the purpose of all the states get together and impose uniform gun having one vote in the House of Representatives. The laws, as a practical matter, it is very difficult. I don’t condition came back to the city that to have Congress know what you all have in Britain—whether you have consider giving Washington DC one vote in the House some kind of organisation akin to the NRA—but in of Representatives, they—that is, the Washington DC this country, it is a no-brainer. You are not able to get folks—would have to set aside all their gun laws and anywhere in terms of any kind of uniform minimum accept the imposition by Congress of its own set of gun regulation, so that you can keep track of guns gun laws, which have no resemblance to any kind of that move across state lines. In fact, right now, we are regulation. fighting in court not only the question of gun I would also say that the NRA and a number of groups registration, but the question of the huge guns, huge are behind a lot of lawsuits that we have had, and not magazines and machine guns. only leading to the Heller case in 2008; we have been Chair: We’ll come onto that in further questions, Mr involved in lawsuit after lawsuit since then, testing the Attorney-General. We have no equivalent to the NRA limits of our current effort to provide some balance in the UK—not at the moment, anyway. between safety and the second amendment right to bear arms. Q320 Mr Clappison: Attorney-General, your ban So, bottom line, Washington DC has been one of the was introduced in 1976, I believe, and it has only strictest jurisdictions, out of line with the views of the recently been relaxed. Are you able to say if there was NRA, with what should be the situation, and it has any significant change in the level of firearm violence cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [17-12-2010 14:58] Job: 006950 Unit: PG06 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected) afternoon.xml
Ev 52 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
16 November 2010 Peter Nickles and firearms used in crime over that period? What weapon to make that crime even more deadly. So we happened after 1976, and has anything happened have very strict preconditions on the application recently? process to register for a weapon. To look at your Peter Nickles: We had a pretty good track record after example, if that individual had any felony, mental 1976. Of course, one can use statistics to prove almost problem or domestic violence problem, they could not any point, but there was a period starting in about register a firearm in Washington DC. 1986 when we had a crack cocaine epidemic in Washington DC and the homicide rate went up to Q323 Nicola Blackwood: May I carry on and ask 479—in fact, Washington DC was then known as the about the prohibition of people with certain mental murder capital of the United States. So there was, of health problems? We are also discussing the role that course, criticism fostered by the NRA and some other our doctors will play in the application process in groups who said, “Look at the failure of strict bans on clearing an individual as being appropriate to hold a weapons.” I think it’s fair to say that after the crack firearm. How does that work in the US? cocaine epidemic was dealt with, the number of Peter Nickles: Individuals who have been found not homicides—particularly with guns—has gone down to be mentally competent by appropriate authorities— significantly. we have a Department of Mental Health, so Last year, in 2009, we had 143 homicides, which was individuals who go through that process—are the lowest total since 1966. This year we are on a ineligible to register a firearm. It is a very important trend to go well below that number, so the registration area. We dealt with it very thoughtfully, because we system that we have imposed over the last two years, don’t want to exclude people arbitrarily or along with the various kinds of training and other unnecessarily, but we look very carefully at the identification requirements, have been very helpful background of each individual who seeks to register not only in reducing the use of guns, but in absolutely a firearm. reducing the total number of homicides and violent Chair: Thank you. It would be helpful if our Clerks crime. talked to your staff about getting a note on your registration procedures. Two final questions, first from Q321 Alun Michael: Could we look at the use of Mark Reckless. firearms in crime? What proportion of those are incidents of domestic violence, distinct from use in the Q324 Mark Reckless: What measures do you have commission of another crime or anything like that? in place to ensure responsible gun ownership? Do you Peter Nickles: First, in connection with domestic see airguns as part of that regime? violence, we have found that during the registration Peter Nickles: With respect to airguns, you have to be process that we adopted two years ago, literally no 18 or older to purchase or possess an air weapon, and registered guns have been found to have been used in you can’t discharge or possess an air weapon on domestic violence incidents. Domestic crimes using public space within the city. As to the conditions that firearms are a very small percentage of the total apply to registration, let me go through some of them, number of violent crimes. I have used the number because we have—the NRA does not like this—a before in terms of violent crimes; in about 75% to significant series of preconditions that apply to the 80% of cases, firearms are used in connection with registration of a firearm. First, you have to submit violent crimes in DC. Most of those offences are gang fingerprints for a national criminal background check related or crime related; they are not related to and for identification purposes. Secondly, the domestic incidents. handguns that will be subject to the registration process are submitted to our police department for a Q322 Nicola Blackwood: This inquiry is, in part, a ballistics identification procedure, for which the response to some very tragic events that occurred in registration imposes a fee. If a crime is later Cumbria, where an individual who had a number of committed with a firearm and that firearm has not convictions was licensed to carry a shotgun. He used been registered, we can then trace it back to the a legal weapon to kill a number of people. We are individual who put the gun up for registration. having a debate at the moment about whether it is We also have a test so that the registrant has to show appropriate for those people who have convictions or a significant familiarity with the laws pertaining to have been sentenced to custody for a period of three firearms. We have vision tests and training— years or less to be permitted to carry weapons under individuals have to take at least an hour of firearms certain conditions. I wonder what the situation is in training at a firing range and at least four hours of the US. Do you prohibit individuals who, for example, classroom instruction. We also have to look at the have a history of domestic abuse or other violent background of the individual. If the registrant is a new crimes from carrying weapons? resident of the district, we look very carefully at that Peter Nickles: We have very strict requirements on individual. The registration lasts for three years, and your ability to apply to register a firearm. We exclude at the end of the three years, the registration must be folks who have been convicted of felonies, who have renewed. The firearm certificate includes photographs some mental problem in their background and who so that law enforcement can more easily find these have a problem of domestic abuse. We are trying, legally registered firearms. through the registration process, to eliminate those We have a background check once every six years individuals who have a propensity to violence who we to confirm that the individual continues to meet the think may be reasonably thought to be in a situation registration qualifications. We also have a very where they would commit a crime and then have a important requirement that if the gun is sold, lost or cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [17-12-2010 14:58] Job: 006950 Unit: PG06 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/006950/006950_HAC 16 Nov 2010 (public corrected) afternoon.xml
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 53
16 November 2010 Peter Nickles destroyed, that information must be given to the police the congressional Committees. Have there been any department. So we have over a period of some time congressional inquiries into firearms or has the NRA developed a significant set of requirements, which are been able to stop even that? now the subject of litigation where we have been Peter Nickles: Let’s say there have been hearings. I asked to justify these preconditions under the second was at a hearing about six months ago with the head amendment. of the Capitol police, the head of the Park Police, and the head of own Police Department. The basic point Q325 Bridget Phillipson: To what extent does the we were making was that Washington DC is a unique district see control of the supply of guns as the key to city with all the embassies and all the demonstrations, solving gun violence in the inner city and what other with the meetings of the IMF, the World Bank and so strategies do you use for this? on and so requires a stricter regime of gun control Peter Nickles: The supply of guns is critical to the than, say, Wyoming or Oklahoma crime programmes that we enforce here in Chair: Indeed. Washington DC. We have tried to work with other Peter Nickles: I must say that very few Congressmen states. We have tried to work with Congress with showed up and the result of the hearing was that respect to the supply issue. In all candour I have to Congress didn’t do anything because the NRA had tell you that we have not been that successful simply done its homework before the hearing. So to some because each state regulates in a very different fashion extent when you have all the senior police officers and because Congress has been so reluctant to deal dealing with the city, the Capitol police who guard the with the issue. My own view, having looked at this very Congressmen who are in the hands of the NRA, for some time, is that if one could impose a modicum the Park Police, the Washington Metropolitan Police of control over the supply of firearms, one can impose Department all taking the uniform view that we must a significant limitation on violent crime with firearms. find a balance and then Congress not doing anything, it is very disappointing. Q326 Chair: Thank you. You mentioned the age Chair: Mr Attorney, I know you are extraordinarily limit, Mr Attorney, and one particular gun—airguns. busy, so may I on behalf of this Committee thank you Is there an age limit on any of the other guns? so much for participating in this evidence session? We Peter Nickles: Yes, there is an age limit of 21 on the will send you a copy of our report and your evidence other weapons. For airguns, it is 18 years of age. It is will be part of that report. On behalf of the Committee interesting that in DC we have been registering guns as well could I invite you, should you be visiting for almost two years and my understanding is that we London, to come and meet us here in the House of have registered only about 1,000 firearms during that Commons? If there is any further information that you period. That indicates first that people do not like to think it would be helpful for us to read before our go through the preconditions we have and secondly conclusions are fashioned I should be most grateful if folks, I guess, have the view that they can get the you could forward that on. Could I thank the Embassy firearms in other ways if they wish to have them. staff who have made this possible, your own staff and our staff here for participating in this evidence Q327 Chair: That is very helpful. It is almost 2.30 session? Thank you very much. pm and Parliament is about to start. I hope that you Peter Nickles: Thank you. This has been very found that a more pleasant experience than appearing interesting. on Capitol Hill and being cross-examined by one of Chair: Order. The session is closed. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [SE] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 54 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Written evidence
Memorandum submitted by the British Shooting Sports Council 1. Summary: (a) It is more eVective to legislate for the person than the gun. (b) Shooting is a well-established, popular and safe participation sport. (c) There is no long-term good quality data on firearms misuse, but gun crime is decreasing. (d) Firearms legislation is enabling as well as preventative. (e) A consolidating act is desirable: a full review of legislation is not. (f) “Tagging” of medical records raises security and eVectiveness issues. (g) Airgun crime has been very significantly reduced by existing legislation.
The BSSC 2. The BSSC is an umbrella body, bringing together the 12 major Associations for target shooting, quarry shooting and the gun trade to achieve consensus on issues aVecting the shooting sports and is a non-profit making body financed by members’ subscriptions. 3. These Associations are: Association of Professional Clay Target Shooting Grounds. Association of Professional Shooting Instructors. British Association for Shooting and Conservation. Countryside Alliance. Clay Pigeon Shooting Association. Gun Trade Association. Institute of Clay Shooting Instructors. Muzzle Loaders Association of Great Britain. National Rifle Association. National Smallbore Rifle Association. Sportsman’s Association of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. United Kingdom Practical Shooting Association. 4. The objective of the BSSC is to promote and safeguard the lawful use of firearms and air weapons for sporting and recreational purposes in the United Kingdom amongst all sections of society. The foundation of the Council’s stance is that the more eVective and eYcient approach is to legislate for the person, not the gun.
ABrief Overview of Shooting in Britain 5. Shooting is one of the most popular participation sports. An estimated one million people in the UK shoot and the number of young people entering the sport is increasing. 1,200 entered BASC’s Young Shots scheme in six months in 2007, while the Scout Association’s annual rifle competition attracts nearly 800 competitors. The National Smallbore Rifle Association has over 12,000 registered instructors on its Sport England funded Youth Proficiency Scheme. National Rifle Association Open Days are so successful that the numbers applying to take part have had to be limited. 6. Shooting is enjoyed by young and old, men and women, and the disabled. 7. Target shooting is a very popular Olympic and Paralympic discipline. Its first Royal patron was Queen Victoria. Of our 12 Associations, two have HM The Queen as Patron (one with HRH The Prince of Wales as President), a third has HRH The Duke of Edinburgh. 8. Hunting with firearms is a £1.6 billion industry, supporting 70,000 jobs, (2006 PACEC Report). Shooting providers spend an estimated £250 million a year on habitat and wildlife management, five times the annual income of Britain’s biggest conservation organisation, the RSPB. 9. 480,000 people shoot game, wildfowl, pigeon and rabbits. 10. 150,000 people regularly shoot clay targets. 11. 250,000 people regularly enjoy target shooting with rifles, muzzle loading pistols and airguns. 12. C. 1,000 clubs are aYliated to the NSRA, the NRA has over 700 aYliated clubs and the Clay Pigeon Shooting Association has c. 420 aYliated clubs. There are at least 1,000 unaYliated clubs. This bespeaks a flourishing sport. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 55
13. 23 of the UK’s 116 medals in the 2006 Commonwealth Games were for shooting. Only swimming exceeded this with 24. Double trap shooter Richard Faulds MBE won gold for Great Britain at the 2000 Olympics in Sydney. George Digweed MBE won 13 European championships, eight World FITASC championships and nine World Sporting championships. England’s most decorated Commonwealth medal winner is Mick Gault, with 15 medals. In 2008 he was awarded an OBE for his contribution to shooting- with a pistol. 14. British shooters consume c. 190 million shotgun cartridges a year. 15. Britain’s deer population continues to increase and sporting deer stalking is a well-accepted contributor to deer management. 16. There is no relationship between gun crime and legitimate gun ownership. For example, gun crime fell by 6% in Scotland in 2005–06, 28% lower than nine years previously. Compare this to an increase in privately-owned firearms, currently at a five-year high in the country.Home OYce figures from May 2006 for gun crime in England and Wales show a similar pattern. 2004–05 saw gun crime fall by 8% but the number of privately-owned weapons rose 8% from the previous year. 17. Shooting is among the safest of sports, particularly in the UK. According to UN statistics, the UK figure for accidental firearms fatalities is one of the lowest at 0.02 per 100,000, a figure which includes military and police fatalities. In England and Wales twice as many people are hospitalised by mishaps with cotton buds than accidents with guns. 18. The British Association for Shooting and Conservation provides the following insurance cover for all shooting categories to all its members: £10 million Legal Liability Cover, £10 million Employer Liability Cover and £10 million Product Liability cover at a cost of c. £10.50 a member. Both the CPSA and the NSRA provide similar insurance schemes. So much cover for so small a premium demonstrates the inherent safety of the sport.
The Use of Legally-held Guns in Crime and the Relationship Between Gun Control and Gun Crime 19. Until very recently,with the creation of NaBIS (the National Ballistics Intelligence Service) little good quality data has been available. Such oYcial statistics as have been published, for instance “Firearms homicide-circumstances of oVence by whether firearms legally held” (1995–97), show a very low level of misuse of legally held firearms. For the seven years covered, no legally-held firearms were identified as having been used in the category “Organised crime, drugs related, contract killings, etc.” 20. The BSSC draws attention to the following written response: Tony McNulty (Minister of State (Security, Counter-terrorism, Crime and Policing), Hansard 2nd June 2008 in response to a question from James Brokenshire MP. “The potential requirements for the sharing of information between the National Ballistics Intelligence Service Database (NABIS) and the National Firearms Licensing Management System was examined, and discussed, in detail by key stakeholders (including forensic and investigatory professionals) throughout the lifetime of the project management process. It was found that the potential crossover between the data held by the systems was very small, due to the very low instances of legally held firearms being used in gun crime and the small overlap in information shared between the two applications. Furthermore, the data descriptors of ‘firearms recovered at Scenes of Crime’ and ‘firearms being licensed’ may be somewhat diVerent and, as a result, inquiries would be passed from NABIS to expert firearms oYcers in the Licensing Departments. As a consequence, it was agreed that any risk of legally held firearms being used for criminal purposes was so low and the diYculty of automating a matching process between systems that the cost of building such an interface would outweigh any perceived benefits.” 21. Statistics collected over the past quarter-century leave much to be desired, particularly in regard to the misuse of legally-held firearms. The potential value of oYcial statistics has been greatly reduced by frequent changes in reporting criteria. To quote Mr McNulty on 25 July 2006: “From 1986 to 1996–97 firearm oVences data collected centrally did not include reference to whether weapons were held legally or illegally. Attempts were made between 1997–98 and 2003–04 to collect these data, but there were concerns over their quality. There is a diYculty for the police being able to identify whether a firearm used in an oVence was legally or illegally held, particularly if that firearm was not retrieved. As a result the data from this period were not published. Because of these concerns, and following consultation with police force representatives, the data ceased to be collected centrally from one April 2004.” 22. The creation and analysis of a database of all recovered firearms was long championed by shooting representatives, despite oYcial indiVerence. The growth of gun crime strengthened our case, however, and we hope that the deliberations of the Committee will be facilitated by clear and accurate data from NaBIS and that such data will be made available to interested parties. 23. Doubtless many submissions will highlight the link between drugs crime and gun crime. The BSSC takes no stance on the de-criminalisation of the supply of recreational drugs, but does suggest that the Committee consider this connection and what further might be done. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 56 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
24. Firearms are simple technology and the advent of CAD/CAM (computer aided design/computer aided manufacture) systems has facilitated illicit manufacture. Criminals will manufacture firearms if no other source is available. Japanese Yakusa have supplied themselves with firearms made illegally in Danao in the Philippines. When police and customs activity made import more diYcult, they invited Philippino gun-makers over for working holidays in Japan. Firearms availability is a matter of supply and demand, and success is more likely to come from reducing criminal demand, an approach already actively pursued to reduce knife crime, since a few hundred guns and a few thousand cartridges would keep Britain’s criminals going for many years. Illegal import will never be entirely stemmed and it may be more cost-eVective to educate potential or former perpetrators than to pursue small numbers of firearms. The recent Channel 4 Dispatches programme “Gun Runners” made play with the recovery of seven pistols and 1,200 rounds of ammunition illegally imported from Holland during “Operation Greengage”. This modest recovery was an unplanned benefit from a major international operation targeting illegal drugs. Fifteen other “runs” by the gang had not been stopped. 25. We understand that hundreds of Russian “Baikal” gas pistols, converted to fire conventional .380 ammunition, have been illegally imported into this country. Perhaps NaBIS could comment on this. 26. Besides being intended to prevent the access of criminals to firearms through legal channels, firearms legislation is an enabling mechanism to facilitate access to and use of firearms by law-abiding citizens. This function should focus on the person, not the gun, and should be structured to minimise bureaucracy and free police resources for other activities.
The Fitness for Purpose of Current Laws Governing Firearms 27. The present much amended legislation is diYcult to use. A consolidating Act, which would have considerable practicable benefits for day-to-day administration, would be more cost-eVective. A number of useful minor changes already proposed by ACPO would simplify the law and make it easier to administer. These could be achieved by a Regulatory Reform Order. 28. In contradistinction to a consolidating Act, this Council would not now support a full review of legislation as it would be “incident-led”. This has resulted in ineVective and misdirected legislation, for instance Dangerous Dogs legislation and the 1997 Firearms (Amendment) Acts. Any aspect of potential legislative change that can be established as relevant to the shootings in Cumbria should be considered first. 29. This Council would wish to be involved in detailed discussion of any proposed change to the law, its administration, or guidance on its application.
Improvement of Information-sharing Between Medics and the Police 30. Since before the Cumbria shootings, the BSSC has been discussing tagging of medical records. Little progress has been made because concerns about security, confidentiality and eVectiveness have not been allayed. A robust set of guidelines for GPs would be essential. The Council notes the BMA’s recent website statement that “Doctors must make it clear that they are in no position to judge the ‘future dangerousness’ of any applicant.” It also notes the lamentable inability of trained professionals to detect child abuse in recent high-profile cases. 31. The NHS employs 1.5 million people and an estimated 300,000 might have access to tagged records. Can this data ever be secure? 32. We have concerns over General Practitioner liability and over the impact of such tagging on shooter health. Tagging could discourage help being sought by those fearing the loss of their sport. A substantial number of people, especially middle-aged men, never go near their GP and this proposal would probably add to that number. Safeguards would need to be provided for disabled shooters and those benefitting from the therapeutic aspects of the sport through the “Help for Heroes” initiative. 33. The number of revocations for mental health reasons has been raised as an issue, and the Home OYce does not hold information on this. The Council would support the future collection of reasons for revocations, provided that the types of reason are clearly defined and the right of appeal against revocation is retained.
Information-sharing Between Police and Prisons in Assessing the Risk of Offenders who may have Access to Firearms 34. The BSSC has no stance on this, but observes that the language used does imply tacit acceptance of the continuing access of criminals to firearms.
The Danger Presented by, and Legislation Regulating,Airguns. 35. Airguns provide the traditional means of training for young people entering the sport. Trade figures indicate that about five million people own seven million airguns for target shooting and vermin control. Violence against the person with airguns has been falling for 25 years, despite overall increases in violent crime. In 1983, the total number of crimes of violence against the person was 111,000, by 2007–08 this was 961,000. Over the same period violence against the person with airguns almost halved from 2,377 to 1,311. Over this period, the figures for criminal damage with an air gun have increased from 2,977 in 1983 to 10,496 Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 57
in 2002–03 and decreased to 5,756 in 2007–08. What this really reflects is economic inflation. The threshold for a record in the criminal damage statistics is £20, but the real value of £20 had halved between 1980 and 1990. The introduction of the National Crime Recording Standard in 2002 also changed the way statistics were recorded and inflated the overall number of violence against the person and criminal damage oVences. In real terms airgun crime has been substantially reducing over the years. To continue this beneficial eVect the two-pronged attack advocated by Paul Boateng MP in 1999 must be maintained: education and the enforcement of existing legislation, particularly Section 37 of the Antisocial Behaviour Act which came into force in 2004. This makes it an oVence to have an airgun in a public place. It would also be sensible to allow the Crime and Security Act 2010 to take eVect before contemplating further controls. 36. In view of the present debate concerning firearms legislation, the BSSC considers it inadvisable to proceed with devolution to the Scottish Parliament of powers to legislate on airguns.
Recommendations for Inclusion in the Select Committee’s Report: (a) The Firearms Act should be consolidated. (b) ACPO recommendations for a Regulatory Reform Order should be acted upon. (c) The collection of data on the reasons for revocation of certificates should be undertaken. (d) There should be no further legislation on airguns until the eVect of the Crime and Security Act has been established, but the application of existing legislation and education to discourage misuse should be robustly pursued. (e) Power to legislate on airguns should not be devolved to the Scottish Parliament. 10 August 2010
Supplementary memoranda submitted by the British Shooting Sports Council 1. Despite promises of assistance with regard to foreign teams competing in the 2012 Olympics, which requires the issuing of Home OYce Section 5 Prohibited Weapon Authorities to their pistol shooters, we are already getting overseas teams wanting to train in the UK (as is usual and expected in the run-up to the Games) and our organisers are having to tell them that they cannot bring cartridge pistol shooters to train. This is against the Olympic ethos and it is not going down well. 2. The 1968 Act as amended requires EU citizens who wish to bring firearms or shotguns to Britain for the purposes of hunting or target shooting to obtain a British Visitor’s Permit in addition to their European Firearms Pass. The EFP is supposed to facilitate the movement of legitimate sportsmen with their firearms within the EU. No other EU state (except I think the Republic of Ireland) requires anything other than an EFP. The EFP system works well, is not seen as problematical, and, so far as we are aware, a Visitors Permit for a firearm has never been refused to an EFP holder. To make matters worse, our Firearms Act requires that the EU citizen submits his EFP with his application. This is like taking his passport away, in that he cannot travel within the EU to pursue his sport until he gets it back. This requirement puts EU citizens at a disadvantage compared to non EU residents. It is a great inconvenience to those often top-flight shooters of impeccable character who travel in Europe to many International matches. At the least, the law should be amended to permit the submission of a photocopy. Preferably the EFP should be accepted as suYcient authority, as it is elsewhere. 3. The BSSC would strongly support the return of the Firearms Consultative Committee in its original statutory form established by the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988, rather than the more broadly-based non-statutory Firearms Advisory Council proposed in the 2004 Home OYce Consultation Paper “Controls on Firearms”, but never implemented. The FCC proved its considerable value in providing a forum for working out the correct application of legislation, particularly new legislation. 4. Figures for accidents are provided by the Royal Society for the Prevention of accidents, those for 2000–02 being available on line.
ROSPA FIGURES FOR ACCIDENTS CAUSING A SERIOUS ENOUGH INJURY TO WARRANT A VISIT TO HOSPITAL
2000 2001 2002 Air gun or pistol 1490 1357 1312 Rifle* 639 625 718 Shotgun 177 89 164 Cotton wool bud 5854 6819 8938 *The disparity between the figures for injuries involving shotguns and the relatively less common rifles might indicate that injuries caused by air rifles were included in this category. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 58 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
Criteria for Home Office Approval of a Rifle or Muzzle-loading Pistol Club The following criteria must be satisfied before a club can be granted approval. Once granted, the same criteria become conditions of continued approval, which can be withdrawn if a club, at any time, fails to meet these conditions. — The club is a genuine target shooting club with a written constitution. — The principal oYcers of the club are responsible people who can be entrusted with the proper administration of the club. — The club has at least ten (10) members at the time of application and at all times whilst approved unless, exceptionally, the Secretary of State determines that there are special circumstances which justify a lesser number. — All members are of good character. — The club must appoint a member to act as a liaison oYcer with the police, and the Chief OYcer of Police must have confidence that this person is providing the police with such information as they require to ensure that the activities of the club, and its members, are conducted properly and safely and give no cause for concern. — The club will maintain a register of the attendance of all members together with details of each visit, of the firearms which they used, and the competitions, if any, in which they took part. — The club will inform the police of any holder of a firearm certificate who has ceased to be a member for whatever reason. — The club will inform the police if any member who holds a firearm certificate has not shot with the club for a period of twelve (12) months. — The club will inform the police of any application for membership, giving the applicant’s name, address and outcome of any application. — No application for full or probationary membership will be granted unless the applicant has informed the club of whether or not he/she has ever had an application for a firearm or shotgun certificate refused by the police or had such a certificate revoked. — Members, prospective members and guests must sign a declaration that they are not prohibited from possessing a firearm or ammunition by virtue of Section 21 of the Firearms Act 1968. See also What is a prohibited person? — The club has regular use of ranges with safety certificates for the categories of firearms in respect of which approval is being sought or granted. — The security arrangements for the storage of club firearms and ammunition are satisfactory. — The club does not run a day or temporary membership scheme. — The club does not have more than twelve (12) guest days a year. Guest members must be either members of a recognised outside organisation or people who are known personally to at least one full member of that club. — Guests must be supervised on a one to one basis at all times when handling firearms and ammunition by either a full club member or someone who is a coach with a qualification recognised by the UK or National Sports Council. The club secretary must notify each guest day to the Police Firearms Licensing Department of the area in which the guest day is to take place, at least 48 hours in advance. — Anyone applying for club membership must be sponsored by at least one full member of that same club. — Before becoming a full member, individuals must serve a probationary period of at least three (3) months, during which time they must attend and shoot regularly. The probationary member must be given a course in the safe handling and use of firearms on a one to one basis by someone who is either a full member of that club or who is a coach with a qualification recognised by the Great Britain Target Shooting Federation and governing bodies. — Until a probationary member has satisfactorily completed a course in the safe handling and use of firearms, he/she must be supervised at all times when in possession of firearms or ammunition, by either the range oYcer or a full member of that club, or someone who is a coach with a qualification recognised by the Great Britain Target Shooting Federation and/or governing bodies. — The probationary period may be waived, at the club’s discretion, for someone who is already a full member of another club approved for the type of weapons, or has handled firearms in the course of duty in the police or armed services, and has a statement from his/her existing or former senior oYcer stating that they are fully trained in handling weapons for which the club is approved, and is able to use them safely without supervision. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 59
— The club should never have more probationary members than full members, unless the Secretary of State determines that there are special circumstances which justify a greater number of probationary members. — There is nothing else that would make the club unsuitable for approval. If approval is granted, the approval will be subject to a set of standard conditions which will reflect the approval criteria listed above. In certain cases, the Secretary of State may attach further specific conditions to a club’s approval, as he sees fit.
Further supplementary memoranda submitted by the British Shooting Sports Council
Gun Control Network: Canada has a registration system since 2003 for most conventional long arms (rifles and shotguns) and a licensing system for pistols and “restricted” long arms. Gill Marshall-Andrews referred to one third of all traced murder weapons in Canada being licensed. Statistics produced by various organisations on the misuse of registered firearms can be at variance. For instance the Canadian public safety department has recently stated that, of 2,441 homicides recorded in Canada since mandatory long-gun registration was introduced, fewer than 2% (47) were committed with rifles and shotguns known to have been registered. A study of homicides between 1997 and 2005, however, reported that 13%, not 30%, of all firearms involved in a homicide could be found in the registry (Dauvergne, 2005). A variety of police studies have found that between 2% and 16% of crime guns were ever in the Canadian gun registry. Each police department defined “crime guns” in a diVerent manner. Canadian Juristat homicide reports show that firearms crime has been stable for seven years and homicide with firearms has been stable for ten years. There has been a very significant, if unsteady (with peaks and troughs), historical decline in firearms homicides in Canada, but this decline started in the 1970s, long before registration. There is a 30% figure which comes from a recent study of “recovered guns” by the Canadian Chiefs of Police, almost all of which have been recovered by police when they attend an “incident”. The so- called “crime guns” in this study are mostly from suicides, attempted or actual, not murders or crimes such as robbery or assault. The guns used in criminal violence in Canada are mostly not recovered. Canadian legislation requiring spouses to sign oV on applications for firearm licences was introduced by the Kim Campbell government in 1991, not 1995. The murder rate of women by their spouses has been gradually declining for three decades. Gill Marshall-Andrews is not correct when she states that gun ownership is a privilege, not a right. Whilst it is reasonable to assert that the right to have arms which existed prior to 1920 has been circumscribed, elements of that right remain in current legislation, viz. Section 27(1) “A firearm certificate shall be granted where the chief oYcer of police is satisfied…” and Section 28(1), “…a shot gun certificate shall be granted…” Whilst the conditions that follow are stringent, the term “shall” is used rather than “may”. This is not accidental and arises from recommendations of the Blackwell Committee of 1919. Nor do we agree that the duration of a firearm or shotgun certificate should be shortened to two years. The present five year period is satisfactory. Finland has a “life” license, Sweden has “life” or five years depending on weapon type, Belgium, Italy and Luxembourg have five year licenses, the Netherlands is to change from one to five years, Eire has changed from one to three, while Germany and Portugal have three year licenses. The important factor is whether or not there is a monitoring system in place. There is an argument in favour of very long licenses with mandatory periodic reviews (and revocation if necessary), since this avoids problems that may require the issuing of temporary permits if for some reason the police have not renewed a license by its expiry date. Unfortunately EU legislation does not permit “life” licenses. With regard to more public access to information about certificate holders, Gill Marshall-Andrews’ comments quoted in the Coventry Telegraph on 15 November were not hedged with the caveats she gave in her oral evidence: With regard to the introduction this year of licensing of air guns in New Zealand, this applies only to powerful pre-charged pneumatic types and is not applied to traditional spring powered or CO2 powered types, or to BB guns or paintball guns. This is very similar to existing law here which requires a firearm certificate for “specially dangerous” air rifles whose muzzle energy exceeds 12 ft lbs. With regard to greater public knowledge about who possesses firearms, Gill Marshall-Andrews’ comments, below, to the Coventry Telegraph published on 15 November were not hedged with the caveats she gave in her oral evidence: “These are deadly weapons and we should know much more about who is permitted to own them.” “Gun owners in the UK have always been protected by a culture of secrecy. Police will not give out information about gun ownership, saying it’s a private matter.” Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 60 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
“But when legal gun owners commit such dreadful crimes, it’s clearly not a private matter.” “We should know who around us has guns so we can judge whether they are suitable people to hold such deadly weapons.” The BSSC sees no need for a “spousal hotline”. Spouses and others, including rifle clubs, show little reluctance in calling the police if they have a concern over a shooter’s behaviour. We would wish to see the evidence from which Gill Marshall-Andrews has inferred that poor storage by shooters has contributed to thefts of firearms. We are happy to continue to “collude” with the police on matters pertaining to firearms security, although we prefer the word “co-operate”. Medical issues: With regard to the involvement of General Practitioners we would note that acting as an agent of the state is not their primary role, and routine referral of all applications for a certificate would place a significant additional burden on the police and the medical practices. Routine referral risks the filing of far more indicators (such as copy letters) in practice records which would flag up to the ill-intentioned the presence of a firearm at a particular address. The proportionality of routine referral deserves consideration. Nor are such referrals reliable or consistent in their outcomes. We are advised that many GPs are reluctant to meet their obligation in the Road TraYc Act to advise the DVLA of individuals who are unfit to drive, so suggest that the eVectiveness or otherwise of this existing reporting requirement might be considered an indicator of the likely eVectiveness of a similar requirement relating to firearms. The BSSC accepts in principle, however, that the greater involvement of General Practitioners should be given careful consideration, but would wish to review any detailed proposals and has concern over any financial impact on an already expensive licensing process. Numbers of firearms: The BSSC does not consider that the number of firearms held by an individual is an indicator of potential risk. It is not possible to use more than two firearms concurrently. DiVerent types of specialised firearm are required if a good standard of performance is to be achieved in each target shooting discipline. Some shooters choose to shoot in a variety of disciplines. DiVerent rifles and shotguns may also be required for diVerent types of quarry. The Home OYce Statistical Bulletin 05/10 “Firearm Certificates in England & Wales 2008–09”, the latest figures available, indicate that there are on average 3.1 “firearms” per firearm certificate (although this average may include such things as spare barrels and sound moderators as well as complete firearms) and 2.4 shotguns per shot gun certificate. Some certificate holders are collectors with an antiquarian and heritage interest and may well hold larger numbers than average. The security aspect is well covered by “Firearms Security Handbook 2005” produced by the Home OYce, ACPO, ACPOS and the BSSC. Power of air guns: We understand that BASC is to respond on this point raised by Dr Huppert. Raoul Moat: We understand that there may be some misunderstanding about Raoul Moat’s possession of a sawn-oV shotgun. We understand that Moat was a violent criminal who had just been released from prison, did not have a shotgun certificate and obtained the gun in question from criminal associates. Storage: The BSSC endorses the additional submission from Mike Eveleigh (BASC) on this matter. Streamlining of the licensing system by the shooting organisations: Graham Downing has responded to the Chairman on this issue in his letter of the 15th November 2010. Last year (2009) the National Rifle Association applied for 400 British Visitor’s Permits, of which 271 came from the EU, so possessed an European Firearms Pass. Mr Roger Weedon, Licensing OYcer for Surrey, reckons it takes about 20 minutes to process each one. The National Small-bore Rifle Association applied for about 100 with 80 from the EU and the CPSA processed 540, with 245 from the EU. If EU citizens could travel on their EFP only then the manpower saving for Surrey would be about 200 hours plus of course postage etc. It is understood that Thames Valley processes even more applications than Surrey. Theft of firearms: The Fraud squad at Gwent advise that 309 guns were reported as “missing” at the beginning of the D J Litts enquiry. They have now traced 120 of these, but 189 are still outstanding. It is not clear what number of these were reported to the Home OYce as misappropriated, as it may be that they had recovered a number of them when the returns were sent. The Home OYce report itself is vague—“around a third of these shotgun thefts….related to one incident in the Gwent police force area.” On the basis of information available to the BSSC, the apparent huge rise in thefts of firearms in the 2008–09 year relates largely—if not wholly—to the DJ Litts enquiry, ie they have not fallen into the hands of potentially violent criminals bent on their misuse. Young people and firearms: The British Shooting Sports Council is firmly of the opinion that there are real benefits to be gained for society and for the individual by permitting and even encouraging those young people who are interested in firearms (and there are many) to learn their disciplined use in appropriate circumstances. Even with the very strict firearms legislation in place in Britain, this point of view has been widely accepted. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 61
Gerry SutcliVe, then Minister for Sport, speaking in 2008 stated: “National Shooting Week gives an opportunity for all the misconceptions about shooting to be put to one side but it also gives people an opportunity to understand that this really is a sport that can be for everybody”. In 2009, Martin Salter said in regard to National Shooting Week: “When Rob Gray from the Countryside Alliance asked for my support for this new project back in 2006, I was only too happy to help because it is so important to demystify firearms and show the general public that responsible shooting is safe and accessible to all.” Kate Hoey has taken school children from her inner-city constituency clay pigeon shooting. She says “I have taken some constituents to experience the countryside and have a go at clay pigeon shooting. I think it is important that children understand that shooting can be a great fun sport where we win medals and children are taught about the discipline…” Ms Hoey said encouraging inner-city children to shoot in the countryside would not entice them to use illegal guns on the streets. “Anti-social young people are going to do that anyway—what we are doing is showing youngsters the opportunity that shooting can be a properly disciplined sport”. Adrian Whiting, Chair of the Association of Chief OYcers of Police Firearms and Explosives Licensing Working Group and member of the ACPO Criminal Use of Firearms Steering Group stated in correspondence with the BSSC’s Secretary in specific reference to a draft United Nations CASA (Coordinating Action on Small Arms) ISACS (International Small Arms Control Standards) module concerned with children, youth, small arms and light weapons: “Having had a chance to quickly read this through, and as you indicate I concur it is seemingly very much aimed at reducing youth related trauma through criminal use of firearms—very laudable intention. In terms of licensing control I sense there is little to observe save that police are content that properly supervised shooting sports activities for youth appear to generate self discipline and positive sporting traits and do not appear to have an adverse impact on youth. On that basis I would not pro-actively support any suggestion that the controls that may flow from the document should be taken as needing to reduce or restrict the ability of youth to participate in lawful sporting shooting activities.” We would support Adrian Whiting’s comments on this issue to the Home AVairs Select Committee on 16 November. In 2008 the then Prime Minister Gordon Brown and his Education Minister Ed Balls supported the growth of the Cadet movement in schools. Mr Balls stated: “I believe combined cadet forces can make a huge diVerence to the young people who join them and the schools and communities in which they are based.” A major review of the military’s role in society stated that encouraging more state secondary school pupils to join the cadet corps would improve discipline among teenagers while helping to improve the public perception of the army, navy and air force. Under the new government proposals, state schools which did not set up a cadet system would encourage pupils to attend a community cadet force instead. One of the core elements of the cadets’ training is mastering shooting skills and military drill. Advocates believe the virtues of discipline, physical exercise and team spirit outweigh any concerns over the use of firearms. The notion of introducing cadet forces across schools was welcomed by heads and teachers. Mick Brookes, general secretary of the National Association of Headteachers, said: “One of the things that these organisations do bring is discipline and order and, in my experience, working with children who have fragmented lives at home, that is something that is missing and something they crave.” 22 November 2010
Memorandum submitted by the British Association for Shooting and Conservation Executive Summary — There is no significant relationship between armed crime and legally owned guns. — Between 1999—2003–04 armed crime rose steadily whilst the number of firearm and shotgun certificates fell by 9 %. — The Firearms Acts 1997 have had no impact on armed crime and have destroyed the sport of pistol shooting with no benefit to public safety. — Handguns remain the weapon of choice for armed criminals. — The current regime for licensing shotguns is the most eYcient part of the administration of the Firearms Acts because it concentrates on the applicant. — The proposal to tag certificate holders’ medical records is disproportionate and raises issues which have not been addressed by those who propose it. — The current requirement to allow the police to ask for factual details from a certificate holder’s GP is proportionate and eVective. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 62 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
— Airguns are already heavily regulated by law, particularly where young people are concerned. — Airgun oVences of violence against the person have fallen steadily over the last 38 years. — If airguns were licensed, the police service would not be able to cope with the additional workload.
Recommendations — The Firearms Acts 1968–1997 should be consolidated into a single Act. — No wholesale review of firearms law should take place in the current emotionally charged climate. — Any new firearms legislation should be divided into two acts; criminal justice matter and licensing administration. — Appeals against police licensing decisions should be dealt with by a tribunal. — Airgun control laws should not be devolved to Scotland. — The current regime for licensing shotguns should be extended to sporting rifles.
1) Introduction 1.0) With some 130,000 members, the British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC) is regarded as the major UK representative body for sporting shooting. BASC’s expertise on firearms matters is widely recognised and we are routinely consulted by a variety of government departments and agencies (including the Home OYce, DEFRA, LANTRA, the Health and Safety Commission) and other statutory and non-statutory bodies, eg the Association of Chief Police OYcers. 1.1) BASC is the only shooting association in the UK with a dedicated Firearms Team. The team is widely recognised as having particular expertise on all firearms matters—legal, practical and technical—as well as having a forensic capacity. 1.2) BASC believes that any controls on firearms and related matters must strike a balance between the legitimate aspirations of firearms users and the need to ensure the safety of the public. However, such a balance must be evidence-led, proportionate and consistent with the Human Rights Act 1998. 1.3) As the Committee has sensibly imposed an upper limit of 2,500 words on written submissions, this response takes the form of skeleton arguments. BASC is happy to expand on any aspect of this submission on request as well as providing details of source material. 1.4) This memorandum is NOT CONFIDENTIAL and BASC welcomes its wider dissemination as part of the ongoing debate.
2) Gun Control and Armed Crime 2.0) BASC welcomes the creation of NaBIS as a body which will be able to provide good quality data on the types and sources of firearms used in crime in the UK. 2.1) BASC asserts that the extent to which legally held guns are used in criminal activity is miniscule. This is clear from a response to a Parliamentary Question by the then Home OYce Minister, Tony McNulty MP in 2008. (The minister was responding to James Brokenshire, MP who asked if the computer systems for NaBIS, FLMS and PNC would be linked.) 2.2) “It was found that the potential crossover between the data held by the systems was very small, due to the very low instances of legally held firearms being used in gun crime and the small overlap in information shared between the two applications. Furthermore, the data descriptors of ‘firearms recovered at Scenes of Crime’ and ‘firearms being licensed’ may be somewhat diVerent and, as a result, inquiries would be passed from NABIS to expert firearms oYcers in the Licensing Departments. As a consequence, it was agreed that any risk of legally held firearms being used for criminal purposes was so low that given the diYculty of automating a matching process between systems, the cost of building such an interface would outweigh any perceived benefits.” 2.3) Home OYce statistics show that sporting firearms—shotguns and rifles—seldom feature in firearms oVences. In 2008–09, shotguns were used in 8% of oVences whilst rifles and other firearms were used in 10%. (The latter category also includes starting pistols, CS guns and other unknown firearms.) 2.4) This is in stark contrast to the use of handguns which formed 52% of all oVences. 2.5) The following types of handguns are routinely used by criminals: — Imported Russian “Baikal” tear gas pistols converted to fire .38 or .32 live ammunition. (Large numbers of these have been recovered since 2003.) — Blank cartridge pistols converted to fire live ammunition. — Self-contained gas cartridge pistols converted to fire live ammunition. (These air weapons—known by the generic name of Brococks—were banned by the Anti Social Behaviour Act 2003. However as a result of the failure of the Home OYce to publicise this prohibition large numbers of these guns—estimated at 68,000—are still in circulation, providing a ready source of easily modified firearms for criminals. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 63
2.6) The lack of any relationship between legally held guns and armed crime is self-evident from Home OYce statistics. Gun crime rose steadily from 1999, to peak in 2003–04. During the same period the number of firearm and shotgun certificates on issue fell by 8% and 9% respectively. 2.8) BASC asserts that the Firearms (Amendment) Acts 1997 have had no impact on armed crime and have simply destroyed the long-established and well-regulated sport of pistol shooting for no commensurate gain.
3) Whether or not the Current Laws Governing Firearms Licensing are Fit for Purpose 3.0) The Firearms Acts have evolved in a haphazard manner by the addition of numerous Amendment Acts and Statutory Instruments. The 1968 Act has been modified over 35 times making it diYcult for practitioners to use and incomprehensible to lay people. A Consolidating Act is required as a matter of urgency. 3.1) ACPO has already identified minor improvements that would simplify the law and improve its administration. These could be easily accomplished by a Regulatory Reform Order and BASC supports this initiative. 3.2) Much of the haphazard nature of the Firearms Acts has been caused by amendments which were hastily drafted, “incident led” and ill-considered. This has resulted in law which has been both ineVective and misdirected. Whilst it would be entirely appropriate to consider potential legislative changes that may be identified by the impending reports into the Cumbrian shootings, BASC strongly suggests that any root- and-branch review of firearms legislation should be deferred until the emotion emanating from this tragedy has dissipated. Hard cases make bad laws. 3.3) Although the Firearms Acts are penal statutes, they are also enabling legislation which licenses those people who wish to use firearms for legitimate purposes. In the interests of good jurisprudence, BASC asserts that it is inappropriate to combine both functions in a single Act. If new legislation is considered, BASC recommends that it should be divided. Those matters which concern the prevention of crime and the preservation of public safety should be part of a Criminal Justice Act. Firearms licensing provisions should be dealt with by an administrative act. 3.4) The Firearms Act 1968 is not Human Rights compliant as there is no right of appeal to law against the imposition of a condition on a Firearm Certificate by the police and the decision of the Home Secretary. Appellants in Crown Court appeals against police licensing decisions are disadvantaged as there is no “equality of arms” in matters of procedure, evidence and costs. BASC recommends that licensing appeals should be dealt with in the first instance by a tribunal. 3.5) Although the Firearms Acts are complicated, they have the virtue of applying to Great Britain as a whole. BASC does not support the Calman Commission’s proposal to devolve airgun legislation to Scotland. This should remain with Westminster to ensure consistency. 3.6) BASC asserts that the current licensing system for shotguns is the greatest strength of the Firearms Acts because it licenses a person to own a class of firearm. Firearms licensing should always concentrate on the suitability of the applicant rather than being a mechanistic process for recording the details of individual firearms, their mechanisms and uses. 3.7) Shotguns are routinely used for pest control, wildfowling, game shooting and clay target shooting. Currently, there are 1,366,800 shotguns held on 574,946 shotgun certificates in Great Britain, an average of 2.4 shotguns per certificate holder. DiVerent types and sizes of shotgun are used for diVerent purposes and quarry species. Over 200 million shotgun cartridges are used each year. 3.8) The current licensing system for shotguns is both proportionate and eVective because it concentrates on the suitability of the applicant. The police can refuse an application if they think the applicant does not have a good reason for possessing a shotgun or is likely to be a danger to the public safety or to the peace. The certificate holder must secure his shotguns and advise the police of any acquisitions or disposals. These are eVective checks and balances. 3.9) BASC strongly recommends that the current regime for shotguns should be applied to sporting rifles and muzzle-loading firearms. This would streamline the licensing process without impairing upon public safety.
4) Proposals to Improve Information-sharing Between Medics and the Police in Respect of Gun Licensing 4.0) BASC has already explored the proposal to put a marker or tag on firearms owners’ medical records with colleagues from ACPO and the British Medical Association (BMA). This is highly controversial and raises issues of patient confidentiality and security of information. BASC cannot support this proposal. We believe it to be disproportionate; and it has raised concerns which have not been satisfactorily addressed by those who proposed it. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 64 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
4.1) In terms of proportionality, BASC questions whether it is reasonable for those who own firearms to have their medical records treated in this manner. Others within society who have access to items and materials that could be dangerous if misused—eg cars, petrol, poisons, knives, archery equipment etc—do not have their medical records tagged. 4.2) BASC is in touch with the Information Commissioner’s OYce over the issues of proportionality and data confidentiality and expects to explore them further. Early contact suggests that this proposal may be in conflict with one or more of the principles within the Data Protection Act 1981. 4.3) One concern with this proposal is the security of information and who has access to it. Any access to information which gives the location of where guns are stored creates a potential security risk. One of the reasons why the theft of firearms from private houses is so low is that certificate holders are circumspect about revealing that they possess guns. 4.4) BASC notes that wider public concern has already been expressed in the media about the security of the proposed NHS database which will hold Summary Care Records. It has been estimated that up to 40,000 people may have access to this information. 4.5) A further concern is that tagged records would act as a strong disincentive which could discourage certificate holders with minor mental health problems seeking help because of a fear that they will lose their certificates. 4.6) In BASC’s experience, there is a general lack of basic knowledge of sporting firearms and their legitimate uses within the medical profession. BASC is also aware of a significant proportion of GPs who are opposed to the private ownership of firearms on moral grounds; and who mistakenly believe that this is a public health issue. 4.7) BASC is aware of routine calls for applicants for firearm and shotgun certificates to undergo some form of psychometric testing as part of a wider assessment of their suitability to possess firearms. There is no scientific evidence to show that psychometric testing is capable of detecting someone who is likely to become dangerous with a firearm. Equally the BMA concedes that “Doctors must make it clear that they are in no position to judge the ‘future dangerousness’ of any applicant”. 4.8) BASC believes that the current requirement for certificate holders to allow the police to ask their GPs for factual information about medical conditions provides a proportionate safeguard for public safety. Such permission is given without time limit and has to be reiterated on renewal of the certificate.
5) The Dangers Presented by, and Legislation Regulating Airguns 5.0) It is a common misconception that although most airguns are not licensed, they are not subject to any controls. Any airgun which is capable of inflicting a lethal injury is legally classified as a firearm. For oVences relating to the prevention of crime and the preservation of public safety, airguns are treated in the same way as any other firearm. Those who misuse airguns are subject to over 30 criminal charges with penalties including fines and imprisonment. 5.1) Since the HAC last considered this issue in 1999–2000, there have been four new pieces of legislation to regulate the use and possession of airguns. 5.2) It is estimated that there are seven million airguns in the UK, owned by five million people. Airguns are a very important part of the gun trade’s business and Britain leads the world in the innovation and development of them. 5.3) Since 1969, air rifles held without a licence have been limited in power to a kinetic energy of 12 foot- pounds (ft/lbs). By comparison a .22 rimfire rifle, used for training cadets, target shooting and small pest control has a kinetic energy of around 135 ft/lbs and a standard shotgun can easily reach 1,350 ft/lbs. Air pistols are limited to 6 ft/lbs. Above these power levels, air rifles can only be possessed on the authority of a firearm certificate and such air pistols are prohibited weapons. 5.4) Air rifles and pistols are used in target shooting up to Olympic level. Low powered air rifles (' 12 ft/lbs) fire a light projectile over short distances and are also used to control pests up to the size of a rabbit at ranges up to 25 yards. They are eVective around buildings where it would be dangerous to use conventional firearms. 5.5) Home OYce statistics show that in 2008–09, the level of airgun oVences declined by 19% which in turn was a fall of 15% over the previous year. The overall decline in airgun oVences since the peak year of 2003–04 is 56%. 5.6) Although violent crime has increased, violence against the person with airguns has fallen over the last 38 years. The increase in oVences of criminal damage with airguns is attributable to economic factors as the recording level of £20 has been halved in value by inflation. 5.7) The use of airguns by young people is heavily regulated, viz: — ItisanoVence for anyone to fire an air pellet beyond the premises where they have permission to shoot. — Young people under 14 may not use an airgun unless they are supervised by someone over 21. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 65
— Young people between 14–17 years of age may not buy or hire an airgun or ammunition or receive one as a gift. A person within this age group may not carry an airgun in a public place at any time unless supervised by a person of or over 21 years and then only with a good reason for doing so. — Nobody under 18 years may buy an airgun or its ammunition. 5.8) Retrospective licensing of air weapons would not improve public safety because it could not be enforced. There are no records of airgun owners and recent experience suggests that the measure would be met with massive non compliance. 5.9) Licensing airguns would impose an intolerable administrative burden on the police which would have an adverse impact on public safety by diverting scarce resources away from front-line policing and firearms licensing. The firearms licensing system is already stretched to its limits in many police forces. 5.10) In 1999 an Adjournment Debate was held in Parliament on air weapons. The then Home OYce Minister, Paul Boateng MP concluded that the solution to airgun misuse was education of young people and enforcement of existing law. BASC supports this sensible stance. 25 August 2010
Supplementary memoranda submitted by the British Association of Shooting and Conservation Introduction BASC submitted its evidence-in-chief to the Committee in August and representative gave oral evidence in September, October and met Committee members at Bisley in November. We followed the evidence of other witnesses with keen interest and make this additional submission as a result of issues and themes arising from that evidence. As with our evidence-in-chief, this additional submission is NOT CONFIDENTIAL and BASC welcomes its wider dissemination as part of the debate.
1) Ammunition 1.1) The proposal by Prof Peter Squires that shooters should not be allowed to store ammunition with their guns is wholly impractical. It fails to recognise the immediacy of use required by pest controllers and others. Equally, it could not accommodate those who hunt at the very beginning or the end of the day, eg wildfowlers and deer stalkers. 1.2) Many people manufacture their own ammunition. This is done for variety of reasons eg recycling of components, cost saving, enhanced accuracy and when ammunition is no longer commercially manufactured. The latter case is especially relevant to those who shoot heritage firearms of the older type. It would not be possible to supply such specialised ammunition from a centralised source. 1.3) Prof Squires’ proposal would be easily circumvented by someone bent on mischief. Millions of rounds of ammunition of all types are used every year in the UK and it would be impossible to account for a number of cartridges issued and the return of the unused residue plus the balance of empty cases. Viable ammunition can be easily improvised for most firearms with simple hand tools and without any great skill level on the part of the maker. The acquisition of most primers and some propellant powders is already controlled. 1.4) The concentration of large amounts of ammunition in centralised depots creates the obvious risk of encouraging theft. 1.5) Chapter 13 of the Home OYce Guidance includes suggested levels of ammunition that might be authorised for a variety of activities eg hunting and target shooting. These levels were arrived at after negotiation between interested parties and are generally reasonable. 1.6) The availability of ammunition was not a factor in the Cumbria shootings. Derek Bird used very small quantities—54 rounds (31 12 bore shotgun and 23 .22RF rifle cartridges)—of ammunition to murder his victims. 1.7) BASC understands Jamie Reed’s concern over ammunition levels when he said “As a parent, it’s harder to buy more than two bottles of Calpol from a supermarket than it is for a rifle owner to buy 1,500 rounds of ammunition.” However, we suggest that this analogy is not well made. Rifle ammunition is controlled by licensing and unlawful possession is an oVence. The possession of mild analgesics is generally unregulated other than in the amount that may be purchased from any retail outlet. The controls on the two commodities are wholly unrelated. In any case, the Home OYce advises that an authority for 1,500 rounds is exceptional; and is only appropriate for pest controllers who cover large areas of land. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 66 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
2) Air Weapons 2.1) Dr Julian Huppert enquired about the power levels of commonly used air weapons. 2.2) The Firearms (Dangerous Air Weapons) Rules 1969 set kinetic energy (KE) levels for air weapons that may be owned without the need for a certificate. Air pistols must not exceed 6 ft lb; other air weapons must not exceed 12 ft lb. 2.3) These levels are largely historical but they are suYcient for target shooting and humane for pest control or hunting small game. Small numbers of air rifles which exceed the 12 ft lb limit are owned on the authority of Firearm Certificates. These tend to be used for pest control in circumstances when it would be inadvisable or unsafe to use a conventional cartridge firearm. 2.4) The low KE limits imposed by the 1969 Rules can be put into perspective by comparison with a variety of cartridge firearms in the table below. .22 CB Long 32 ft lb Pest control at short ranges .22 rim fire rifle 117–191 ft lb Pests and small game .17 rim fire rifle 245 ft lb Foxes, other pests and small game .223 Rifle 965–1,460 ft lb Foxes and smaller deer species. .243 rifle 1,599–2,133 ft lb Legal minimum for Red, Sika & Roe deer. .308 rifle 2,502–2,743 ft lb Larger deer and wild boar 12 bore shotgun approx 1,175 ft lb 2.5) BASC notes that when air weapons are tested by forensic providers, there is no standard testing protocol within the UK. The test protocol used by the Forensic Science Service is scientifically rigorous and BASC recommends that it should be adopted as a UK standard.
3) International Comparisons 3.1) As a general principle, BASC asserts that international comparisons of firearms control regimes add little to the debate because they do not reflect the cultural and legislative diVerences that exist between countries. In many instances, “like is not compared with like”. It is often easy to assume that a measure which is eVective in country A will have the same eVect in country B. This is not the case and any such assumption will be flawed to varying degrees.
3.2) The Gun Control Network’s allusion to the Canadian experience is a case in point. Our colleagues in the British Shooting Sports Council have produced a detailed rebuttal of many of the GCN’s points and BASC endorses this.
4) Young People 4.1) Much of the Committee’s focus has been on the use of and access to firearms by young people.
4.2) The law on this issue is unnecessarily complicated and often inconsistent. Simplification and rationalisation is long overdue. However, that process should not be used to place further restrictions on the use of firearms by young people because no evidence has been adduced by any witness to this inquiry that this has produced major concerns for public safety.
4.3) In his oral evidence to the committee on 16 November, ACC Whiting suggested that 10 years might be an appropriate minimum age for the grant of a Shotgun Certificate. No evidence has been oVered to sustain this position which appears to be based on the age of criminal responsibility in UK law. It is hard to see how criminal responsibility can be an issue when a child of that age must always be supervised by an adult whilst using a firearm. The burden of responsibility devolves to the adult as the responsible person in such a situation.
4.4) The reason why relatively young children need to apply for certificates is that the exemption for non- certificate holders at Section 11(5) is unclear and is predicated upon the term “occupier” which has no legal definition in the context of the Firearms Acts. If this was clarified then the need for children to apply for certificates would be reduced.
4.5) BASC recommends that there should be a general exemption which allows any adult certificate holder to lend any firearm to a non-certificate holder for use in his presence on land where they have permission to shoot. If this measure was put in place then it might be appropriate to have a minimum age for the application for certificates. This should be the same for both Firearm and Shotgun Certificates and in such circumstances BASC would accept that it should be 10 years of age. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 67
4.6) BASC has learned that the ACPO Firearms Licensing Working Group has made a supplementary submission that no young person under the age of 10 should be allowed to use a firearm or shotgun under any circumstances. BASC does not support this and strongly asserts that it is neither proportionate nor evidence based. 4.7) A similar measure—only with age limits of at least 12 and possibly 14 years—was recommended by the Committee in its earlier report issued on 6th April 2000. It was strongly rejected by the government in its response of October 2000. The reasoning behind this rejection is sound and is reproduced in its entirety below. “The Government does not accept this recommendation. The Government’s main interest is to protect public safety and we do not believe that a ban on supervised shooting would improve this. We are not aware of any evidence that supervised shooting activities poses a particular danger to public safety, or that young people taking part in such activities are more prone to misuse firearms than those taking up shooting sports as adults. We are not opposed in principle to young people taking part in organised shooing activities, for example through the Cadet movement. We would wish to encourage the responsible attitude of responsible parents and shooting organisations in teaching young people a safe and responsible attitude to firearm handling. As with many other issues, we believe that this is one on which parents should decide the age at which their children should take up shooting sports. A ban of this kind would be diYcult to enforce on private premises and thus may bring the law into disrepute.”
5) Other Matters 5.1) BASC does not support the calls to reduce the life of Firearm and Shotgun certificates from five years to a lower level. There is no evidence to sustain this. In terms of boosting police eYciency, it would be preferable to increase the life of a certificate but subject to the holder receiving routine, mandatory checks throughout its life.
5.2) ACPO has made representation about increasing fees, on a full cost recovery basis. This is unjustified as the standard of firearm licensing varies from force to force. Inconsistency of practice is still a major issue and amazingly, no national standards of key performance areas and core skills exist for firearms licensing personnel. Equally no customer service standards exist Any increase in fees must be delayed until these issues are addressed. Equally, as firearms licensing is undertaken for the preservation of public safety, then it is only proper that a proportion of the costs should be borne by the public purse.
5.3) BASC does not agree with the proposition that the ownership of firearms for legitimate purposes by suitable persons is a privilege. We assert that it is a right, albeit one which is conditional upon certain legally defined criteria being satisfied. The language at Section 27(1) of the 1968 Act sustains this; “A firearm certificate shall be granted where the chief oYcer of police is satisfied…” and Section 28(1), “…a shot gun certificate shall be granted…” The term “shall” is used rather than “may”, as is the case in Northern Ireland where the Chief OYcer has absolute discretion. The use of the mandatory word “shall” is no historical accident and comes from recommendations of the Blackwell Committee of 1919.
5.4) BASC also accepts that rights bring responsibilities with them. We assert that the UK’s shooting community discharges its responsibilities to a high level and is one of the most law-abiding groups within society.
5.5) BASC applauds the measured remarks made by the Home OYce Minister in his evidence when he emphasised that the government’s response to the Cumbria shootings would be both proportionate and evidence based. BASC commends this sensible approach and hopes that it will underpin the Committee’s deliberations as it considers the submissions made to it during the course of this inquiry. 22 November 2010
Memorandum submitted by the British Association of Shooting and Conservation The British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC) welcomes the invitation to comment on criminal use of firearms. This paper deals with aspects of the Association of Chief Police OYcers (ACPO) submission to the committee as well as wider criminal firearms matters. We are supportive of some recommendations made by ACPO and cautious of those we believe to be impracticable or unworkable. We would not support a greater bureaucratic burden on the police, other law enforcement agencies or the legitimate shooting community without reassurance of necessity to protect public safety in a proportionate and eVective manner.
Irrespective of enthusiasm for legislation change, any changes in legislation or practice should be reasonable, demonstrably beneficial to the public safety and proportionate to the risks involved. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 68 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
1. Deactivated Firearms The consultation on deactivated firearms of 2009 has not moved forward. No summary of responses has been issued nor a timetable for action. BASC made a submission to the Home OYce which is available here: http://www.basc.org.uk/en/departments/firearms/controls-on-deactivated-firearms-a-consultation.cfm which we commend to the committee as it covers many aspects discussed in the Home OYce consultation paper and ACPO Criminal Use of Firearms group’s submission. In addition, UK law enforcement bodies have asserted publicly over recent years that deactivated firearms pose a significant threat. This is also mentioned in the UK Threat Assessment. There has been a lack of significant evidence provided with these statements to date within national statistics of a then current problem; this is where our concern lies. That is not to say that a problem may not develop, or that no deactivated firearm will ever be misused in ways ACPO suggest, but we would hope that any action taken by government is fair, evidenced and proportionate having considered up to date statistics. Whilst we understand that more modern data may be linked to operational activity and diYcult to release without causing further burden for the teams involved in dealing with firearms crime, we need to see the current extent of any problem. Statistics that are available from older recording systems are very out of date. We hope that at some point basic statistics will be able to be released to the debate. The statistics in the 2009 Home OYce consultation on deactivated firearms show an extremely low number of incidents recorded. The paper acknowledges this and qualifies that the data may be unreliable and provides an incomplete picture. We are concerned that the UK Threat Assessment has, along with ACPO’s paper to the Home Secretary on Guns and Gangs (September 2007) brought deactivated firearms to the forefront precipitately.This is discussed more in our submission to the Home OYce 2009 consultation. Our concern is that these papers highlighted a “possible”’ threat of exploitation by criminals rather than “current” significant exploitation. Whilst the picture of firearms misuse will vary year on year, there is no new data available beyond the police surrounding misuse of deactivated firearms. We realise that we must of course be aware of potential threats and be ready to act when a significant criminal trends are identified, such as prohibiting items like the self contained gas cartridge air guns (Brococks) in 2003 and more recently the Olympic.38 blank firing revolver following identification of prolific misuse; however it is important for the National Ballistics Intelligence Service (NABIS) to be allowed time to produce statistics for the Home OYce to consider. The NABIS database is the best tool available today to identify and monitor such trends accurately and is a significant improvement on the previous National Firearms Forensic Intelligence Database (NFFID). We are confident that when new statistics become available they will be detailed so we can understand how the problem has arisen. That said, it is paramount that recovered guns are classified carefully for ease of trend analysis in preparation for any program of work to counter a specific problem. In the case of deactivated firearms there are many variables that could contribute to inaccurate statistics and have done so under the old recording system. Specifically, it is important to understand on what base item a reactivation had been developed in order to evidence lead a program of work against a specific threat. For example; the old NFFID system largely recorded items under titles based on the classification of the item as it was passed to the forensic examiner. The statistics title “converted firearms” for instance, showed a figure for all converted guns. The figures included items converted to fire live ammunition from many diVerent base items such as gas cartridge firing pistols (which are already classified under UK law as a prohibited weapon prior to conversion). Most foreign forward venting blank firers are deemed readily convertible and prohibited under the 1982 Firearms Act. These were also put into the same database entry post conversion. We feel that it is important to establish within the data each type of reactivation or conversion to show where the items are coming from and whether there is a problem with UK deactivations, or imported items and whether the conversions are being done within the UK or abroad. If either of our deactivation standards are being exploited significantly then we need to evidence this accurately before action is taken. NB: foreign deactivation standards diVer from the UK’s, and some replica firearms are classified as deactivated simply because they do not work and have never been manufactured as a firearm. In the UK they are simply referred to as imitations. These replicas may be a problem in that they may provide a better base for criminals to engineer a firearm from, whereas the UK standards remove material from real firearms to prevent their re-activation. The Home OYce consultation of 2009 did not consider foreign imports or EU deactivations and we await evidence to show whether any of these imports are contributing to misuse in the UK, and for which border security may need tightening.
Summary We wish to wait until NABIS provide the relevant data for the Home OYce to consider and publish before legislative changes are further considered.
Section 21—prohibited persons and deactivated firearms We cautiously supports ACPO’s suggestion that persons prohibited from possessing firearms under Section 21 of the Firearms Act 1968 should also be prohibited from possessing deactivated firearms. In practicable terms however it is problematic. Section 21 is designed to stop real firearms getting into the hands of criminals, even on supervised sporting loan within the exemptions provided by the Firearms Act. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 69
In real terms Section 21 generally only works where a person applies for a certificate. The licensing department will have access to criminal records and refuse a certificate when a person is shown to be prohibited. Criminals like Raoul Moat intent on committing crime ignore the terms of Section 21 when leaving prison and bypass the licensing system altogether to obtain illegal firearms. The possession of some firearms (such as pistols) attract much higher penalties for possession and use than the breach of Section 21. In such circumstances Section 21 would only become a secondary oVence and the same would follow if deactivated firearms were included in Section 21. As for intimidation with deactivated firearms, we understand that there is a requirement to prevent this; however we feel that there is insuYcient data available at present to gauge adequately the issues raised as it is very diYcult to assess from witness reports whether a gun thrust at somebody is in fact real or deactivated etc. Guns recovered from incidents of intimidation will contribute to reliable data which NABIS will collate and undoubtedly provide to the debate via the Home OYce. Whilst we feel that legislative eVort may be better concentrated on other projects, we remain supportive of this proposal in principle. In connection with Section 21, there is an existing oVence in Section 21(5) of the 1968 Act of transferring a firearm to a prohibited person. Whilst prohibited persons cannot acquire licensed firearms, as that relies on the production of a valid certificate which prohibited persons will not be able to obtain; there is no system for traders, shooting schools or members of the public to ascertain whether a person is prohibited unless the prohibited person voluntarily declares that information. If Section 21 is amended to include deactivated firearms, it could result in the prosecution of people who have done their utmost to adhere to the law. It is unsatisfactory that current legislation doesn’t contain a defence for those who pass possession of firearms in circumstances where the borrower does not need a certificate. We would suggest the following defence could be added to protect individuals who might innocently supply deactivated firearms to prohibited persons intent on obtaining them through deception. We would also wish to see the defence applied beyond deactivated firearms to cover all firearms mentioned in Section 21 of the 1968 Act. In proceedings for an oVence it is a defence to show that the person charged with the oVence— (a) believed the other person to be anything other than a prohibited person; and (b) had reasonable ground for that belief. For the purposes of this section a person shall be taken to have shown the matters specified in subsection above if— (a) suYcient evidence of those matters is adduced to raise an issue with respect to them; and (b) the contrary is not proved beyond a reasonable doubt. [This example defence was adapted from Section 40 of the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006]
Updating pre 95 specification deactivated firearms to post 95 specifications NB: The specifications are explained in detail within this document: http://www.basc.org.uk/en/utilities/document-summary.cfm/docid/2EDD9D88-B3C4-40BC- ADCF08688FAD95C4 Following on from above, we feel there is insuYcient justification at this time for legislative change of this type. ACPO have stressed that they do not want to prohibit deactivated firearms or hamper collectors, we welcome this approach, but as the 1995 specifications were not implemented retrospectively,a scope has been identified to perhaps legislatively require the update of certain pre 1995 deactivated firearm types to that of the 1995 specification. Pre 1995 specification deactivated firearms hold particular value due to the fact enthusiasts wish to possess the most realistic of deactivated firearms for technical historical and aesthetic reasons, accordingly most transfers take place amongst collectors as private sales rather than on open market. To update existing items to post 1995 standards would be costly to individuals and diYcult to enforce. Likewise with any licensing or registration scheme. We are aware that in past years some dealers have flouted the legislation, but these have been rare and isolated and with an intent to circumnavigate deactivation standards. Poor police oversight into dealer trading and record keeping may also have been at fault in those some of those cases.
Licensing or registering deactivated firearms Successive governments have rejected airgun licensing for very good reasons; it would be a very diYcult and expensive process for little benefit. The same can be said for deactivated weapons. The licensing or registering of deactivated firearms would be expensive for government and contribute little to public safety. Such a scheme would also impose an extra burden on police firearms licensing departments which are already stretched. With the further financial cuts proposed, we expect the system to suVer in eYciency and service to the customer in coming months. To add another tier of licensing to an already heavy burden is unthinkable at this time. If a real problem develops with the criminal use of deactivated firearms, then such a scheme may become an option; currently we believe it is simply not viable or proportionate. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 70 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
Summary Until newly gathered statistics are provided to the Home OYce by NABIS and ACPO CUF we suggest that the current Home OYce policy be upheld.
2. Section 39 Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 and Blank Firing Replicas Type Approval We support type approval of blank firing imitations; a system that used to be in place and conducted by the Forensic Science Service called the “Model Firearms Examination” (MFE) test. Reinstating a type approval test would provide importers and traders with peace of mind. If problems occur with certain items, they could be refused approval until the problem is designed out and the item passes a new test.
Suspicious Activity Reports (SAR’s) & dealer only transactions As for dealer networks and sellers informing police of suspicious activity, we would like to think that most sellers today would inform the police if somebody wanted to purchase an unusual quantity of these items at any one time, however we understand why ACPO wish a formalised system to be introduced and BASC remains on hand to spread awareness and the benefits of being vigilant and reporting any suspicious activity through this system. It is doubtful that to place a legal obligation upon dealers to achieve better engagement is necessary. We would oppose a move to regulate the sale of blank firing imitations by RFD’s only with a face to face sale aspect. This has already been done for air weapons when sold by way of trade or business by the Violent Crime Reduction Act (VCR) 2006. This was enacted because there was a perceived problem with retailers selling cheaply available air rifles and pistols illegally to persons below the required age, which in turn contributed to anti-social behaviour and crime. Whether or not such a change in legislation for blank firing imitations would be successful remains to be seen as blank firing imitations are not on sale t the same extent as air weapons. We also wish to analyse the impact of the change to air weapon sales as the change to the VCR Act has not been in force for very long. We maintain that it also unlikely that even post 95 deactivated firearms are aVordable in the same manner as air guns by those intent on committing anti-social behaviour. There are no suggestions that current regulations are being breached by sellers of blank firing imitation firearms in the way airguns were sold prior to the 2006 Act. Restriction of sales to dealers only would aVect many legitimate traders who are outside the registered firearms dealer system. These traders would have to register at a cost and most likely security arrangements would be enforced upon them as a condition of registration as per air weapon dealers. Similarly to air guns, which do not require a certificate for possession, blank firing imitation firearms remain untraceable once they leave a shop. We feel that to place blank firing imitation firearms into the dealer system would not be proportionate.
3. 1982 Firearms Act Section 1(6)(b)—Updating Definitions Referring to the conversion of firearms, this Act states in Section 1(6)(b)— “the work involved in converting it does not require equipment or tools other than such as are in common use by persons carrying out works of construction and maintenance in their own homes.” ACPO has recommended that the section be amended to take account of advances in technology and availability of tooling on the current market. In 1982, the level of tooling available was limited and costly. Today tooling has advanced in quality, decreased in cost and become easily accessible through high street hardware stores. ACPO suggests that the Act be amended to include specific definitions to define tooling types that should be viewed as readily available and those which are not. We feel that to distinguish between heavy and specialist machinery only available through specialist suppliers and light tooling available through high street outlets would be beneficial. However any amendment needs to be tempered with common sense as any tooling is available for a price and criminals intent on setting up illegal gun factories are likely to employ any means possible to convert imitation firearms as they stand to make a lot of money from the sale of conversions. Any change should reflect the intention of the Act ie to prevent easy conversion in the home and with aid of tools from the local hardware store; the Act was not designed to deal with professional engineers equipped with a production line to convert or make firearms from scratch. BASC supports this amendment in principle and looks forward to being further consulted. A change to the 1982 Act will support the application of the Violent Crime Reduction Act (VCRA) Section 39 regulations which, when passed by Parliament, will be known as “The Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 (Realistic Imitation Firearms) (Specifications) Regulations”. These are currently being drafted and include specifications to which blank firing imitations should conform. These regulations coupled with a change to the 1982 Act will compliment each other, and we feel that reliance cannot be placed on either piece of legislation alone to reduce the conversion of imitation firearms. As mentioned in above, there are also suggestions to re-instate a body to examine blank firing imitation firearms prior to sale on the UK market; we wholly support such a move as it will ensure the legitimate trade has the security it requires since the abolishment of the Model Firearms Examination. Such a body should Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 71
make a list of those items which have passed or failed the examination available to interested parties. The sale or import can then be prevented of any item found to be readily convertible or not conforming to regulations from the time of that examination. The gun trade (The Gun Trade Association and BASC) are actively involved in drafting the regulations. If such an amendment is made to the 1982 Act, the Act will be fit for modern purposes and provide clearer guidelines on the examination of imitation firearms for the purposes of both the 1982 Act and the impending VCRA Section 39 regulations. That said, Section 39 regulations will only serve to protect public safety if legally imported items are rigorously examined by a specialist body on initial import; the authorities will still need to concentrate on smugglers and criminals intent on circumnavigating the system.
4. Theft of Legally Held Shotguns (Shotgun Problem Profile) ACPO and NABIS are looking at a perceived problem involving shotgun theft, including diversion into UK crime from UK or foreign sources (legal or illegal), criminal use, and inferred numbers of unlicensed guns in criminal circulation. They then wish to conclude what may, (if anything) be done to diminish their theft and diversion into crime from legitimate sources as well as remove them from criminal circulation. The programme of work looks at a specific period of time and seeks to examine targeted thefts wherein “mob handed” burglaries and armed raids have been made on certificate holders’ properties. The programme will also examine how information about storage locations may have come to the criminal’s knowledge and examine the criminal use of shotguns nationwide. In general, BASC supports the work in this area, we hope this work will identify where the problems, if any,lie. The statistics of inferred firearms given by ACPO may be correct in terms of numbers, but we wonder if they are correct in terms of how the guns came into criminal hands, this is something that we are sure NABIS will have identified in principle thought it is not always easy to show how a gun has come into that pool. We have not yet seen specific data to show whether the losses stem from trade losses/diversion, thefts, illegal imports, loss from national carriage/freight forwarding companies and potential misappropriation from police or military stores. We feel it would be best to gauge the problem from links to domestic losses/ thefts before deciding upon a course of action. If the report suggests that theft or lost shotguns make a significant contribution to armed crime (which is not our experience) then we feel that legislative change is not the answer, it should be through prevention and awareness that we protect ourselves. ACPO have already been in talks with BASC about security awareness campaigns and education should it be necessary. We are more than happy to help in this regard but we cannot envisage any legislative provision as an eVective preventative measure. Additional oVences or higher sentencing standards are available in the legislative tool box, but they do not stop the root cause of thefts or losses and will only add to burden legitimate owners. In most cases if someone has been negligent in losing a shotgun or firearm or eVectively made it easier for theft to take place, they are prosecuted for failing to comply with the statutory security conditions of their certificates and/or have their certificates revoked. We feel that the current statutory condition applied to all firearm and shotgun certificates is suYcient ie “stored securely so as to prevent, so far as is reasonably practicable, access . . . by an unauthorised person”. It is right that a Court be allowed to decide whether a person has been negligent with their obligations when an apparent breach is identified.
Retention of shotgun cartridges The suggestion of retaining reference cartridges becoming a condition of a certificate is something that has not been discussed with the shooting community. Whilst there may be merit in fired cartridges kept, then submitted in case of a theft or loss of a shotgun, this remains to be seen. We would welcome more engagement on this subject before committing to it. Any such proposal or scheme will need careful management amongst the shooting community. A voluntary pilot scheme is underway in the Greater Manchester area and has yet to produce any feedback. We will be looking to see whether this system had any benefit to helping police trace or recover firearms.
“Inferred” firearms—inaccuracy of statistics due to the 1968 Act We understand that “Inferred firearms” (Inferred weapons are created on the NABIS database to illustrate the presence of a firearm which has been identified from recovered ballistic material (projectiles and cartridge cases) but where the firearm is yet to be recovered.) was referred to by ACPO CUF within both its closed oral submission to the committee and the shotgun problem profile document. It must be realised that the sources of inferred firearms (so far as shotguns are concerned) in criminal activity cannot be attributed to thefts alone and therefore any data provided must be examined with this in mind. These figures, (albeit a best guess based on reported discharges of guns, street activity and forensic material recoveries from scenes of crime,) will undoubtedly include guns that were smuggled into the UK or shotguns not recorded on certificates prior to the 1988 Firearms (Amendment) Act which have found their way into criminal hands. Prior to 1988, shotguns were not itemised on a shotgun certificate. When the 1988 Act addressed this issue and required shotguns to be listed and accounted for, the police contacted certificate holders inviting them to apply for a new certificate and to declare the details of each shotgun they possessed. Some certificate Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 72 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
holders did not renew their certificates as they saw the burden of bureaucracy too great to carry on shooting and some police forces were at that time lax in following up the whereabouts of guns held when the certificate holder failed to renew his or her certificate. The majority of certificate holders kept or correctly disposed of their shotguns through legitimate routes; however some simply left their guns in their homes out of laziness to, in time, be found by criminals, new house owners or beneficiaries to the estate of deceased persons, the latter two being BASC’s experience. On average, BASC firearms department receives one contact a week about unlicensed gun finds with many contacts involving more than one gun. Whilst the majority of finds today are innocent and usually the result of house moves, clearances or dealing with deceased persons’ eVects, it is reasonable to suggest that some shotguns may also have been diverted to criminals prior to 1988, and (when they have been found,) post 1988. It may also be possible that some unscrupulous people saw opportunities prior to 1988 to specifically acquire shotguns for criminal purposes. Whilst each sale was recorded in a dealers register, police resources were not suYcient at that time to ascertain the ownership of every shotgun. Then, dealers were not required to keep records for any period of time and could have destroyed them annually. The National Firearms Licensing Management System (NFLMS) database now carries the details of every licensed firearm. Records are also retained of those disposed of or destroyed. It is important to realise that deliberate diversion from legitimate ownership today is extremely diYcult due to the requirement to notify the police of purchase, disposal or sale as mandated by the 1988 Act. Shotguns can be physically diverted, but due to the records on certificates, dealer’s registers and NFLMS, finding that a gun is no longer in possession of a certificate holder or a dealer is at some point inevitable during the licensing cycle. It is also inevitable that shotguns shown in any statistics about inferred shotgun use will include those that escaped the licensing system in 1988 either by deliberate means or through laziness or forgetfulness. Some unlicensed shotguns may also find their way into criminal hands due to irresponsible disposal, often in fear of possible police actions when a finder attempts to surrender the gun to them. Criminals are very unlikely to dispose of shotguns in this way, and as the police are under pressure to detect crime, it appears that persons surrendering found guns may be processed, due to the absolute nature of the oVence and targets set upon forces by the Home OYce to detect crime. We have experience of people wanting to surrender found guns and whilst the majority of firearms licensing departments remain helpful, some operational police oYcers still, on far too many occasions, wish to prosecute even though the person has come into possession of the gun quite innocently through circumstances beyond their control. These incidents attract the attention of the news media, generating distrust of the police amongst those who find guns innocently. We are often advised by the police that to allow the courts to decide on this issue is the correct action in these cases. We view this as alienating the public from the police and is counterproductive. Defendants are rarely acquitted due to the absolute nature of the possession of a firearm without a certificate. Whilst it is an absolute oVence to possess a firearm without a certificate and higher penalties exist for prohibited weapons, we believe there should be better guidance to allow illegally possessed firearms to be brought into the “legal” pool or disposed of correctly. This is important where members of the public wish to dispose of a gun that they find innocently. The police rightly suggest that any surrendered firearm should be examined carefully to eliminate it from enquiries and open case files; however the current system isn’t sympathetic towards members of the public who surrender guns that have come into their possession innocently through no fault of their own. We believe that taking a gun out of criminal use (or potential exposure to being taken up by criminals) is the best option, even at the risk of not detecting a criminal. That is to say that prevention is superior to detection. It is our belief that it’s highly unlikely that criminals will use the police as a disposal method for unwanted firearms. We feel that pressure on the wider police service to detect armed crime may—in these cases at least, be counter-productive.
Summary Whilst absolute oVences are a good deterrent they only work in circumstances where the oVence is completed by a consciously guilty action, meaning that the defendant has no doubt as to the guilt of his actions. When firearms are found in attics (for example) because of historical reasons or dumped on people’s property, absolute oVences simply inconvenience the law abiding public who have been placed in that situation by others.
5. New Offence of Possession with Intent to Supply Suggestions to create new oVences and heavier sentences to deter or to deal with smugglers and traYckers illegally importing firearms with intent to supply to criminal networks are worthy. We are supportive of such measures; however we believe the UK Borders Agency will need extra resources to counter such threats.
6. Importation of Firearms into UK Without a Licence We assume that ACPO means “without a firearm or shotgun certificate,” where they say “licence” as firearms are also subject to import and export licensing. Whilst there is no suggestion that ACPO wish to hamper legal importation, there is a need to maintain the current concession given by the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) Import Licensing Branch. UK residents may bring firearms from Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 73
abroad for personal use. The guns are declared at HM Customs, who check the firearms and then enter them onto the firearm or shotgun certificate in the same way as any UK trade sale. HM Customs then inform the issuing authority of the transfer/importation, as does the certificate holder. Technically until the point that HM Customs enter the firearm onto a certificate, the gun could be construed as being in contravention of firearm or import legislation. We would not wish to lose this concession should a new oVence be introduced. The wording for any new oVence will need careful drafting with the relevant government department. We wholly support the prosecution of those who knowingly attempt to illegally import firearms.
7. Consolidation of the Firearms Acts and Secondary Legislation BASC strongly supports this suggestion. A consolidation is required to make it easier for practitioners and law enforcement bodies to understand and enforce the legislation. BASC has found that the Courts and CPS are often ineYcient in this area due to the disjointed nature of the legislation. The amount of legislation causes frustration, loss of objectivity and eVectiveness. We also believe that solicitors and barristers are often not representing their clients well due to the complexity of the current legislation.
8. Other Matters Relevant to the Enquiry Allied to the matter of unlicensed shotguns, the five year mandatory sentence for possession of certain prohibited firearms is causing diYculty. We believe that there are probably more guns held illegally in complete innocence than are held with real criminal intent. When (for example) a .455 Webley Pistol which may have belonged to a long-deceased member of the armed forces turns up in his or her eVects, the finder is under threat of that mandatory sentence, as the simple unauthorised possession of such a gun is an absolute oVence. BASC has seen examples of people who have found such guns, and who have been in great fear of handing them to the police for fear of arrest and imprisonment. In these cases BASC has acted as a “go-between” for them with firearms licensing departments to facilitate the surrender of the gun. There is a remedy available in law to “legitimise” firearms found innocently by non-certificate holders. Section 7 of the 1968 Firearms Act allows the police to issue a permit for section 1 & 2 firearms (but not Section 5 prohibited weapons—this needs to be addressed) found in these circumstances. It is BASC’s experience that many police forces are reluctant to issue such certificates, preferring to destroy the firearms instead. Again, this promotes a degree of mistrust, as those firearms often have a value—either sentimental or financial. Firearms may also be deactivated in order to be held without the need for a certificate. Matt Perring Firearms and Explosives OYcer, BASC 1 December 2010
Annex A HOME OFFICE STATISTICS RELATING TO SHOTGUNS USED IN CRIME The oYcial statistics below show a slight increase in discharges of normal (un-shortened) shotguns reported. Sawn oV discharges and use have not increased significantly though their use in crime has declined over recent years.
Fired Used Fired Used 2008–09 Normal 188 381 Sawn-oV 63 238 2007–08 Normal 180 365 Sawn-oV 46 237 2006–07 Normal 174 361 Sawn-oV 61 252 2005–06 Normal 192 375 Sawn-oV 69 267 2004–05 Normal 136 305 Sawn-oV 65 293 2003–04 Normal 196 424 Sawn-oV 52 294 2002–03 Normal 161 361 Sawn-oV 46 310 NB: Previous figures do not diVerentiate between sawn-oV and normal (un-shortened) shotguns. Whilst sawn oV shotguns are prohibited weapons, the statistics above do not show whether any of the un- shortened shotguns were prohibited weapons per se prior to any adaptation ie sawing of barrels, that is to say that they were already prohibited such as smooth bore revolving guns prohibited by Section 5(a)(ad) of the 1968 Act or a short self loading or pump action shotgun subject to Section 5 (1) (b) of the 1968 Act. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 74 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
These prohibited firearms were prohibited in1988 and whilst they are prohibited in unaltered format by their manufactured size and action type, they may still be shortened and listed in the sawn oV section of the statistics. There are too many variable for these statistics to reflect the possible origin of the guns.
Shotguns “found” after 1988 On average, BASC firearms department receive at least one call every week regarding guns which have been “found”, most of which quite innocently in property or in deceased person eVects- and each of these calls may involve more than 1 gun, the vast majority being shotguns. From information given to each BASC firearms oYcer when receiving these calls, most of these guns are either antiques which may be held under Section 58(2) of the 1968 Act as curiosities or ornaments which do not require a certificate for possession; or are guns not recorded on the licensing system in 1988 when certificate holders didn’t declare them or did not renew their certificates.
Memorandum submitted by Professor Peter Squires Brief Summary of Key Themes and Issues Many people involved in firearms business argue that nothing should be done, nothing further can be done. This is an unacceptably complacent knee-jerk response. Public Perceptions about crime risks are such that many people already see weapons as a self-defence option. This will have dangerous self-fulfilling consequences. Air weapons do raise a range of significant criminal risks and public order and anti-social consequences— the case for bringing air rifles and pistols into full firearm licensing does need further consideration. They are potentially lethal and have been involved in serious and fatal incidents. The illegal firearm inventory—a mixed economy of illegal weapons—has changed (with replica, convertible and reactivated weapons) in the period since the 1990s and does merit a more proactive regulatory overview. There needs to be a review of published “gun crime data” to aid more eVective policing and problem analysis. The boundary between “illegal” and “legal” firearms is not clear cut. Storage of weapons and ammunition in private homes does pose some significant public safety risks. There may be public safety and crime prevention benefits to be gained from better collaboration between the policing, intelligence and criminological research communities on these issues.
Bibliographic Details I have been researching gun crime, gun control and the policing issues arising there from since the mid 1990s. In 2000 my book Gun Culture or Gun Control? Firearms, Violence and Society (Routledge) was published, the first UK authored academic book on this topic for over a quarter of a century. Since then I have continued working in this area, presenting academic research papers on these issues at conferences in Britain, America, Europe and Canada. Further publications have resulted including: “Gun crime”: A review of evidence and policy. CCJS, Kings College, 2008; Shooting to Kill? Policing Firearms and Armed Response. Wiley/Blackwell 2010; Street Weapons Commission: Guns, Knives and Street Violence. CCJS Kings College 2008; Selective literature review on children and young people’s involvement in gun and knife crime—Final Report. CCJS. Kings College. 2009; Young People and Weaponisation, in B. Goldson (ed.) Youth in Crisis: Gangs, Territoriality and Violence, Cullompton, Willan Publishing; New Approaches to Gun violence, Criminal Justice Matters, No 71 2008 pp.3–5. Regular appearances on TV and radio and in other news- media discussing these issues. In providing this brief profile of my work, which began in the mid 1990s I have sought to counter a suggestion, often heard in matters of gun control, that legislation is nothing more than an inappropriate “knee-jerk reaction” to a tragedy. I mention this because I have been arguing pretty much the same points for a decade and a half. This is no “knee-jerk” response. In fact the real “knee-jerk” response seems to emanate from firearm advocates and enthusiasts who, when rejecting sensible public safety or gun control suggestions, invariably respond that “nothing should be done, nothing can be done”. This non-sequitur has never been true.
Evidence and Issues Public Perceptions As I explained in my book (Squires, 2000) I came to the gun crime issue almost by accident and realising that, as we interviewed householders on a relatively high crime housing estate in the South East, quite a number of these same householders had purchased air weapons (but in one case a shotgun) or replica guns which they explained might be used to protect their families or otherwise dissuade intruders from breaking Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 75
in. By the same token, householders also complained of their pets injured by air weapons and of air weapon involved criminal damage to their property.This is a familiar and routine picture: where weapons proliferate, even where people seek to use them for a positive/protective purpose others will misuse them (anti-socially or criminally) to abuse or intimidate. More recent evidence, this time from a (4,000 subject) public survey, found that while only 2% of those questioned admitted to ever keeping a gun/air weapon by their bed at night some 16% rather worryingly commented that they felt they would feel safer if they could legally own a gun for purposes of personal protection. Such a finding clearly reflects widespread perceptions about violent crime risks and the widely shared perception that the law favours the burglar. These opinions are skewed by socio-economic status, so it is highly likely that they will be far more prevalent (just as illegal gun possession) in higher crime or relatively disadvantaged areas. These issues undoubtedly throw up many more questions, which, much like the evidence which follows, show that there is much we still do not know and more we need to know about our contemporary gun crime problems: it is neither a singular nor simple problem.
Air weapons However, we do know rather more about crime involving air weapons. For example, Home OYce data shows that air weapon involved crime tends to account for approximately 50% of recorded gun crime in England and Wales. This entails important “presentational” issues and issues for international comparisons or rankings. Air weapon misuse is subject to a notably diVerent pattern of misuse than conventional live ammunition firing weapons. For example, 78% of air weapon oVences involve criminal damage only (Kaiza, 2008: Figure 2.6) and air weapon oVences are generally committed by virtue of the weapon being fired. Ninety-Two per cent of air weapon oVences involved the weapon being fired compared with only 12% of handgun oVences. On the other hand, since 1998, we know that at least 10 people, young children especially, have been killed by air weapon misuse. For a long time we have tended to regard air weapons as a rather less serious adjunct to our gun crime problems, this now appears as a rather complacent attitude, it is far more appropriate to regard air weapon misuse as part of a complex pattern of “weapon” misuse developing since the 1990s. As will be argued below, this problem has become more significantly complex following the apparent “displacement” of oVender weapon choices following the handgun bans of 1998 and following the marketing of air/gas-powered weapons which are, eVectively, replicas of more powerful handguns.
A complex, mixed economy of illegal firearms The illegal gun market in England, Wales and Scotland has changed significantly, in three major ways, in the recent decades. Firstly, firearms manufacturers have franchised out their patents and designs to other manufacturers, creating a large (supposedly legitimate) international market in replica, sometimes called “air-soft” or pellet firing, air-powered, handgun-type weapons. To all intents and purposes they look like the real thing but are often made of plastic and are therefore much lighter. They were not outlawed in 1998 when real handguns were banned. They continued to be used in anything up to 30–40% of “armed robberies” until they were banned by section 36 of the Violent Crime Reduction Act of 2006. Replica firearms (we once used to refer to them virtually as toys) have significantly inflated our gun crime figures, they also feature in the 2003 Anti- Social Behaviour legislation: it is an oVence under that act to carry a replica weapon in public and cause “alarm and distress” to other people. They have caused a particular problem for police armed response and a significant proportion of police fatal shootings have involved suspects carrying replica weapons. Some police forces suggest that as many as 25% of their armed response call-outs involve replica firearms A second area of significant change in our illegal gun market concerns what are referred to as “convertible” or converted weapons. These involve a range of pistol type weapons such as “blank firers” (such as athletics starting pistols); CS gas guns (sold as self-defence weapons in parts of Europe) or high- pressure gas pellet firing weapons or even air-pistols. Many of these are designed to look like real weapons, just like the replicas described above. They are generally of metallic alloy construction (they do fire) although typically cheaper alloys, so they are not as robust as “real” firearms. Many of these are capable of “conversion” (re-engineering) in a number of ways so as to enable them to chamber and fire real bullets. However because the guns are not designed to carry real ammunition they also have a habit of blowing up in the hands of users. They are unreliable, under-powered, unstable and inaccurate but can certainly kill. Evidence from the Metropolitan Police’s Operation Trident in 2004 suggested that some 75% of murders and attempted murders involved converted pistols. Between 2003 and 2008 of nearly 9,000 firearms submitted to the National Forensic Science Service for analysis, just over one-fifth were converted weapons. A numbered of such re-engineered weapons have surfaced from time to time (for example the Brocock, Baikal and “Olympic 38” pistols) and (where necessary) have been the subject of specific prohibitions. The Olympic 38, for instance, began to appear in criminal possession in recent years; it became the subject of an amnesty until mid-June 2010 and is now prohibited. Yet rather than wait for each new weapon type to surface on the streets, a rather more proactive and preventive response is called for. The final area of criminal innovation in firearm misuse involves what are called “reactivated” weapons. These are often military weapons deactivated and sold as “souvenirs”. This has become something of a cottage industry in criminal circles. Dealers have bought significant batches of deactivated weapons Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 76 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
(preferring those deactivated to a less exacting pre-1995 specification), reversed the deactivation process in machine shops (for example by drilling away blocks welded into gun barrels or installing new firing mechanisms) in order to bring the firearm back to working order. A number of criminal business have been exposed buying deactivated AK47s and Uzis on the international market, importing them as souvenirs, and reworking them to sell them to gangsters in Manchester, Liverpool or London. There have been a number of important prosecutions in this area, but often not all the re-engineered weapons have been recovered. The previous points address issues about the changing structure of the UK’s illegal gun inventory it relates to a number of further points about what we know (and gaps in the evidence and intelligence bases) concerning illegal firearms, the working of supply and demand, traYcking, origins and so on.
Gun crime data There are approximately 55 diVerent firearm related oVences a person can commit even before a weapon is pointed at anyone. Many of these are rather technical, relating to firearm licensing procedures and weapon security but they also deal with activities such as the erasing of weapon serial numbers or the sawing oV of a shotgun barrel to make the weapon more concealable. Most such oVences never make the news, but it is often the breach of these rather less newsworthy laws that puts the weapons into the hands of those who will criminally misuse them on the streets of our towns and cities. Like the visible tip of the iceberg, what gets recorded in the criminal statistics by the Home OYce is only the criminal misuse of firearms (or, gun enabled crime, where they are used to threaten, rob, assault or kill) even simple illegal possession of a handgun which, following mandatory sentencing, now attracts a five year penalty, is not recorded as gun crime in the Home OYce data. If simple possession oVences and others were added into the “gun crime” count estimates suggest that the total UK gun crime figure would rise by as much as 60%—while no Government has (perhaps understandably) wanted to see such a change during its term of oYce, a better picture of illegal weapon circulation, leading to misuse, might be produced, thereby assisting and further prioritising police action to intercept the circulation of illegal weapons.
Legal and Illegal Weapons The terrible gun crime outrage in Cumbria opened up again the question of the use of legal (licensed) weapons in criminal violence. Shooting advocates like to imply that legal and illegal weapons are two watertight categories but this is misleading. To begin with, the stark facts are that Britain’s three most terrible shooting outrages in Hungerford, Dunblane and Cumbria were all carried out with weapons that were, at the time, legally owned. There may be questions about whether they should have been, but at the time of those terrible incidents those weapons were subject to the licensing system and therefore held, as it were, with public authority. Generally speaking, privately owned weapons are held in people’s own homes and it is here that a number of risks arise: the risk of misuse within the home, the risk of misuse outside and the risk of theft. To begin with it is worth noting that every year around 1,000 firearms are stolen or misappropriated—keeping guns at home may not be the safest place for them. Secondly, in the home, guns are at risk of misuse by those who are in legal possession of them. It is pertinent to recall Lord Cullen’s conclusion from 1996: “While illegal firearms are used in the great majority of firearm-related crimes, and especially robberies, the existence of legally held firearms leads to their use in crime in a significant, though relatively small, number of cases.” (Cullen, p.108, para. 9.12) Evidence provided to the Cullen Inquiry by the Home OYce covering the years 1992–94 revealed firearm homicides totalling 196 (9%), with handguns responsible for some 40% of these and legally owned handguns for only 14% of these (once again, mainly domestic incidents). Of 15 handguns used in domestic murders, six were legally held by the perpetrator. (Home OYce, 1996, Cullen, 1996 paras. 9.10 and 9.46). No doubt this information is dated, but it underscores the point that while the lion’s share of gun crime involves illegal weapons, there is rather more to it. While up to date figures are not available to me, guns in the home are responsible for a significant share of murder, murder/suicide and suicide.
Weapons at home Such evidence led to Lord Cullen to suggest that firearms should not be stored at home, but in armouries at gun clubs. As it turned out this conclusion was deemed “unworkable” by the shooting lobbies, and insuYcient by the public at large—leading, ultimately, to the handgun ban. However, shotguns and rifles, employed to terrible eVect in Cumbria can still be stored at home (subject to appropriate security measures) by sports shooters and people with an agricultural or land-management based need for a firearm (farmers, gamekeepers etc). In the wake of the Cumbria shootings I argued that, while it was understandable that firearm owners might want their weapons at home, a real public safety danger only arises when the ammunition and the weapon can be brought together [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/ 03/gun-control-cumbria-shootings ]. While some commentators have questioned whether some further assessment of medical or psychological suitability ought to be a more substantial aspect of the licensing system (perhaps more frequent re-licensing) I seriously doubt whether any medico/psychological professional would be able or willing to predict a given Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 77
person’s future mental state. Accordingly it seems to me more appropriate to address the means by which a firearm outrage is carried out and keeping ammunition separate from weapon in the home would do that. Of course I have heard many objections to this—that it would not be “practical” or “too inconvenient”. These strike me as second order considerations in the face of a substantial public safety issue. In the case of organised shoots or competitions, ammunition could be organised and delivered centrally, for land- management and agricultural purposes large amounts of ammunition are not required and could be ordered in, specifically for pest-control work as and when required.
Firearm TraYcking, Firearm intelligence—information sharing Having, as I have noted, been involved in criminological research concerning firearms for over 15 years now, I have often been struck by the reluctance of policing and forensic science agencies bodies to share appropriate information on firearm supply, trends, distribution and so on.
Two or three years back, undertaking some research funded by the Engineering and Physical Science Research Council (EPSRC) with whom the National Forensic Science Service, ACPO, The Metropolitan Police Technical Services Branch and the Greater Manchester Police were fellow stakeholders, I had occasion to seek some information from police Crime Scene managers about firearm trace evidence left at crime scenes. I was made aware of a Forensic Science Service (FSS) report on weapons examined. Contacting the FSS, I asked about the report and was subsequently invited to submit a freedom of information request. In due course (long after the FOI time limit had expired), access to the report was denied (its very existence was also denied) and access to the information in it also denied as “not in the public interest”. Surprisingly, the FSS even went on to claim that they had no records of the type and model of firearms submitted to them for analysis. If this is true it is utterly farcical (rather like the DVLA not knowing make and model of our vehicles) and a major hole in our gun crime intelligence profile. I am aware that the National Ballistics Intelligence Service (NABIS) has taken up this intelligence development role but I am continually dismayed by the insular silo vision of policing agencies in these matters. More research and intelligence collaboration on these issues is called for.
A case in point, while researching my most recent book (Squires & Kennison, 2010) interviews with present and former police oYcers continued to throw up a particular, seldom acknowledged, source of some of the illegal weapons on the streets of Britain—returning soldiers. The evidence is only anecdotal and is certainly only one of the trickle-supply routes we have heard about—but, as it often said, it does not take many trickles to create a significant gun crime problem. Better collaboration between the policing, intelligence and research communities might yield dividends here especially if the former two lack capacity, skills or imagination to do the job. 30 July 2010
Supplementary memoranda submitted by Professor Peter Squires 1. “Most Firearm Offending Involves Legal Weapons” When I gave my oral evidence to the committee on Tuesday 26 October I began with the point that most “gun crime” in England and Wales was probably committed with “legal weapons”. The significance of this point did not seem to be fully grasped by the committee and has been otherwise contested so I will explain the evidence upon which it is based.
According to the Home OYce Supplementary Volume 2 statistics: Homicides, Firearm OVences and Intimate Violence (Home OYce 2010), roughly 40% of recorded firearm oVending involves airguns. Earlier Home OYce evidence (Home OYce, 1996) has established that approximately 14% of firearm homicides involve licensed weapons.1 Finally a clutch of other weapon types (BB guns, blank firers, deactivated weapons) account for a further 8.5% of recorded oVences. Hence: Air weapons 40% of recorded gun crime Licensed weapons (extrapolated trend) 14% of recorded gun crime Other (not illegal) Weapon types 8.5% of recorded gun crime TOTAL 62.5% of recorded gun crime
It may be objected that only the second category of weapons have been through a licensing process and therefore need to be examined in a diVerent light. Such a point would suggest that air weapon licensing might go some way to reduce air weapon oVending ( a point taken up later) and it also underscores the point that
1 This figure rises to 20% if illegal misuse of someone else’s licensed weapon (for example stolen weapons or weapons used against their owners) is taken into account (Home OYce Memo, 1996. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 78 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
where weapons are legally or illegally prevalent in a community they are, much to the same extent, more frequently misused. Nevertheless, as it stands, around 62% of recorded gun crime in England & Wales involves firearms that are not illegal.
2. “A Particular Pattern of Licensed Weapon Misuse” The Home OYce evidence from 1996 which we have already considered made it clear that as many as “one in three firearms used in ‘domestic’ homicides were legally held” (HO: 1996). This related to 19 out of 56 “domestic murders” between 1992 and 1994. Such domestic murders or, sometimes, murder-suicides (or, dyadic murders) form a particular patterned subset of homicides. Such murders are often the end point of a pattern of domestic abuse going back many years. The Home OYce findings are consistent with a series of studies between 1993 and 2007 reviewing the circumstances of domestic homicide and domestic murder- suicide in England and Wales (Milroy, 1993, 1998; Barraclough and Harris, 2003 and Travis, Johnson and Milroy, 2007) and with a range of international studies which show that firearms “readily available in the home” and often legally owned continue to account for a significant proportion of domestic murder and murder-suicide incidents (Alpers and Morgan, 1995; Carcach and Graborsky: 1998; Mouzos, 2000. Furthermore in England and Wales, approximately 70% of firearms misused in domestic homicides were shotguns and, where shotguns were used to commit domestic murders, they were legally owned in 32% of the incidents. Recent evidence: 2010: I have logged 44 “domestic firearm incidents” between 1 January and 30 September reported in national and local media. This figure is undoubtedly an under-representation of the scale of these incidents. Excluding the Cumbria killings (12 Murders, 11 attempted murders and one suicide) committed with legally-owned firearms, these 44 incidents comprise nine further murders (including three murder-suicides), nine further attempted murders (including one attempted murder followed by suicide) and 23 other incidents involving threats, wounding, Assault/ABH and animal cruelty.
Sixteen of the incidents involved air weapons (by definition, not illegal) and 15 of them shotguns (given the earlier data one third of these is likely to be licensed). A motley collection of illegal handguns, converted weapons and imitation firearms (by definition illegal, were responsible for the remaining incidents. By these estimates legal weapons are still responsible for around 50% of our most serious domestic firearm incidents. They are not uncommon, they are not unforeseen “tragedies” like natural disasters,2 they are preventable crimes.
3. “The Particular Harms of Air Weapons” We have already noted the scale of air weapon misuse, which accounted for 6,042 oVences in 2008–09. Air weapons represent the single most common type of criminally misused firearm. They are subject to a diVerent pattern of misuse and are much more likely to be criminally misused by being fired than any other type of weapon. Most air weapon misuse results in criminal damage oVences but air weapons are still responsible for 50% of total firearm injuries (Home OYce, 2010, page 43) including ten fatalities (mostly of children) since 1999–2000 and around 100 serious injuries per year. Looked at another way,air weapons were responsible for 19% of serious firearm injuries and fatalities (in 2009–10).
In sum the air weapon evidence underscores the point that firearms that are routinely available in a community are more likely to be routinely misused within it. Air weapons are the most commonly available weapons in England and Wales, the pattern of harm associated with them suggests that they should be brought into the wider licensing system. While the recorded air weapon crime trend is falling significantly there is a recognition that rates of air weapon oVending are very much under-reported (Home OYce, 2010). The suggestions arising from these comments: (i) the contribution of legal weapons to British gun crime needs to be more fully acknowledged. (ii) This would be easier if more consistent record were kept of the legal status of crime weapons. (iii) The crime patterns ands weapon use patterns associated with firearm involved domestic homicide/ attempted murder/assault/threats needs fuller consideration. (iv) The harms associated with air weapons need to be taken more seriously and these weapons need to be brought into a licensing system. Nothing in this supplementary memorandum is meant to detract from earlier written and verbal comments relating to the problems resulting from—and the need to deal more eVectively with—the complex and changing mixed economy of illegal weapons available on British streets.
2 Much of the reporting of domestic firearm incidents, murders and murder/suicides, as is common in the case of the reporting of firearm rampage killings, shares a tendency to see them as if they were “unforeseeable natural disasters” rather than preventable crimes. See Squires, 2000. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 79
Finally, in view of the Whiting Report’s conclusion that the existing gun laws had been appropriately applied in Cumbria, that the Police had no grounds for refusing Derrick Bird a gun licence and that only “far more fundamental changes” on private ownership of guns could have prevented him carrying out his murderous shooting spree, I would also reiterate a point made in my original evidence that firearms and ammunition should not be retained in private homes where they are most at risk of illegal misuse and theft. 4 November 2010
Memorandum submitted by the Independent Police Complaints Commission Summary The IPCC’s primary responsibility is to secure and maintain public confidence in the handling of complaints by the public against the police and matters involving police conduct. Its functions include the investigation of incidents involving death or serious injury during or following contact with the police. As the police are responsible for the system of firearms licensing, the IPCC has a role in cases of death or serious injury caused by use of licensed firearms. Following a series of cases involving licensed firearms, the IPCC identified a number of concerns about the system for licensing firearms, in particular in relation to medical history, and, in consultation with other responsible bodies, put forward proposals to amend the Home OYce’s guidance on firearms licensing. This submission draws the attention of the Committee to these proposals and the work done so far to progress them. The IPCC hopes the inquiry by the Committee into the need for changes in the laws governing firearms licensing, and in particular the focus on information-sharing between medics and the police, will give impetus to the necessary action. A fuller description of the IPCC’s role is set out at the end of this submission.
Firearms Licensing 1. A series of investigations involving licensed firearms prompted the IPCC in 2007 to consider what lessons could be learnt in relation to the role of the police. Several of the incidents investigated resulted in deaths, including in one case the shooting of a police oYcer. The IPCC conducted an analysis of the cases in question, and subsequent cases as they occurred, in order to pinpoint any common factors. The main issues identified are outlined below. 2. The extent to which a criminal record is, or can be, taken into account. In some instances certificates were granted (or not revoked) despite a record of oVences that might be considered relevant, including breach of bail conditions relating to threats to kill and oVensive weapons charges, criminal damage and a series of convictions for alcohol-related oVences. 3. The extent to which intelligence other than convictions is, or can be, taken into account. Some cases involved firearms licensees who were the subject of a series of allegations that did not proceed to a conviction. A certificate of a licensee was renewed even though he had been bound over as a result of an allegation of domestic violence and was at the time suspected of burglary of the victim (he later murdered her). A licensee was arrested for a violent outbreak at work and, in a later incident, for aVray and assault and was subsequently reported for a race hate incident; none of these was treated either singularly or cumulatively as grounds to revoke the license and he subsequently shot at police oYcers called to a domestic incident involving him. In both these cases, the licensees also had criminal convictions. It was noticeable from the analysis of the cases how many involved domestic incidents, either as the trigger for misuse of the licensed firearm or in the history of the licensee.
Medical history 4. Firearms certificates were granted to those with a history of depression and alcohol-related problems because they did not disclose them on application. (There have to be doubts about the applicant’s medical history before the police can approach his/her GP.) In one case investigated by the IPCC the licensee was shot dead by police after an incident in which he fired shots from his property with his shotgun. Where an applicant in one instance did declare he suVered from depression, the police did not pursue enquiries with his GP because the GP asked for advance payment of a fee the force considered too high. The IPCC’s concern about gaps in the system for obtaining relevant medical information was reflected at the inquest into the death of Mr Christopher Foster, who used a licensed firearm to kill first his wife and daughter and then himself in August 2008. The coroner recommended improving the system for relevant medical information becoming available post-grant or on renewal. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 80 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
Proposals 5. The IPCC worked with representatives of the Home OYce, ACPO, the Police Federation and NPIA to reach a shared view as to how to address the issues arising. In some instances the problems arose from failures of communication between the firearms licensing department and the rest of the force. It is hoped that advances in linking police computer systems will help address this aspect. However, in other cases it appeared to be the wording of Firearms Law—Guidance to the Police 2002 (the Guidance), the Home OYce guidance to the police on firearms licensing that explained the stance taken by the police. 6. The IPCC therefore developed proposals to amend and strengthen the Guidance for presentation to the ACPO Firearms and Explosives Licensing Working Group (FELWG), the ACPO body that makes recommendations to the Home OYce for changes in the Guidance. These proposals are outlined below.
Medical information 7. The Guidance currently provides that GPs should not be approached as a matter of routine and the authority to do so should only be used where there are genuine doubts or concerns about the applicant’s medical history that might be relevant to suitability to possess firearms, either because of information on the form or arising from other information available to the police. 8. Proposals: — The force should be required to approach the applicant’s doctor in each case to obtain confirmation that the medical information provided in the application form was correct. This proposal was designed to address failure by an applicant to disclose medical problems. — The applicant, rather than the police, should be required to meet the cost of any fee charged by the GP.
Convictions 9. The Guidance provides for forces to consider previous convictions or cautions, in particular those involving violence, when assessing fitness to be entrusted with a firearm. However, it makes no mention of bind overs or the cumulative relevance of a series of oVences. 10. Proposals: — Bind overs should be included as a relevant factor and greater emphasis be given to convictions for domestic violence. — A series of convictions, even if one was not on its own enough to justify refusal or revocation, should normally be treated as suYcient evidence of unfitness unless well in the past.
Allegations/Intelligence 11. The Guidance provides that, when assessing fitness to be entrusted with a firearm, forces should also consider: — evidence of aggressive or anti-social behaviour, which may include domestic disputes; — evidence of disturbing and unusual behaviour which suggests firearms may be misused; and — evidence of alcohol or drug abuse which suggests possible impairment of judgement and loss of self control. It recognises that the test of “beyond reasonable doubt” applicable to crimes is too high for consideration of applications for a firearms license, but is silent on the test to be applied. 12. Proposal: — The test to be applied should be either “balance of probabilities” or “significant risk that the allegation/intelligence is true” and the Guidance should be explicit that intelligence which has not resulted in a conviction may still be evidence of unfitness, especially if a number of allegations has been received from diVerent people.
False information 13. Proposal: — The Guidance should make knowingly or recklessly making a false statement on the application form, especially in relation to convictions or medical conditions, of particular relevance to unfitness. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 81
Current Position 14. FELWG was generally in support of the proposals made and, as the relevant ACPO body, assumed the lead on negotiating changes to the Guidance. We understand the current position to be as follows. 15. FELWG approached the BMA for views on the medical concerns. In September 2009 ACPO and the BMA were able to reach agreement in principle for a system under which forces would notify an applicant’s GP of an application (initial or renewal) for a firearms or shotgun certificate, with a marker placed on the patient’s record accordingly, thus enabling the GP to raise any medical concerns on application or subsequently. 16. This and the other proposals for changes to the Guidance were considered by the Practitioners Group, comprising representatives from the Home OYce, British Shooting and Sports Council, and the police. We understand they were acceptable in principle but concerns were raised regarding the appropriate level of confidentiality in relation to disclosure of medical information by GPs. Discussion has been under way since then on how to address this aspect. ACPO is also in discussion with the Information Commissioner’s OYce about issues of proportionality and the purposes for which the NHS is authorised to hold data. 17. We understand amendment of the Guidance to address the other proposals is awaiting resolution of the medical issues.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission 18. The Independent Police Complaints Commission, which operates in England and Wales only,became operational in April 2004, succeeding the Police Complaints Authority. The IPCC was created by the Police Reform Act 2002 as a Non-Departmental Public Body (NDPB) with a remit in respect of complaints and allegations of misconduct against police in England and Wales. 19. More recently this remit has been extended to include the investigation of serious allegations against oYcers of the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA), HM Revenue and Customs and the UK Border Agency. 20. The IPCC is overseen by a Board of Commissioners appointed by the Home Secretary. By law, Commissioners must never have worked for the police service in any capacity. They are the public, independent face of the IPCC. 21. The IPCC’s powers include: — investigative powers: the IPCC may independently investigate cases, oversee police investigations of cases, or leave cases to be locally investigated by the police without oversight; — an appeal function: complainants who are unhappy with how the police dealt with their complaint may appeal to the IPCC; — the power to direct a force to convene a disciplinary tribunal and, in exceptional cases, to direct that the tribunal be held in public; and — the power to recommend, in the light of its experience, changes to police policy and practice and the arrangements for handling police complaints and conduct matters. 26 August 2010
Memorandum submitted by the Gun Trade Association Ltd 1. The Gun Trade Association Ltd. The GTA is the oYcially recognised body representing the legitimate sporting, recreational and professional gun trade in the UK. The 700 members that it serves comprise the considerable majority of the businesses involved in the industry. They range from the sporting firearms manufacturers through to the smallest retail outlet and include the cartridge manufacturers, the importers, wholesalers and retailers of all sporting firearms related products. The GTA also represents The Airgun Manufacturers & Trade Association Ltd. (AMTA), in both policy and legislative areas. The UK sporting firearms industry supports some 70,000 jobs and is responsible for an annual turnover of some £1.6 billion. The GTA is a Council Member of the British Shooting Sports Council (BSSC), and both contributed to, and wholly endorses, the submission made by that body. 2. Use of legally held guns in crime The GTA endorses the submission from the BSSC and others that legally held guns are very rarely used in crime and such use as there is has been in restricted circumstances which cannot be predicted. 3. Relationship between gun control and gun crime The GTA regularly monitors reports of levels of armed crime and both statutory and administrative measures that have been introduced. There is no evidence to suggest that recent or further restrictions of legally held firearms will reduce armed crime and we refer in particular to the fact that the ban on handguns in 1997 had no impact on the use of handguns in crime. Again, we endorse the BSSC’s submission on this point. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 82 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
4. State of Current laws. Existing legislation is now extremely complex even for practitioners in the field. Since the 1968 Act (which is still the primary source of the law), a flow of amending Acts and Rules, together with individual measures inserted in more general legislation, plus the considerable measures regularly emanating from the EU makes it almost impossible for the user to understand what is required of him. The GTA OYce spends much time, on a daily basis, dealing with firearms licensing and general firearms legislative enquiries from its members. 5. Existing law has many unintended or misunderstood consequences which the non certificate holder will find diYcult to understand. For example, if the owner of a .22 rifle damages it, or merely wishes to replace it, he is likely, first, to shop around and select the replacement rifle from the many diVerent makes on the market. Having made his selection he will have to arrange with the dealer to keep the rifle for him whilst he applies for a variation to his certificate. This involves filling out a four page form and then waiting up to the six weeks or more that is the usual delay in varying a certificate. Once the variation is approved both certificate holder and the dealer will then notify the police of the transaction. The dealer will have had to retain “frozen stock” for a long period and if several such weapons are held, this can produce a cash flow problem. The end product, of course, is that a man who had one .22 rifle still has only one .22 rifle and the police will have been given details of each rifle. An enormous amount of the time of the police, the dealer and the certificate holder has been spent for mere bureaucratic gain. 6. It is felt, however, that changes to the legislation should follow detailed consideration of the nature of controls that are required with proper thought given to the mass of unintended consequence likely to be created. 7. The question of sharing some medical information with general practitioners has been under consideration for some time. There are problems regarding security and medical ethics which are still being considered and no useful comment can be made at this stage. We again endorse the submission points raised by the BSSC on this question. 8. The question of exchanges of information between police and prison staV is one for the Home OYce.
Airguns 9. The GTA is particularly concerned with the issue of air gun legislation, especially since the Committee’s invitation to submit evidence makes special reference to the recommendations of the predecessor Committee in 1999–2000 which proposed licensing all air guns. (Appendix 1 cites the various responses to the Committee’s proposals at that time and, in particular, on page 10 says; “the Government does not accept that the introduction of a licensing regime as recommended can be justified at present”). The eVect of a licensing regime would be to irrevocably damage the air gun industry, to seriously damage an Olympic sport, to make the safe training of young shots much more diYcult and to prevent parents and their children from enjoying a less formalised sport within the confines of their home or garden. This latter is by far the greatest sector of legitimate air gun use and there are few in the competitive or field sports use of firearms today who did not start in this fashion. It is universally recognised that the UK airgun industry leads the field in terms of innovation through research and development and its products are highly regarded, worldwide. 10. The GTA, like all responsible bodies and individual citizens, is concerned about level of misuse of air guns, as it is about all such crime. It has commissioned research and has consistently supported measures that seemed likely to impact on the problem. It has analysed the eVect of the full scale licensing imposed in 1988 on shotgun certificate holding. A reduction in shotgun certificate numbers of almost one third had a serious impact on trade and sport but had no eVect on crime. We believe that only a minority would go through the treadmill of firearms licensing to retain existing air guns. Unregistered air guns might enter the black market and the harm would be compounded by a problem that could take generations to resolve. It is a well known fact that Section 1 firearms that should have been registered in 1920 continue to appear and continue to be used in crime.
Legitimate Uses of Air Guns 11. The best and most widely accepted estimate indicates that there are some seven million air guns in the hands of four million people in England and Wales. Some 1,500,000,000 (1.5 billion) air gun pellets are sold each year of which 65% are of domestic manufacture and 35% are imported. 12. Between 170,000 and 250,000 air guns are sold by dealers each year in England and Wales with about 35% of domestic production for export. The industry employs well in excess of one thousand people in the manufacture and distribution of airguns. The value of the trade is in the region of £50,000,000.
Competitive Shooting 13. Airgun events, both rifle and pistol, are included in the Olympic Games, Commonwealth Games, European Championships and World Championships. Domestically there is a hierarchy of competitions at local, county and national level. The National Smallbore Rifle Association is the Governing body. Target shooting is popular amongst youth groups such as the Scouts, Pony Clubs and others. In 1996, the Scouts conducted a poll of parents who were overwhelmingly in favour of retaining airgun shooting as part of the Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 83
Scout programme. Competitive airgun shooting demands high standards of discipline and self control and is seen as a character forming activity. Although in every way a laudable activity, club shooting probably only amounts for a small percentage of total airgun use.
Field and Sporting Use 14. Airguns are used by professional pest controllers in circumstances where the use of an ordinary firearm (even a .22 rim-fire) would cause risk. These include urban areas and inside buildings. They are also much used by farmers or their guest shooters for control of rats and other pests up to and including rabbits.
Casual Target Practice 15. There is no doubt that casual target practice (generally known as “plinking”), is by far the most common use of airguns. Such use is generally outside the public gaze, indoors or in a garden and involves parents teaching or shooting with their children. The airgun is the stepping stone for many who will use firearms a little later. It provides a means of instilling discipline, safety and responsibility. Most of today’s adults who shoot in the field or on the target range will have started with airguns.
Airgun Misuse 16. Expressed as a proportion of legitimate use, misuse of airguns is extremely rare though the fact that legitimate airgun use is out of the public eye, whilst misuse is often very much in, it has created a misconception.
17. One of the major problems of dealing with many aspects of airgun misuse is that of displacement. If the young vandal could not obtain an airgun, it seems that he is likely to commit the same acts of vandalism or anti social behaviour with a brick or a stick.
18. The GTA has a vested interest in helping reduce, as far as possible, the misuse of airguns. It is the legitimate user of airguns and the legitimate trader rather than the vandal who is likely to suVer from ill directed legislation. If proposals for licensing were to be adopted, legitimate users might apply for licences, but the vandal would not. He is and would remain anonymous and the prospects of his possession of an airgun being detected are very small.
19. The cost of imposing a licensing regime of four million users would be enormous. Assuming that most existing airgun users were to apply for a licence, the demand on police time would be excessive. If the system of variations mentioned above were to be applied and a system of regular renewals were involved that excessive burden would be perpetual. It is also quite likely that only a minority, consisting of the most responsible users, would apply for licences.
20. The GTA has long espoused a policy of education and enforcement as the most productive way of reducing airgun misuse. (Appendix 2 quotes extracts from the 10th and 11th Report of the Firearms Consultative Committee where the Committee recommends education proposals for airgun use proposed by the GTA). It has to be recognised that the problem cannot be eliminated and the extreme solutions often suggested would rank alongside proposals to ban baseball because baseball bats feature amongst the blunt instruments used in homicide. 21. Attempts to maintain useful statistical records generate almost insurmountable problems. Appendix 3 presents the published figures for airgun misuse for the past twenty years. Figures are available for longer periods but changes in Home OYce Statistical methods make it almost impossible to make any comparisons. 22. Criminal damage (often of quite low value), makes up the largest proportion of airgun oVences. Of 5,037 recorded airgun oVences in 1989, 3042 (60.4%) were criminal damage; for 1999 criminal damage amounted to 72% and for 2008–09 it amounted to 77% of the total. In the early years criminal damage was recorded only if the value of the damage exceeded £20, but the value of £20 fell rapidly so that more and more cases were included. Both the figures for criminal damage and the figure for total oVences were more representative of an inflation guide than of any real increase in misuse of airguns.
23. Details of the various changes Home OYce recording and counting methods are reproduced in Appendix 4 to avoid production of the relevant volumes. They show that figures for the period up to 2002–03 cannot properly be compared with figures from 2003–04 to 2008–09. The figures for total amount of airgun misuse, for slight wounding and damage are, at the very best, misleading. The figures for homicide with airguns are so low that trends cannot be discerned. There have been 16 cases in a 20 year period. Only from 2002–03 onwards can any comparison be made.
24. The figures for criminal damage, slight wounding and for the total number of oVences are such that no meaningful comparison can be made prior to 2002. Comparisons are possible from 2002 when NCRS should have caused a significant increase in all airgun oVences. But what we see is a sharp increase in 2003–04 Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 84 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
reducing very rapidly thereafter with a halving of the 2002–03 figures by 2008–09. The trend starts slowly, possibly because of the inflationary eVect of NCRS, but shows every sign of being a persistent change downwards. 25. The 2008–09 statistics note this change at Box 2.2 and attribute it to the Violent Crime Reduction Act which came into law in October 2007 and introduced new restrictions for imitation firearms and air weapons. (See Appendix 4). It is claimed that the Act restricted the sale of air weapons to licensed firearm dealers and raised the minimum age for owning or buying an air weapon from 14 to 18. It is also claimed that “the Act coincided with large falls in the number of firearm oVences where an air weapon has been involved though it is admitted that air weapon oVences have been falling steadily since 2003–04.” 26. None of what is said there in connection with airguns is correct. An Act that came into eVect in October 2007 can hardly have influenced events in 2003–04. The VCR Act applied only to sales by way of business and not to private sales. Sales via dealers have actually gone up, not down. Whilst the age at which a person could buy an airgun was raised to 18 (from 17, not 14), the relevant age for possession on private premises with the consent of the owner remains at 14. 27. Section 37 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 deals with possession in a public place and removed complexities found in previous legislation. It prohibits the possession of an air weapon in any public place without lawful authority or reasonable excuse. The age of the person is not an issue, neither is the question of whether it was covered in some way or whether it was loaded or not. This is now a simple oVence with a single defence in appropriate cases. 28. The GTA has long seen rigorous enforcement as a major factor in reducing airgun oVences. Many police oYcers have sought simplicity in the law. Amongst the mass of legislation that a constable must enforce, worries about complexities in airgun law have tended against rigorous enforcement. 29. It is the position of the GTA (1) that airgun oVences are falling quite dramatically at a time when, because of changes in recording methods, the figures should have been increasing; (2) better enforcement of simplified laws is producing results; (3) enforcement levels should be increased and (4) nothing more needs to be done at this time. The GTA is also firmly of the opinion that, despite the recommendations of the Calman Commission, airgun legislation should not be devolved to Scotland and should remain in the control of Westminster.
APPENDIX 1 RECORDED OFFENCES IN WHICH AIR GUNS WERE INVOLVED ENGLAND AND WALES 1989—2008–09
Wound Wound Damage Year Total Homicide Serious Slight 1989 5,037 3 146 1,701 3,042 1990 5,380 1 191 1,853 3,351 1991 5,464 2 192 1545 3,501 1992 6,097 " 207 1,634 6,097 1993 6,332 " 200 1,502 4,044 1994 7,155 " 207 1,504 5,223 1995 7,549 1 185 1,343 5,717 1996 7,648 " 119 1,266 5,861 1997 7,509 " 75 1,374 5,798 *1998 8,665 " 88 1,381 6,362 1999 10,103 " 80 1,806 7,330 2000 10,227 1 133 1,654 7,674 2001 12,377 2 171 1,748 9,559 2002 13,822 1 166 2,220 10,496 2003 13,756 " 156 2,238 10,272 2004 11,825 1 157 1,353 9,308 2005 10,437 1 150 1,062 8,165 2006 8,839 3 93 956 6,900 2007 7,578 " 104 1,267 5,756 2008 6,042 " 103 1,034 4630 * From 1998 the figures are for the financial year, thus 2008 refers to 2008–09 Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 85
APPENDIX 2 EXTRACTS FROM HOME OFFICE STATISTICAL BULLETINS CHANGES IN RECORDING AIRGUN OFFENCE Criminal Statistics,England and Wales 2002–03, Supplementary Volume 1, Homicide and Gun Crime,Page 26: “Changes in the counting rules on 1 April 1998 aVected both the methods of counting and the coverage for recorded crime and had the eVect of inflating the number of crimes recorded. For some oVence groups— homicide, violence against the person endangering life, robbery and burglary—there was likely to be little eVect of numbers of firearm crimes recorded. However, the changes will have had more eVect on figures for more minor violence and criminal damage. This would have a particular impact on the number of air weapon crimes recorded.” “Similarly, the implementation of the National Crime Recording Standard (NCRS) by police forces on 1 April 2002 will have increased the number of crimes recorded. Again, it was not possible to assess accurately the eVect of this change on recorded firearm crimes. This change inflated the overall number of violence against the person and criminal damage oVences, but had less eVect on the number of robberies. Many firearm oVences are amongst the less serious categories, for example criminal damage involving an airgun and these types of oVences are amongst those most likely to have been aVected by the NCRS. However, the more serious crimes are not expected to be as greatly aVected by the latest recording changes. Some police forces adopted the principles of NCRS in advance of its national implementation, and this may have aVected figures for 2001–02”.
Criminal Statistics,England and Wales 2008–09, Supplementary Volume 1, Homicide and Gun Crime,Box 2.1: “The introduction of the National Crime Recording Standard (NCRS) by police forces on 1 April 2002 brought in a more victim-focussed reporting system, where victim accounts had to be accepted unless there was credible evidence to the contrary. While no estimates were calculated to assess the eVect of this new standard on the number of firearm oVences recorded, it is known that this change inflated the overall number of violence against the person and criminal damage oVences but had less eVect on the number of robberies (see Simmons et al., 2003). Due to this change, it is not possible to directly compare figures prior to 2002–03 with those for later years.” “From 1 April 2008 there was a change in oVence classification which for the first time collected separate information on grievous bodily harm (GBH) without intent (rather than as part of a broader ‘other wounding’ category). This, combined with a clarification in the counting rules for grievous bodily harm with intent led to a step change in levels of ‘most serious violence’ for some police forces. This means that figures for GBH oVences in 2008–09 are not comparable with those for earlier years. The overall totals of firearm oVences are not aVected by this change.”
Criminal Statistics,England and Wales 2008–09, Supplementary Volume 1, Homicide and Gun Crime,Box 2.2: “The Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 came into law in October 2007 and introduced new restrictions for imitation firearms and air weapons.” “For air weapons, the Act restricted the sale of air weapons to licensed dealers and raised the minimum age for owning or buying an air weapon from 14 to 18. For imitation weapons, the import or sale of realistic imitation weapons was made illegal by the Act.” “The introduction of this Act has coincided with large falls in the number of firearms oVences where an imitation or air weapon has been involved. However, it has not been possible to assess the exact impact of the introduction of this legislation and air weapon oVences have been falling steadily since 2003–04.” 26 August 2010
Supplementary memoranda submitted by the Gun Trade Association Ltd VIOLENT CRIME REDUCTION ACT 2006 SECTION 31—FIREARMS REGISTERS 1. The VCR Act requires all those selling low-powered air weapons “by way of trade or business” to be Registered Firearms Dealers (RFDs). A requirement of the Act (Section 31), is that RFDs selling low- powered air weapons shall keep a statutory Firearms Register. 2. The VCR Act requires details of the air weapon and the name and address of the individual buying it to be entered into the Register. Details of air weapons sold to other RFDs are also required to be entered into the Register. Purchases, with details of the air weapons and names and addresses, from individuals or Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 86 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
other RFDs will also have to be shown in the Register. Many low-powered air weapons (especially from the cheaper end of the range), carry no serial number and, if the number is not present there is no requirement in law to enter a serial number in the Register. 3. Where the Act mentions the names and addresses of the purchasers or transferees and/or the names and addresses of the sellers or transferors it requires, from the dealer who makes the entry into the Register, that; “particulars suYcient for identification” (Section 40 Firearms Act 1968), are obtained from the person with whom the transaction is carried out. (a) It is not a legal requirement that the member of the public should have to prove their name or address, only that the dealer is satisfied with the details provided. In most circumstances, a driving licence, credit card or other, usually carried form of identification and the application of normal commercial procedures for the verification of the bona fides, should be suYcient. (b) Consideration should be given to requiring the purchaser of the air weapon to sign a receipt/invoice stating that they are aged 18 or over and that the name and address supplied is true and, further, that the purchaser is not a prohibited person within the meaning of the Firearms Act 1968. 4. The minimal details in the Register which allow an air weapon to be identified for retail sales purposes are: class (ie rifle or pistol), make and model (ie Umarex, Webley, CO2, pre-charged pneumatic, spring, etc.), and calibre (.177, .22). These details would allow the FEO, or the police, to relate an air weapon to a Firearms Register. The Register would show to whom that air weapon had been sold. 5. As most importers and wholesalers deal in bulk purchases and sales it has been agreed by ACPO, The Home OYce and the GTA that “bulk entries” into the Register are acceptable when selling, or transferring, air weapons to another RFD.
Memorandum submitted by Countryside Alliance 1. Executive Summary 1.1 The Countryside Alliance, as a leading shooting organisation, welcomes the opportunity to respond to the Home AVairs Committee Inquiry into the Control of Firearms. 1.2 The Alliance is concerned that conclusions are not reached before the full facts surrounding the tragic shootings in Cumbria are known. We would hope that any recommendations would focus on measures which might have served to prevent those events. (Section 2) 1.3 Over a million people in Britain regularly enjoy shooting sports. Shooting is involved in the management of two thirds of the rural land area and is hugely important especially in rural areas. (Section 3) 1.4 It is agreed that the proportion of oVences which involve legally held firearms is very small indeed, as recognised by both the police and Home OYce. (Section 4.1) 1.5 Current regulations governing firearms are regarded as being amongst the strictest in the world. The current suite of legislation provides appropriate checks and balances between the protection of the public and the rights of lawful shooters to enjoy their sport or continue their businesses and occupations. We would thus favour a consolidating Act which placed the existing legislation into a framework which is more easily accessible to those who are required to use it. We believe that the legislation is at it most eVective when it deals with the regulation of those individuals who may have access to guns rather than the regulation of the guns themselves. (Section 4.2) 1.6 The medical tagging of records raises serious issues of data security, the range of situations and conditions in which GP’s might intervene and GP liability. This would act as a disincentive for people to seek medical help when needed. Any such move would need adequate safeguards. (Section 4.3) 1.7 The past seven years have seen three Acts of Parliament designed to regulate further airguns. Those who would misuse airguns are already subject to some 30 potential criminal oVences. Our view is that the Government should allow the most recent legislation to take eVect before considering further measures. We would support the continuing programme of airgun training and education. (Section 4.4)
2. Introduction 2.1 The Countryside Alliance’s aim is to promote and support the livelihood of rural people and their communities. We define livelihood as economy, community, environment and the country way of life. The Alliance is a campaigning organisation based across the UK. As a membership organisation with over 100,000 individual members and over 400,000 aYliated members we reflect the views and concerns of a broad range of rural people and their livelihoods. 2.2 Many of our members use firearms for sport or in the course of their businesses or occupations. The Alliance is a member of the British Shooting Sports Council (BSSC) and commends the Council’s submission to the Home AVairs Committee. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 87
2.3 Given that the current Inquiry was prompted by the tragic shootings in Cumbria we are concerned that conclusions are not reached before the full facts of that incident are published. We would hope that any recommendations would focus on measures which might have served to prevent the events in Cumbria.
3. Background—Shooting Sports in Britain 3.1 Over a million people in Britain regularly enjoy shooting sports. In addition many people, especially in the countryside, use firearms for the control of pests or in connection with their trade or occupation. 3.2 Some 480,000 people shoot live quarry. They spend £2 billion each year on goods and services, and their sport is worth £1.6 billion to the British economy (PACEC, 2006). 3.3 Shooting is involved in the management of two thirds of the rural land area of Britain. Two million hectares are actively managed for conservation as a result of shooting and shoot providers spend £250 million a year on conservation (PACEC, 2006). 3.4 Firearms are essential for the management and control of pest species such as rabbits, pigeons, rats, foxes and corvids. Deer populations continue to increase and deer management by both professional deer managers and sporting deer stalkers is essential to the control of deer numbers. Indeed, the annual cull could not be met without the contribution of recreational stalking. 3.5 The game and venison produced by shooting sports is of increasing value as a wholesome, low-fat, naturally produced food. Game sales have increased by 64% since 2001 and now command annual sales of £75 million. In the five years up to 2008, the market value for game nearly doubled. Venison captures more than half the total spend on game (Mintel Market Intelligence, 2010). 3.6 Britain has an enviable record of achievement in international competitive shooting. There are some 1,500 smallbore rifle clubs in Britain, including Scout and Cadet groups, making the Olympic sport of smallbore shooting one of the most accessible target shooting disciplines. 3.7 Shooters such as Olympic gold medalist Richard Faulds MBE, nine-times World championship holder George Digweed MBE and triple Commonwealth gold medalist Charlotte Kerwood have brought this country honour and distinction at the highest level of international competition. 3.8 The flourishing of shooting sports, and especially game shooting and deer stalking with rifles, contributes substantially to Britain’s world-class reputation for the manufacture of fine sporting guns. This reputation has been well-established over more than two centuries and has produced an important sporting firearms legacy.
4. Response to Matters Raised by this Inquiry 4.1 The use of legally-held guns in crime and the relationship between gun control and gun crime 4.1.1 There is very little oYcially recorded evidence of the use of legally held guns in serious armed crime and until the establishment of the National Ballistics Intelligence Service (NaBIS) the provenance of guns used in crime was not systematically investigated. However, it is generally agreed that the proportion of oVences which involve legally held firearms is very small indeed. 4.1.2 In its Second Report of April 2000 the House of Commons Home AVairs Committee noted: “A common theme to many submissions is that illegally held weapons pose a far greater danger to public safety than those which are held in conformity with the present controls. It is argued that weapons held outside the licensing system are used in the commission of the majority of armed crime. This is an argument which we recognise: it is clear that those determined to live outside the law are unlikely to respect the law’s requirements when they wish to acquire or use a weapon.” 4.1.3 In his response On 2 June 2008 to a question by the present Minister of State James Brokenshire MP, Tony McNulty MP, then Minister of State (Security, Counter-terrorism, Crime and Policing), referred to “the very low instances of legally held firearms being used in gun crime.” Explaining a decision not to share information between NaBIS and the National Firearms Licensing Management System (NFLMS) he commented: “it was agreed that any risk of legally held firearms being used for criminal purposes was so low and the diYculty of automating a matching process between systems that the cost of building such an interface would outweigh any perceived benefits.” 4.1.4 NaBIS has highlighted the use by criminals of converted Russian “Baikal” gas pistols which have been illegally imported from illicit workshops in Eastern Europe. Home OYce Research Study 298 (Gun Crime: The market in and use of illegal firearms [2006]) refers to the sourcing of firearms from recent conflict areas and cites Ireland and Liverpool as entry points for illegal importation. The research refers to the “limited legal market for ammunition” and notes that “criminals are manufacturing or improvising it themselves.” The apparent demand for smuggled firearms amongst the criminal fraternity and the improvising of both firearms and ammunition by criminals points to the lack of availability of firearms emanating from legally held sources within the UK. 4.1.5 Although handguns became prohibited weapons and were entirely removed from general legal circulation in 1997, they still routinely feature in crime and remain the criminal’s weapon of choice. Of those oVences involving a non-air weapon, 52% involved a handgun in the period 2008-9 (Home OYce Statistical Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 88 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
Bulletin, Violent Crime Overview, Homicide and Gun Crime 2008/09). The number of handgun crimes continues to rise slightly despite prohibition. This underlines the lack of any relationship between firearms crime and lawful ownership of firearms.
4.2 The fitness for purpose of current laws governing firearms 4.2.1 The current suite of legislation provides appropriate checks and balances between the protection of the public and the rights of lawful shooters to enjoy their sport or continue their businesses and occupations. It enables the Chief OYcer to assess the suitability of applicants and make reasoned assessment of them. It enables responsible people who wish to use firearms for pest control, sport or recreation to have controlled access to them. It enables graduated access to firearms, under supervision, by young people. The worst and most inconsistent aspects of firearms legislation are those which derive from fresh laws hastily introduced after high profile incidents. 4.2.2 Current regulations governing firearms are regarded as being amongst the strictest in the world and go far beyond the requirements of the 1991 EU Firearms Directive. However, they are also extremely complex. The Firearms Act 1968 has been amended by a large amount of subsequent legislation and as a result is unwieldy and hard to understand, whether by lawful firearms users who have to comply with the law or by police firearms licensing departments which have to administer it. We would thus favour a consolidating Act which placed the existing legislation into a framework which is more easily accessible to those who are required to use it. 4.2.3 The Countryside Alliance, as a constituent member of the BSSC, has for some time been in discussion with the Association of Chief Police OYcers (ACPO) over modifications to the law which would remove certain anomalies and make the legislation easier to administer. We would commend ACPO’s proposal for a Regulatory Reform Order dealing with these matters. 4.2.4 We believe that the legislation is at it most eVective when it deals with the regulation of those individuals who may have access to guns rather than the regulation of the guns themselves, together with their various components and accessories. We would warn against measures which focus upon the listing of serial numbers on certificates rather than assessing the suitability of individuals. If a person is fit to posses firearms then the number of firearms is irrelevant so long as they are stored securely.
4.3 Improvement of information sharing between medics 4.3.1 An applicant for a Firearm or Shot Gun Certificate must provide his/her firearms licensing department with the authority to approach his/her GP for medical information. Such an approach is only made when there are genuine doubts or concerns about the applicant’s medical history which might have a bearing on his/her suitability to possess firearms. 4.3.2 An applicant may approach his GP as a person of good standing with a request for him/her to act as referee or countersignatory to his/her application for a Firearm or Shot Gun Certificate. The GP is under no obligation to provide this service and the BMA advises GPs not to endorse applications unless they have asuYciently detailed knowledge of a patient’s mental and physical health to be confident that the individual can safely possess firearms without endangering themselves, their families or the public. 4.3.3 If a doctor has reason to believe that a person who is applying for or who already has authority to possess firearms represents a danger to themselves or others, then the BMA advises that he/she may if necessary breach confidentiality in order to disclose this information to other authorities such as the police. However, doctors themselves acknowledge that they are in no position to judge the future dangerousness of their patients. 4.3.4 The Countryside Alliance, as a member of the Home OYce/ACPO/BSSC Practitioners Group, has been involved for some months with discussions regarding the “tagging” of medical records to enable medical practitioners to be aware of those of their patients who have lawful access to firearms. We currently have a number of concerns which would need to be addressed before we were satisfied that such an arrangement could be safely put in place. 4.3.5 Tagged records would represent a database of addresses where firearms are potentially stored and this would create an obvious target for criminals. Thus the security of this information within the NHS is of the greatest importance and access to it by persons other than GPs or similar professional staV would have to be prevented. 4.3.6 A very large proportion of the population suVers at some time from some form of depression as a result of relationship, employment or financial diYculties. In most cases they do not go on to cause harm to themselves or others. The potential liability of a GP if he did not disclose information about a patient who subsequently went on to misuse firearms might prompt him to intervene in cases where such intervention was quite unnecessary. 4.3.7 Many individuals, especially middle aged men, rarely visit their GPs. The potential threat to their Firearm or Shot Gun Certificate and thus their sport or livelihood would be quite suYcient to discourage them from seeking medical advice in the event of depression or some other similar condition, to the detriment of their own health. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 89
4.3.8 GPs would need to consider intervention in the case of a wide range of conditions, not merely depression, such as stroke or even possibly head injury. Is a GP to report a patient who has suVered a road traYc accident, fallen oV a bike or had a mild stroke? What would be the consequences for disabled shooters? There would need to be very clear guidelines for GPs regarding the conditions and circumstances in which it might be regarded as appropriate for them to intervene. These guidelines would need to be established by a panel of qualified experts upon which the shooting community was represented. The panel’s opinions might need to be tested by research.
4.4 The danger presented by, and legislation regulating, airguns 4.4.1 Airguns oVer an entry into the sport of shooting. Almost everybody who shoots started doing so with airguns. They are a relatively inexpensive and accessible means whereby shooters can learn the basic principles of gun safety and marksmanship which are central to shooting sports. They are used by many youth organisations such as the Scouts in order to teach responsibility to young people. Airguns are widely used for the control of pests and small vermin in the countryside. Some airgun shooters go on to enjoy more advanced competition shooting with airguns, including elite shooting at Olympic and Commonwealth Games level. 4.4.2 There are an estimated seven million airguns in Britain, in the hands of approximately four million owners. Thus any proposal for registration or licensing for low-powered airguns would involve a huge administrative burden and a great deal of costly bureaucracy. Police firearms licensing departments acknowledge that they would be unable to cope with such a huge additional workload, which would divert attention from and potentially put at risk their current licensing eVort. 4.4.3 There were 6,042 oVences in which airguns were reported to have been used in 2008–09. This figure continues to decline and has fallen by 56% since its peak in 2002–03. (Home OYce Statistical Bulletin, Violent Crime Overview, Homicide and Gun Crime 2008–09). The great majority of airgun crime involves minor criminal damage. However, crimes in which injury was caused by air weapons have also fallen markedly by 71% since 2003 –04 to just 694 oVences, the lowest number for five years. 4.4.4 The past seven years have seen three Acts of Parliament designed to regulate further airguns: The Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003, The Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 and the Crime and Security Act 2010. The provisions of this last Act relating to security of airguns have yet to be implemented. There is thus a large amount of legislation which currently controls the possession and use of airguns, and those who would misuse airguns are already subject to some 30 potential criminal oVences. Our view is that the Government should allow the most recent legislation to take eVect before considering further measures. 4.4.5 We would support the continuing programme of airgun training and education which is being undertaken by the shooting associations. We commend in particular the National Smallbore Rifle Association’s Youth Proficiency Scheme which has 12,000 registered instructors and we would welcome Home OYce involvement with airgun training and education programmes. We believe that the twin-track approach of enforcement and education which was advocated in 1999 by the then Home OYce Minister, Paul Boateng, is the correct approach to reducing further the already low level of airgun crime.
Supplementary memoranda submitted by Countryside Alliance I very much hope that your visit to Bisley last week proved useful to you and the members of your Committee. During the question and answer session, you asked if we might make some additional suggestions as to how, in the light of constraints on police budgets, firearms licensing might be streamlined without compromise to public safety. One way of improving the workflow would be to iron out the “bulge” in renewals which is a legacy of the change in certificate duration from three to five years. This could be eVected by extending the life of a proportion of certificates over the course of a number of renewal cycles. Mick Fidgeon, Firearms Licensing Manager of Essex Police, has made detailed proposals of how such a system might operate, but regrettably these have not thus far been taken up. We are confident that removing the peaks and troughs in renewal administration would greatly benefit both licensing staV and certificate holders. Savings have been estimated at £2 million. Licensing departments continue to administer processes which are not strictly necessary for public safety. Authorisation of clay target shooting events under S11(6) of the 1968 Act currently involves a detailed assessment by police licensing oYcers of the site, and the way in which an event is set up by its organisers. This is analogous to the range inspection process which formerly existed for rifle ranges and which was carried out by MoD staV. Rifle range inspection has now ceased, and range safety is now guaranteed through the process of insurance, the insurer issuing a certificate upon the occupier evidencing a safe method of range operation. We believe that production of a valid insurance certificate for a temporary clay target shoot should be all that is necessary for the grant of an authorisation under S11(6), with no further police time being required. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 90 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
Police licensing departments issue Visitors Shot Gun Permits and Visitors Firearm Permits for visitors to Great Britain from the EU, which are above and beyond the requirements of the European Firearms Directive. We believe this process to be superfluous, furthermore it acts as a constraint upon providers of sporting shooting in Britain and leads to reciprocation by some EU administrations through the placing of additional controls upon visiting British shooters. We would recommend that EU citizens in possession of a European Firearms Pass should be admitted to Great Britain in accordance with the terms of Article 12(2) of Council Directive 91/477/EEC without any requirement for additional domestic certification. 15 November 2010
Memorandum submitted by Mr Michael Eveleigh I served with Merseyside Police firearms Licensing department, as well as conducting firearms licensing enquiries which involved visiting applicants to inspect their security arrangements. During my service with the No1 Region Technical Support Unit my team was responsible for physical and technical security at several political party conferences during a time of high risk following the Brighton Bombing. I was one of the three editors of the “Firearms Security Handbook 2005” together with Dennis Wilmer for the Home OYce and Peter Johnson for ACPO.
The Current System of Security There is a statutory condition on every firearm and shotgun certificate which states: The firearms (and ammunition in the case of a firearm certificate) (or shotguns) to which this certificate relates must at all times [when not in use]…… be stored securely so as to prevent, so far as reasonably practicable, access to the firearm (or ammunition in the case of a firearm certificate) (or shotgun) by unauthorised persons. The Firearms Security Handbook 2005 published (on the Internet) by the Home OYce was an attempt to codify the term “reasonably practicable,” whilst providing helpful, practical advice. In essence, a certificate holder has to provide security equal to or in excess of a gun cabinet or clamp constructed and fitted to comply with BS 7558:1992. What this means is that the cabinet must be secured so that a force of 2 Kilo-Newtons is required to prise it away from the fitting. The key combinations should not be of less than 1,000 diVers. In general the test is one of attack resistance rather than a construction specification, therefore catering for diVering types of security. The test consists of an attack on the cabinet (or clamp) with a club hammer, cold chisel and/or jemmy. Inside the security are dummy firearms to represent a pistol and a rifle or shotgun. The cabinet fails if within five minutes of determined attack, the cabinet can be removed from the fixing or the “guns” can be removed from the cabinet. A second identical test is then conducted with a fresh operative on second cabinet. This operative is first allowed to view the cabinet first tested, together with any observations from the first test; again it fails if it can be removed or entered within five minutes. Apart from the cabinet or clamp itself, he police consider many factors when advising the applicant on firearm security, which will relate to such factors such as: — The level of property crime in the area. — The remoteness or otherwise of the premises. — The types and security of windows and doors. — The manner in which the property is overlooked and illuminated. — The extent to which it may be left unoccupied. — The location of the storage points in the property. — The attractiveness of the firearms to criminals. — The number of firearms held. — The division of the risk by using a number of cabinets. — Whether it is generally known that firearms are stored on the premises. — Any repeat victimisation of the applicant’s property. — The public profile of the certificate holder, if any. One security factor which is always strongly emphasised is the fact that no “unauthorised person” (which includes members of the certificate holder’s family if they are not certificate holders themselves) may have access to the cabinet’s keys, or knowledge of the lock combination should that be the case. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 91
It is usual for cabinets to be hidden away from casual visitors to the house and if a relatively large number of guns are to be held, dividing the risk by having a number of separate cabinets. As a security precaution this is of also relevant to the section below. (Central Storage). There has been a suggestion that firearms or ammunition should be stored in “outhouses” but this runs contrary to the Firearms Security Handbook advice in paragraph 26, as outhouses by their nature are often flimsy, and usually unoccupied, thus presenting a criminal with a far lesser risk of discovery when attacking such premises. Ammunition for Section 1 firearms must be stored in a similar manner to firearms, and not accessible at the same time as the firearm—IE: in their own, separate lockable security.
Central Storage There have been suggestions that firearms and/or ammunition should be stored at a central location: quite apart from the considerable inconvenience caused to law-abiding shooters and the expense involved in providing an armoury system and employing an armourer, this would also breach some of the above principles. I am personally aware of at least four occasions over the past years in which shooting clubs/cadet armouries have been attacked, although fortunately the majority of the guns (where any were stolen) were recovered. There may be some four or five locks, on two or three doors to be defeated to gain access to (say) four guns in a domestic dwelling under the current system. If an armoury system were to be implemented, then a similar number of doors and locks could be defeated (albeit with greater resistance) then access would be gained to far more guns. In any case a person intent on murder would easily defeat this system. The same applies to ammunition. In fact, the theft of firearms has been diminishing dramatically over the years since 1995 (when the number of guns stolen started being recorded, rather than the number of oVences in which guns were stolen.) This relates to both the number of guns stolen AND to the proportion stolen of those held legally. (See attached graphs) There is however the exception of the year 2008–09 where a considerable rise in firearm thefts appears. We are aware that quite a large portion of this rise is accounted for by shotguns misappropriated during one oVence in Gwent, (The “D J Litts” Enquiry) and it may be that in this case the guns have been passed into the legal possession of registered firearms dealers and certificate holders, or been exported rather than passing into criminal hands. We understand from Gwent Police that 309 firearms were reported “missing” during the Litts Enquiry, 120 of which have been located so far. A further six shotguns were also stolen from other sources in Gwent during this period. The Home OYce Supplementary Volume 2 to Crime in England & Wales 2008–09 in paragraph 2.8 deals with this rise, stating, “Around a third of these shotgun thefts in 2008–09 are related to one incident within the Gwent police force area.” 22 November 2010 Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 92 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
Proportion of stolen licensable firearms of those possessed since 1995 (2006/7 & 2007/8 held firearms estimated)
0.0009
0.0008
0.0007
0.0006
0.0005
0.0004
0.0003
0.0002
0.0001
0
1995 2000 2002 1996 1997 1998 1999 2001 2005/6 2006/7 2007/8 2008/9 2002/3 2004/5 2003/4 Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 93
Licenseable Firearms stolen - England & Wales
1600
1400
1200
1000 Number stolen
800
600
400
200
0
1995 1996 1997
1997/19981998/1999 1999/2000 2000/2001 2001/2002 2002/2003 2003/2004 2004/2005 2005/2006 2006/2007 2007/2008 2008/2009
Years Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 94 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
Memorandum submitted by Dr Ian Chrystie Ownership of Firearms in the New Era of Freedom to Roam During the session of 14 September the comment was made that a firearm may be used on “…private premises…” and “….on land where [you have] permission to be…” (Mr Harriman’s response to Q37). Now, I am well aware that ranges used by the Armed Forces fly red flags warning potential “visitors” that firing is in progress. In addition, lookouts are, I believe, always deployed to ensure that the general public do not trespass during firing (although access may be permitted when no firing is taking place). I have no experience of organised “Quarry shooting”—for example on grouse moors and deer stalking—but I would hope that similar precautions are required of and are taken by those organising such events. However, in circumstances where the use of firearms is less organised, for example the farmer who, one morning, might wake up and wish to shoot a few rabbits (referred to by Professor Ashton in his evidence of 2 November), what precautions are required to ensure that members of the general public, with their recently granted “Freedom to Roam”, are made aware of the potential dangers their randomly selected route may be taking them into? Is the farmer required to fly a red flag on his land and post lookouts? Were such dangers considered during the Freedom to Roam deliberations?
Firearm Licence Versus Motor Vehicle Licence During my evidence I made the analogy between Firearms and Motor Vehicle licensing. The question asked subsequently was “is this a red herring?” I have thought about this further and do not think it is. Rather, I feel there are aspects of licensing relating to motor vehicles which should be applied to any revision of that relating to firearms. For example: — Minimum age It seems ludicrous that there is there is no a minimum age for shotguns yet one for firearms and another for motor vehicles. Especially when the only explanation which can be given is that “….the reasons……are probably lost in history.” (Mr Penn’s response to Q36). I find it similarly absurd that an explanation for youngsters applying for shotgun certificates is that they do so because “… the law is so badly written as to how somebody who doesn’t hold a certificate may borrow one legitimately and use it.” A minimum age for both holding a certificate/licence and for using a firearm (whoever owns it) should be enshrined in legislation as soon as possible and should be at least the equivalent to that for driving a motor vehicle. — Motor Vehicle Licence certifies ability to use safely A firearms certificate is granted if an individual has “good reason” and if the police can “ensure that the applicant can be permitted the firearm and ammunition without danger to public safety and the police”. There seems to be no measure of any ability to use in a safe manner as is the case with the licence for a motor vehicle. Surely, at the very least, those whose “good reason” involves shooting living creatures should have to demonstrate that they are able to kill without causing unnecessary suVering? — Requirement for 3rd Party insurance There should be a requirement for any owner of a firearm to be covered for 3rd party liability. — Annual MOT after three years Motor vehicles are required to be maintained to a minimum standard. Any vehicle older that three years requires an annual certificate (MOT). Should not any firearm be similarly certified? — Annual Road Tax Does the cost of a firearms certificate cover the costs in general associated with policing the ownership of such weapons? — GPs I may be mistaken, but is not a GP obliged to inform the DVLA should he/she feel that a patient’s health has deteriorated to the extent that they are unfit to drive? If so, what is the problem with GPs having a similar responsibility with respect to firearms licensing?
“Good Reason” In his response to Q2 (Meeting, 14 September) Mr Penn listed as legitimate uses for being granted a firearms certificate: — quarry shooting—hunting and vermin control (deer control, rabbit control, and, presumably, also fox control); — target shooting; — collecting (including, I assume, trophies of war); — veterinary purposes (medicine delivery, the slaughter of animals, humane despatch of wounded animals); Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 95
— starting sports events; — signalling (life saving equipment for aircraft or boats); and — entertainment—film, theatre and television productions, and battle re-enactment. (Note: I was surprised to learn that self-defence remains a legitimate use in Northern Ireland.) I wonder whether many of these uses actually require firearms? For example, those uses listed above under “entertainment” could surely be accomplished with non-convertible replicas? And it cannot be beyond the wit of man to generate the sound required to start a 100m race in a manner that obviates the use of a firearm. Of the others, those for veterinary and signalling purposes are probably specific enough, and well controlled enough, not to be considered further. Which leaves us with the main three. Although I can appreciate the interest some have in collecting firearms, indeed I can understand the necessity of maintaining collections as they are part of our heritage, I have to ask whether such collections need to be in private hands or whether they should be “national” and held in places where they can be adequately secured—for example attached to military museums within the precincts of military establishments. Target shooting (and I would support the inclusion of pistol shooting—see Mr Penn’s reply to Q17) would, I think, be more made acceptable to those concerned about the current accessibility of firearms, were all such weapons held in high-security armouries (with some form of 24 hour surveillance). I would also include hunting for sport within this category and require that weapons so used be similarly stored. Lastly, vermin control should perhaps be limited to those whose profession it is, with the use of firearms limited to situations where there is no other remedy. The point is often made that farmers need shotguns to rid their farms of unwanted foxes, and licences are granted for such purposes. As I said during the meeting of 2 November, do we envisage such a control measure to rid us of the urban fox?
Ammunition Mr Jamie Reed mentioned (2nd November) the seeming incongruity between being limited to the amount of Calpol he can purchase yet being able (if he holds a shotgun certificate) to purchase, and hold, an almost unlimited amount of ammunition. Perhaps the simplest change to the current legislation would be to require that those who wish to use firearms request ammunition for a defined purpose and date; certify the amount used; and return any that remains to their supplier. In addition, perhaps any firearms licence should be revoked if there is no evidence that the weapon is being used—that is, no ammunition is being purchased and used.
Current Legislation In response to Q18 on 14 September, Mr Doe cited the “34 Acts of Parliament that amended the original 1968 Act”. All three witnesses described the complexity of the current legislation and the lack of understanding, at all levels from “Joe Public” through the Police, to the Judiciary. There can be no doubt that all 34 Acts of Parliament should be consolidated into one Firearms Act. However, I would disagree with Mr Doe when he states (his answer to Q19) that “it’s very important that is done before any other review of it is taken”—especially when one considers the timescale suggested by Mr Penn’s response to Q48 that “…..it would be about two years’ preparation time and one years’ parliamentary time to produce a complete new Firearms Act”. Rather too long for us to wait, I suggest, especially when all agree that “…the Government of the day should be willing to legislate without waiting for such incidents to occur” (Q48).
The Media What Mr Reed eloquently, and accurately, described as “…gratuitous, shocking, unjustifiable, invasive media coverage…” that “…within a matter of hours, became entertainment…” should not be permitted to continue. And, rather than there being some form of self-regulated Code of Practice, I do feel that there needs to be legislation that, for example, specifically protects those who might be termed “victims” such that their identification would require their explicit consent. In addition, I would also propose that no member of the media be permitted to contact ANY minor without that individual’s guardian giving their explicit consent.
Memorandum submitted by the Gun Control Network Summary 1. The Gun Control Network argues, and produces evidence, that gun control works. The UK’s strict gun laws ensure that gun crime remains comparatively rare in this country. Recent legislative changes have contributed to the current trend of falling gun crime. Nevertheless further measures must still be taken to reduce the risk of guns getting into the “wrong hands”. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 96 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
2. A significant proportion of gun oVences are committed with legally-held guns, both those that require a licence eg shotguns and those that do not eg imitation weapons and most airguns. Any government which is serious about reducing gun crime further cannot ignore their contribution to the problem. 3. Gun ownership is a privilege and not a right and the prime purpose of legislation should be about minimising the risk to others. The licensing procedure should be such that the onus must be on the gun owner to demonstrate his/her ongoing suitability and need for a particular gun. The bar should be raised to ensure that only those who meet the strictest criteria are permitted to own guns that can kill, injure or threaten. 4. We make a number of recommendations to deal with weaknesses in current licensing procedures. These include: — the adoption of a single rigorous system that includes firearms, shotguns and airguns with a much shorter renewal period and more input into the process from family, ex-partners and professionals who might be aware of reasons why a person is not suitable; — the cost of this more rigorous system to be borne by gun owners; — more openness about gun ownership making it possible for relevant professionals and members of the public to know who has a licence and for what purpose; and — a new “hot line” for recording concerns about a gun owner and a stringent and consistent policy over revocations in response to such concerns.
Gun Control Network 1. The Gun Control Network (GCN) was set up in 1996 after the Dunblane massacre and campaigns for tighter gun legislation. Our active membership includes a number of families who have personal experience of the harm caused by guns. We do not represent any special interest and are solely concerned with protecting the public from the misuse of guns. We routinely monitor gun incidents occurring throughout Great Britain and compare the level and type of gun crime reported by the media with that recorded in oYcial statistics.
Evidence Gun Control Works 2. It is our firm view that gun control works and that society is best protected from the misuse of guns when ownership and use are tightly regulated. 3. The UK has strict gun laws and gun crime is relatively rare. Comparisons between industrialised countries show that there is a correlation between the levels of gun ownership and gun violence. This country has one of the lowest rates of gun death with annual gun homicides in England and Wales at 0.10 per 100,000 population compared, for example, with 0.69 in Canada, 0.93 in Switzerland and 3.52 in the USA (Gun Violence: The Global Crisis (IANSA, 2007) (data compiled from WHO)). The graph below shows the correlation between Intentional Firearms Deaths and the Presence of Guns in the Home. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 97
12
• 10
8
• Switzerland 6
International Firearm Deaths per 100,000 • Finland
4 • France • • Belgium Austria
• Canada • 2 • Portugal• • Denmark Sweden Australia • • New Zealand • Germany • Netherlands Spain • Poland 0 Scotland • Japan England &Wales 0.0% 5.% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% 40.0% % Household with Firearms
Source: Global Firearm Deaths (Toronto: Small Arms/Firearms Education and Research Network, 2005), www.ryerson.ca/SAFER-Net/issues/global firearmdeaths.html; also United Nations (UN), The Eighth International Crime Victims Survey, 2000. 4. The experience in the UK shows (a) tough gun laws play a significant role in maintaining low levels of gun crime, but (b) more should be done to reduce the risks posed by gun ownership. 5. The impact of recent tighter legislation has been reflected in sustained downward trends in the overall number of firearm oVences and most categories of gun crime over the last few years. Total oVences fell by 41% in the six years to 2008–09 (unless otherwise indicated all figures quoted are for England and Wales). In 2008–09 and 2009–10 the number involving fatal injury was at its lowest (39) for at least 20 years and injuries were down by over a half since 2004–05. 6. Recorded handgun crime has fallen by 33% during the last seven years. Whilst there have been mass shootings involving handguns in countries where they can be legally owned no such outrage involving a handgun has taken place in Great Britain since the 1997 legislation which banned them from private ownership. Police forces report that fewer handguns and ammunition are available to criminals. Earlier this year the National Ballistics Intelligence Service (NABIS) reported that rival gangs were sharing weapons because of a scarcity of guns on the streets. 7. GCN believes the impact of the 1997 handgun ban may be greater than is indicated by the oYcial figures. Imitation guns proliferated in the years following the handgun ban, but unless a gun is fired or recovered it will not be known whether an oVence has been committed with a live-firing weapon or an imitation. In the majority of incidents a handgun is used as a threat but not fired. We understand that unless a weapon is specifically identified as an imitation the police will record it as a handgun on the basis of its appearance, and so it is likely that the number of handgun oVences is being inflated by the inclusion of many committed with imitation guns. 8. More recent legislation placed restrictions on the sale of airguns and banned the manufacture, import and sale of realistic imitation weapons. OYcial figures show falls in oVences committed with imitation guns (down 55% in five years) and air weapons (down 57% in six years) suggesting that the legislation has had an impact. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 98 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
9. Despite the overall downward trend in gun crime there is no room for complacency, and inadequacies in the current legislation or its implementation have been highlighted by a number of recent incidents, including the shootings in Cumbria committed by the owner of a licensed shotgun and rifle.
Legal Guns and Gun Crime 10. Claims that all gun crime is committed with illegal weapons are entirely misleading. Some of the most devastating crimes, such as those in Cumbria, Dunblane and Hungerford, involved legally-held guns. In addition, at least half of all firearm oVences are committed with imitation guns and air weapons, the majority of which can be owned without a licence (in 2008–09 they accounted for 53% of oYcially recorded oVences). Any government which is serious about reducing gun crime further cannot ignore the contribution to the problem made by legally-held guns. 11. There can be no dispute that some licensed gun owners use their guns to commit crimes. Nearly all the mass shootings that have taken place in industrialised countries in the last thirty years have been committed with legally-owned guns. This was true at Hungerford in August 1987, Dunblane in March 1996 and Cumbria in June 2010, and in some of the deadliest shootings elsewhere including, since 2002, in Zug (Switzerland), Nanterre (France), Chieri (Italy), Tuusula and Kauhajoki (Finland) and Erfurt and Winnenden (Germany), as well as the majority of spree shootings in the USA. 12. Many of the fatal domestic shootings in Great Britain are committed with legally-held weapons. Between January 2009 and March 2010 fourteen people (about a quarter of all shooting homicide victims) died in apparent domestic shootings, at least five of which involved a legally-owned shotgun (information on the legal status of weapons is not always available). Nearly all of the victims were women, and in many cases the perpetrator took his own life. There were further incidents in which women were fortunate to survive being shot by a family member or ex-partner armed with a shotgun. Legally-owned guns are used to threaten partners and ex-partners, and given the nature of such incidents it is likely that many incidents go unreported by frightened victims. 13. Each year a number of others die from self-inflicted gunshot wounds, usually involving a legally-held shotgun. We are aware of at least 17 such fatalities in 2010 including four young men with access to shotguns in their own home. 14. Legally-owned guns provide a source of weapons for criminal activity. Last year the Metropolitan Police warned that criminals were using shotguns because of “the lower cost of ammunition, the ease of use and the absence of viable alternatives [such as handguns]” and that there had been an increase in the number of shotguns stolen in London. The most recent Home OYce figures showed a more than doubling of the number of shotguns misappropriated throughout England and Wales last year. Wider shotgun ownership increases the risk of more guns being stolen, especially if owners are not frequently checked and reminded of their obligation to store guns securely. 15. Airguns and imitation guns (which include BB and airsoft weapons), which do not require registration, are used in a wide variety of gun oVences. They are responsible for a large proportion of injuries caused when a gun is fired (64% of the total in 2008–09). 16. Inadequacies in the control and monitoring of imitation guns and air weapons have resulted in certain types of weapon being converted for use in violent crime. The Brocock air cartridge pistol and more recently the Olympic Starting Pistol were eventually banned but only after many of them had been converted into live-firing weapons in illegal gun factories. 17. Despite recent restrictions on sales, airguns may be purchased without background checks and so can easily be obtained by those banned from owning firearms or others who would be deemed unsuitable for gun ownership. There are many reports of airguns being used to threaten partners and ex-partners. Without registration it is easy for them to fall into the hands of children and young people, often as a result of inadequate storage. Air weapons are treated diVerently from other firearms, both in legislation and oYcial statistics, implying they are not dangerous. Yet there is plenty of evidence that they are lethal. There have been a number of fatalities, especially among children and teenagers (three during 2009), and they were responsible for a fifth of all serious gun injuries in 2008–09. Airguns are frequently used in attacks on pets and wildlife. In 2008 the RSPCA dealt with 759 animals aVected by the improper use of airguns, a figure likely to be a gross underestimate of the number actually attacked. 18. Imitation guns are widely used in armed robberies and create fear and alarm when seen on the street. Most guns recovered in police raids (Metropolitan Police, 78% of weapons seized) or after armed responses (Avon and Somerset Police, 90%) are imitations or air weapons. (Hampshire Police estimate that one hour of policing a firearms incident costs the equivalent of 27 hours of local beat policing.) 19. Whilst the Violent Crime Reduction Act prohibits the sale of realistic imitation firearms there are no such restrictions on the sale of air pistols, many of which resemble real handguns. Indeed on internet sites they are often described as looking like the “real thing”. We are told by the Home OYce that they cannot be treated as imitations because they are actual firearms. However, there is no distinction between the ways in which air pistols and other imitation weapons are being used in crime, and GCN believes that no such distinction should be made in law. This view is backed by written legal opinion obtained by GCN which is available to the committee. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 99
Gun Licensing The Principle 20. In the UK, gun ownership is regarded as a privilege and not a right. Guns are licensed because they are lethal weapons and because, as we have demonstrated above, society is safer if there are fewer of them. It is generally acknowledged that there are some people who should be allowed to own and use guns for specific purposes eg pest control, shooting designated wild birds and animals for pleasure, clay pigeon shooting and target shooting in a gun club. 21. The prime purpose of legislation should be about minimising the risk to others. It is said that the purpose of licensing guns is to prevent guns getting into the “wrong hands”, but perhaps a better way to approach the issue would be to ask the question “who are the right people to own guns in our society?” We need to raise the bar to ensure that only those who meet the strictest criteria are permitted to own a gun that is capable of killing. The onus should always be on the applicant to demonstrate his/her ongoing suitability and need for a gun.
Weaknesses in current licensing procedures 22. Shotguns, rifles and airguns are all treated diVerently for no good reason. All three can, and do, kill and injure. 23. Violent oVenders, drug and alcohol abusers, people with mental health problems and people with a history of domestic violence frequently own licensed guns and misuse them to devastating eVect. Licensing oYcers may investigate these matters but are not mandated to do so. 24. Licences do not always identify the purpose for which a gun is to be used. Even where a purpose is identified, the licence is often not revoked where the gun is no longer being used for that purpose. This latter category is of particular relevance in the case of the Cumbrian killer whose legal guns were apparently not being used for anything on a regular basis. 25. Renewals are required every five years. A great deal can change in the course of five years and too often licences are renewed “on the nod” to people without knowing if they have become unsuitable in some way. 26. There is no connection between the cost of a licence and the cost of administering that licence. 27. There is a culture of secrecy surrounding gun ownership. There are many people who consider an individual’s ownership of guns to be a risk to themselves or their families, or to the general public— neighbours, ex-spouses and partners, parents of visiting children, doctors, paramedics and care workers. It is appropriate that these people should be able to find out if someone has a gun and for there to be a hot line to record concerns. Whilst criminals appear to know who has guns others who may have a legitimate interest in the matter do not. Secrecy does not serve the public interest in this case. Nonetheless there is a culture of secrecy which is maintained by gun owners and the police. Arguments that openness would make it easier for criminals to steal guns are heavily outweighed by the interests of public transparency and the increase in safety and security that that would ensure.
Recommendations 28. GCN recommends the following changes to the licensing system: (i) Tightening the licensing procedure into a single rigorous system that includes firearms, shotguns and, in due course, airguns. The onus should always be on the applicant to demonstrate suitability and a specific need or purpose for the weapon. Any opportunities for the spontaneous purchase of a gun, including air weapons, should be eliminated. (ii) A licence for every gun, renewed annually with two referees required for each application. Referees to be asked to confirm that the applicant has a need for a gun and is a suitable person to have one. Referees to be contacted for renewals as well as initial applications. (iii) Increased licence fee to cover the cost of a more rigorous licensing system. (iv) Lifting the secrecy about gun ownership, making it possible for certain professionals and members of the public to find out who has a licence and for what purpose. (v) National “Hot line” for those who wish to record their concerns about a gun owner. A dedicated well advertised and promoted free phone line for those having concerns about their own or another’s safety, or the behaviour or state of mind of a gun owner. Where appropriate this should prompt a licence review. (vi) Refusal or revocation of a licence where there is evidence of domestic violence, drug or alcohol abuse, when a gun is not being used for the designated purpose, when a relevant misdemeanour has been committed, eg shooting of wildlife, threatening behaviour, negligent storage or when an applicant has a significant criminal conviction. Clear guidance is necessary to avoid inconsistent court decisions. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 100 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
(vii) Mandatory notification to GPs when a patient becomes a legal gun owner. The GP will then put a marker on the file and decide when and if to notify police of mental health problems. (viii) Mandatory private and discrete notification to former (two years) and present partners of new and repeat applicants. Any concerns should begin a secondary review of the application and, where appropriate, the refusal or revocation of the licence and removal of guns. This happens in Canada and Australia and there is evidence that gun-related domestic violence has decreased as the legal frameworks on gun licensing and domestic violence become harmonised. 26 August 2010
Supplementary memoranda submitted by the Gun Control Network We thank the committee for giving us the opportunity to answer questions about our recommendations for legislative change to: (i) reduce the risk of another mass shooting following the terrible events in Cumbria; and (ii) bring down the overall level of gun crime in the UK. We would like to add to our previous written and oral submissions as follows.
1. What could have prevented the Cumbria shootings? Under a more rigorous licensing system, such as the one GCN is proposing, Derrick Bird’s gun licence would have been revoked on account of his having a significant criminal record. He would therefore not have had access to legally licensed guns. Since it is generally believed he would have been unlikely to have gone in search of illegal weapons, he would not have had the means of killing such a large number of people. Police believe that our tightly enforced gun laws have made it diYcult to acquire illegal guns. The claim made by another witness—a gun owner himself—that he would be able to get hold of an illegal weapon within 48 hours is idly made and not borne out by police information. In January 2010 Detective Chief Superintendent Paul James, NABIS programme director, was quoted as saying that it was wrong to suggest illegal guns could be bought cheaply and easily. “It’s a myth that you can go into a pub and pick up a gun for £50”. Ironically, in the United States which we regard as having very lax gun laws, Bird’s convictions would probably have barred him as a legal gun owner.
2. Do legal weapons contribute to gun crime? There are two sorts of legally-held guns: licensed guns and those for which no licence is required. Licensed guns – predominantly shotguns, rifles and high powered airguns: — Almost all mass shootings around the world, including Hungerford, Dunblane and Cumbria, involve licensed gun owners using licensed guns. The lone mass murderer is almost always a man who loves his guns and acquires them perfectly legally. — Figures for licensed guns involved in crime are not recorded in the UK, and the information is not in the public domain. GCN’s FOI requests are repeatedly denied. However, the Home OYce do seem to have produced some information for the HAC and we hope that in future this data will be routinely collected and published as in other countries. — In Canada where data about the criminal use of licensed weapons is routinely collected and published, 1/3 of all traced murder guns are licensed. This, and anecdotal evidence collected by GCN of domestic homicide in the Great Britain, suggests that legal guns are used to kill on a regular basis. Weapons for which no licence is required—airguns and imitations (including BB and airsoft guns) — 53% of gun oVences in England and Wales involve airguns and imitations; 57% in Scotland; — 23% of serious injuries involve airguns and imitations; — 67% of slight injuries involve airguns and imitations; and — most reported convictions for armed robbery with a gun are of people who were armed with an imitation firearm or air weapon. In 2010 GCN has logged 55 domestic gun incidents (ranging from aVray and possession of a firearm with intent to cause fear of violence, to murder and unlawful killing). From the information given in the reports 65% of these probably involved a legally-held gun. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 101
3. What changes should be made to the licensing procedures? Improved licensing procedures should be: — inclusive—involving all guns that are routinely used to kill and injure ie rifles, shotguns, airguns); — simple—a single system up to Section 1 standard; clear purpose for each gun. — rigorous —onus on the applicant to prove s/he is suitable, oVenders (for oVences carrying a prison sentence) refused, involve partners and/or ex partners in the process as in Canada/New Zealand , GP to be notified, mandatory checks for mental health, alcohol and drug abuse, domestic violence; — frequent—renewable every two years; and — cost neutral—fee to cover all administration. No cost to the taxpayer or police.
4. Why introduce a Hotline for registering concerns about gun owners? — GCN receives many messages from people fearful about partners or neighbours who have guns. There is currently no procedure in place for people to register their concerns; — in 1995 Canada introduced a package of measures to combat armed domestic violence, including a toll free hotline and greater involvement of spouses/partners in the application process. Around 26,000 calls were received in the first four years of the hotline. The rate of firearms related spousal homicide decreased by nearly 50% between 1997 and 2006 (Statistics Canada 2008) suggesting, though not proving, a causal link. Other countries to have harmonised their gun control and domestic violence laws are South Africa, Australia and Trinidad and Tobago; and — good intelligence is the key to public safety.
5. Why should we be more open about gun ownership? — secrecy is not justified in the public interest; — certain people have good reason to want to know if there is a gun in the house viz potential partners, neighbours, medics and paramedics, care workers, parents of visiting children; and — criminals already know where the guns are and there has been, for example, a significant recent rise in theft of shotguns. If gun owners were more exposed to scrutiny they might take more care to keep their guns secure.
6. Why and how do we need to connect information about domestic violence and gun ownership? — there is evidence that guns are frequently used to threaten women in domestic violence scenarios; — in 2009–10 there were 44 gun murders in Great Britain of which 12 appear to be domestic with 10 female victims; — in 2010 there were 55 domestic gun incidents logged by GCN (ranging from aVray and possession of a firearm with intent to cause fear of violence, to murder and unlawful killing); in 65% of these the gun was probably held legally; — in Canada partners and ex partners (two yrs) must sign the application; failure to do so is not a veto but will trigger a review; there is a toll free spousal hotline; and — in New Zealand a partner must sign the application, and the police manual requires “partner to be interviewed in a separate room with the door closed”.
7. Why and how should GP’s records be tagged? — mental ill—health should be a contraindication for gun ownership; — GPs may have relevant information about a gun owner’s mental health; — a clear protocol is necessary to protect GPs from pressure and allegations of breaking confidence; and — the removal of discretion would be helpful to the GP.
8. Why and how should airguns be registered? — airguns are not “boys toys” but as they are not registered the wrong message is given and they proliferate and fall into the wrong hands; — around 20% of serious gun injuries involve airguns; — around 50% of all gun injuries involve airguns; GCN’s list of airgun incidents in 2010 is attached; —oVenders banned from ownership of firearms are able to purchase an airgun (including a realistic imitation) without any checks being made; Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 102 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
— although realistic imitation guns now cannot be bought or sold, no such restrictions are placed on realistic airguns which are frequently advertised online as looking like the “real thing”; — Scotland is about to take control of licensing its airguns; and — Australia treats airguns in the same way as any other firearm and licenses them. 8 November 2010
Joint memorandum submitted by the Association of Chief Police OYcers for England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and the National Ballistics Intelligence Service 1.0 Introduction 1.1 The Association of Chief Police OYcers for England, Wales and Northern Ireland (ACPO) and the National Ballistics Intelligence Service (NABIS) are pleased to be able to respond to the recent request for written submissions on the above subject matter. The stated focus of the inquiry reaches across more than one ACPO committee or working group. In order to provide the most comprehensive overview of the Criminal Use of Firearms this submission is made on behalf of the ACPO Criminal Use of Firearms (ACPO CUF) portfolio and the National Ballistics Intelligence Service with the knowledge that ACPO Firearms and Explosives Working Group (ACPO FELWG) will provide a separate submission to the Home AVairs Select Committee (HASC). 1.2 The Information provided in this document by NABIS is limited in its specificity due to the nature of the Services’ work. NABIS has requested through the Home OYce that the Service be allowed a closed session with the HASC in order to provide a “restricted” brief of the current threat posed by the criminal use of firearms. To do so without restriction would compromise UK Law Enforcement (UKLE) activity. The foundations for the recommendations contained within this report are however based on NABIS Intelligence information. 1.3 Both ACPO CUF and NABIS consider there to be a number of changes required to ensure public safety, deny criminals the use of firearms, or a base product of convertibility, whilst providing a legislative framework that tackles those who present a risk of substantial harm to the communities and citizens of the United Kingdom and beyond.
2.0 Deactivated Firearms 2.1 The issue of deactivated firearms has been one of contention for many years and remains subject to a Home OYce consultation paper. Fundamentally these items were previously firearms and as such some provide a base product for those who wish to convert them back to lethal firearms. 2.2 As NABIS has developed it has become clear that the supply of illegal firearms is limited. As eVective action by UKLE is taken the sourcing of weapons becomes more diYcult for criminal organisations to achieve. Criminal groups appear to, and or have the potential to, exploit this ready supply of deactivated weapons. It is clear pre-1995 standard items may present them with an opportunity to convert these items into deadly firearms. 2.3 ACPO recommends at this juncture that consideration be given to ensure that pre-1995 deactivated firearms are brought inline with the post-1995 standard of deactivation. ACPO does not seek to ban these items but does seeks to ensure a common standard is apparent across those deactivated firearms in circulation in order to prevent exploitation by criminally minded individuals whilst allowing those who wish to collect or re-enact with these items the right to do so. It may be sensible to limit the scope of this exercise to a group or list of weapons that would appear to either be criminally desirable or on the easier side of reactivation. 2.4 Due to the realistic nature of these items it also suggested that deactivated firearms be either subject to licence such as those currently defined under Section 1 of the Firearms Act 1968 or subject to another form of registration scheme. 2.5 In the light of the tragic events surrounding the action of Derrick Bird the HASC may also wish to give consideration to the prohibition of ownership of deactivated weapons by those persons classed as “Prohibited” as per Section 21 of the Firearms Act 1968.
3.0 Section 39 Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 3.1 Section 39 of the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 provides the legislative framework for the specification of blank firing imitation firearms. 3.2 Both before and after the ACOP CUF/NABIS operation to remove the Olympic .380 BBM Blank Firer from sale and circulation it was, and continues to be, our view that the current standard in relation to the specification applied to blank firing weapons in the UK is not fit for purpose. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 103
3.3 ACPO recommends that the standard be revised with the utmost urgency. This standard must reflect the knowledge of the National Ballistics Intelligence Service and commercial forensic providers with regard to ease of convertibility. 3.4 ACPO also recommends that a process of “type approval” be brought into eVect in order to ensure that blank firing items are in compliance with the standard before sale is permitted. This will involve a process of testing and periodic re-testing that should be at no cost to the taxpayer. It would be expected that the importer or manufacture fund the type approval process via an application fee. 3.5 Any supporting legislation should state that no modification to the design should be made post certification without prior approval or retesting. Any breach of this should result in a large fine or prohibition to sell any item within the UK, or both. 3.6 As part of this legislation the Secretary of State should be able to remove an item from the “approved” list at any time based on a change of design or manufacture that has not been declared, or if evidence is apparent that an item is being, or is capable of being converted. 3.7 ACPO would also recommend that if blank firing items continue to be sold over the counter that a process such as that outlined within the Proceeds of Crime Act 2007 in relation to Suspicious Activity Reports (SAR) be instigated. 3.8 A SAR system would allow for the proactive investigation of larger sales of blank firing weapons to an individual or individuals, however this would necessitate the requirement to obtain information relating to the identification of the purchaser. The HASC may also wish to give consideration to the RFD network becoming the single supply system for such items where information could be gathered from the purchaser at point of sale. ACPO would suggest Internet sales would not be possible under such a scheme. 3.9 On behalf of ACPO CUF, NABIS is currently completing an operational assessment and learning capture exercise in relation to the activity to remove the Olympic .380 BBM from sale and circulation. A copy will be made available to the HASC before October.
4.0 Firearms Act 1982 Section 1(6)(b) 4.1 In light of activity in relation to Olympic .380 BBM and other operations such as that relating to Operation OCTANE it is suggested that consideration be given to amending Section 1(6)(b) of the firearms act 1982. 4.2 Subsection (b) of the act covers the area of “tools”. 4.3 ACPO would also recommend the words as detailed in Section 1 (6) (b) in relation to tools involved in the conversion of firearms be amended. Current wording states that the tools used to convert firearms should not be outside of those in “common use” by “persons carrying out works of construction and maintenance in their own homes”. These terms create confusion and a lack of common understanding; neither do they reflect the range of tools available within the domestic marketplace. It is suggested the sub section be revised to reflect tools and equipment commonly available on the high street or via Internet retailers. It is suggested that tools with a gross weight of over 250Kg would fall outside this definition, as they would demonstrate heavy machinery.
5.0 Theft of Legally Held Shotguns 5.1 As per section 2.1 of the evidence provided by Assistant Chief Constable Adrian Whiting on behalf of ACPO FELWG. ACPO CUF and NABIS are increasingly concerned with the rising number of shotgun thefts in the UK. 5.2 ACPO and NABIS have identified that over the period 1 April 2009 to 31 July 2010 there have been 41 incidents over 15 forces entered onto the NABIS database involving the theft of a total of 80 shotguns; 79 of which are still outstanding. This has also included targeted robberies in order to obtain shotguns from shotgun license holders. It is the view of NABIS that the rising number of thefts is directly correlated to the lack of supply of illegal firearms within the criminal market place. 5.3 At the time of writing NABIS is currently preparing a shotgun problem profile for use by UKLE in managing the risk and threat posed by such thefts. A copy of the profile can be made available to the HASC upon completion however this document is “restricted” and can therefore not be disseminated outside of the HASC, or have its contents discussed in open forum. 5.4 As part of the associated dialogue in the development of the profile it has been suggested by criminal use of firearms practitioners that Shotgun certificate holders retain test fires from their Shotguns as part of a condition of licence. Upon loss or theft these test fire could be submitted to UKLE. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 104 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
6.0 Possession with Intent to Supply 6.0 NABIS has been successful in showing that there is a small amount of firearms in circulation that are used on a frequent basis. These uses are often by individuals and groups that are unconnected, suggesting the role of “middle men” who supply firearms to others either by sale, loan or lease. 6.1 ACPO CUF, based on intelligence information from NABIS, has requested that a new oVence of “Possession of a firearm with intent to supply” be created with a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. 6.2 It is the view of ACPO and criminal use of firearms practitioners across UKLE that the oVence of straight possession for these “middle men” is not appropriate for the seriousness of the oVence. In order to achieve an appropriate oVence and sentence the only current option would be a charge of possession with intent to endanger life; this is often extremely diYcult to prove and oVers little to investigators where intent to endanger life is not an obvious factor in the case. 6.3 The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, stated in his summing up of a recent appeal in relation to firearms oVences that “being in possession of a firearm with intent to supply them, whether manufactured by someone else of not, is not less criminally reprehensible than the importation of drugs or possession with intent to supply them”. 6.4 The available profit relating to firearms is no way consistent with that of class A drugs and it is hoped that this type of sentence outweighs the potential financial gain, thus creating a extremely strong deterrent. 6.5 Currently progress in relation to the creation of a new oVence for possession with intent to supply firearms (with an associated life sentence) has stalled. ACPO CUF/NABIS Knowledge had been in discussion with the Home OYce and Ministry of Justice (MoJ) before the General Election and some progress had been made with the oVence being agreed in principle by the former administration. ACPO would again recommend this be given priority.
7.0 Importation of Firearms into the UK without Licence 7.1 Additionally ACPO CUF would request that it becomes an oVence to import firearms, without a license, into the UK as a separate oVence under the firearms act. Currently individuals caught importing firearms into the UK illegally (including handguns and machine guns with ammunition suitable for use) face a maximum of is 10 years imprisonment, this is either a consequence of section 170 of the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 or possession of a firearm under Section 5 of the Firearms Act 1968. 7.2 Based on NABIS intelligence data and other operational information the importation of firearms from other nationals globally poses a substantial threat to the UK. 7.3 ACPO CUF would recommend that a separate oVence be created in relation to the importation of, or conspiracy to, import firearms without license. The maximum sentence for such an oVence should be life imprisonment.
8.0 Current Legislation 8.1 ACPO CUF and NABIS would both strongly support the view of ACPO Firearms and Explosives Licensing Working Group (FELWG) that in the main firearms legislation is broadly fit for purpose. However it is now very complex as amendments have simply been “bolted” onto other pieces of legislation for convenience. Practitioners therefore have to have regard for legislation such as the Welfare of Animals Regulations 1995, the Anti Social Behaviour Act 2003 and the Energy Act 2004 for example. The legal landscape is jumbled meaning that great eVort is expended negotiating it. 8.2 ACPO CUF and NABIS would also support FELWG in its view that now would appear an opportune time both to review and consolidate the relevant law, adding clarity where it is needed. ACPO has a number of submissions regarding potential legislative change in addition to the views mentioned. Whilst the key ones are discussed in this submission, ACPO both from and Criminal Use and Licensing working group perspective have a number of further areas of detail to contribute should a process to achieve legislative change be embarked upon.
Memorandum submitted by the Association of Chief Police OYcers Firearms & Explosives Licensing Working Group Executive Summary It is considered that a significant number of improvements can be made to the system of firearms licensing control, such as would improve public safety generally. Given the complex nature of the legislation it is proposed that the most eVective and eYcient method of achieving a significant number of improvements would be through fresh amending and consolidating legislation. It is not currently oVered that the recent appalling oVences in Cumbria demonstrate any particular shortcoming in the existing legislation or its application in respect of the law seeking to put into practice parliament’s intentions. If the more or less exact events of Cumbria are to be prevented by a firearms licensing system then a far more fundamental change would be necessary in relation to the private ownership of firearms. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 105
1.0 Introduction 1.1 The Association of Chief Police OYcers for England, Wales and Northern Ireland (ACPO) is pleased to be able to respond to the recent request for written submissions on the above subject matter. The stated focus of the inquiry reaches across more than one ACPO committee or working group. This submission is thus made on behalf of the ACPO Firearms & Explosives Licensing Working Group (ACPO FELWG) and seeks to assist in relevant specific areas. 1.2 The Committee will be aware of the ACPO “Peer Reviews” following the appalling tragedies in Cumbria. One of those relates to firearms licensing and I am leading on it. That review has been divided into two parts. The first concerns the application of the licensing system by Cumbria Constabulary and the second observations and recommendations for change that may flow from the learning from those events. I have completed a final draft of the first part, and anticipate publication in due course. In trying to assist the Committee now I consider it appropriate to advise that, in brief, I consider that Cumbria Constabulary has a robust and professional operation in these matters and that the system was applied appropriately, in accordance with the law, Home OYce guidance, national and force policy. 1.3 From the details of the circumstances I consider it reasonable to seek to assist the Committee further by observing that I anticipate that the second part of the review will indicate that there are no immediate changes that could be introduced such as would alter the licensing system in such a way as to have either prevented or significantly mitigated against the outcomes in Cumbria. In essence only a fundamental change in the matter of private ownership of firearms, so as to essentially prevent such ownership, could achieve anything like that level of assurance. 1.4 ACPO FELWG considers that there are a number of changes that could be made that would usefully improve public safety and these are set out below. A more detailed background and case for these changes can be provided if requested. I therefore anticipate submitting both parts of the Cumbria Peer Review report to the Committee in due course, and providing any further submissions as the Committee may wish.
2.0 Criminal Use of Otherwise Lawfully Possessed Firearms & the Firearms (Amendment)Acts 1997 2.1 Whilst ACPO Criminal Use of Firearms Committee will oVer material relating to armed criminality, in general it is considered that certificate holders represent a very small proportion of such crime, which itself is a small percentage of oVending behaviour. This does not minimise the impact of such crimes and so the respective ACPO groups work closely together. A good example of this would be the recent work in respect of the “Bruni Olympic BBM .380” blank firing revolver”. Of current joint concern is the increase in numbers of lawfully held shotguns stolen. 2.2 The Firearms (Amendment) Acts of 1997 principally achieved widespread prohibition of the private ownership of small firearms. This prohibition is not complete as a number of exempted purposes for their possession remain. The Acts have served to mostly ensure that oVences are not committed by people otherwise in lawful possession of small firearms. This is likely to remain the case although could be aVected adversely if the increase in lawful possession of handguns for the humane despatch of animals or for pest control continues to develop; as at present. This trend features handguns of varying calibres and without restriction to their magazine capacity. ACPO considers that greater clarity in law as to Parliament’s wishes in this area should be given. 2.3 That legislation also provided the foundation for the National Firearm Licensing Management System (NFLMS). This system has now been successfully introduced across all police forces in England & Wales. The NFLMS has exceeded the requirements of the legislation in order to provide better public safety and so includes, through a link to the Police National Computer (PNC) a mechanism for alerting forces to their certificate holders coming to adverse notice of police in other police force areas as well as their own. A link exists between the PNC and the Scottish equivalent. The NFLMS is operated by the National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) on behalf of chief constables.
3.0 Current Legislation and its Fitness for Purpose 3.1 Current law concerning firearms law is broadly fit for purpose. However it is now very complex as amendments have simply been “bolted” onto other pieces of legislation for convenience. Practitioners therefore have to have regard for legislation such as the Welfare of Animals Regulations 1995, the Anti Social Behaviour Act 2003 and the Energy Act 2004 for example. The legal landscape is jumbled meaning that great eVort is expended negotiating it. It would appear an opportune time both to review and consolidate the relevant law, adding clarity where it is needed. ACPO has a number of submissions regarding potential legislative change in addition to the views mentioned. Whilst the key ones are discussed in this submission, ACPO has a number of further areas of detail to contribute to should a process to achieve legislative change be embarked upon. 3.2 It is important that the Committee and the public are aware that public access to s1 firearms without the need for a firearm certificate or indeed supervision can be achieved reasonably easily. ACPO is uneasy with the provisions under s11 (4) Firearms Act 1968 regarding miniature rifle ranges. Whilst there is only limited evidence to indicate that people otherwise refused a firearm certificate have subsequently gone on to possess .22”RF rifles under these provisions ACPO believes that a clear risk exists that should be legislated for before a tragedy occurs. Likewise there are some limited concerns regarding Home OYce Approved Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 106 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
Shooting Clubs where it is possible for a person to have unvetted access to firearms and ammunition whilst not in the presence of a certificate holder. ACPO stresses that it seems that no risk in this regard has actually materialised but simple amendment to the law could prevent it from doing so without adversely aVecting the club’s lawful activities. 3.3 ACPO considers that the rather final provision relating to revocation should be complemented by a power to suspend a certificate for a period of time, subject to the same appeal procedures as for revocation. Such a provision could avoid revocation whilst a matter is investigated. In many cases a chief oYcer has to come to a view ahead of investigation, especially where dispute exists between parties. In addition ACPO would welcome further consideration being given to the route of appeals against revocation or refusal. 3.4 ACPO considers that it is timely to review what Parliament wishes to achieve in respect of “prohibited persons” within the meaning of s21 Firearms Act 1968. The circumstances in Cumbria appeared to demonstrate some disconnect between the public (or at least the media) expectation in this regard and the law. In particular how the courts interpret the law in relation to wholly suspended sentences hangs on the wording of the law prior to the introduction of such provisions. In addition, orders made in relation to a person’s mental health are only engaged under the more general considerations of a person’s suitability rather than through any express prohibition. Greater public safety through improved clarity could potentially be gained here. 3.5 Police forces are expected by Parliament to have regard to the Home OYce guidance in this area. The same consideration to the guidance is not aVorded by the courts and in some instances the court has not permitted a jury to have access to the guidance. ACPO considers that a change in status to that of an “Approved Code of Practice” (ACOP) would be useful, drawing on the parallel with the Manufacture and Storage of Explosives Regulations 2005 ACOP.
4.0 The Committees Previous Recommendations 4.1 In respect of the Committee’s previous recommendations, ACPO is pleased that progress, including completion, has been made in many areas. Of some of those areas not yet adopted in practice FELWG would oVer the following; 4.2 A single form of certificate (requiring change to Regulations) remains desirable for safety and economic reasons. FELWG considers that utilising the procedures for s1 firearm control in respect of applications for the grant/renewal of shotgun certificates will generally provide a higher assurance of public safety. Similarly there should be provisions regarding the secure storage of shotgun ammunition. However whilst broadly supportive of the proposal to require shotgun certificate holders to have a good reason for each shotgun, or to state how many shotguns they might wish to possess, FELWG is aware that such provisions have scant evidential bases, including the recent crimes in Cumbria. 4.3 Formal arrangements for the examination and classification of new types of firearm do not yet exist and this has led to additional policing eVort when firearms have been brought to the market and sold as one type when they are subsequently shown to be another. FELWG considers legislation is needed to formalise such arrangements. 4.4 The continued absence of a statement in law regarding lethality is a very significant continued diYculty, and the frequency of engagement with this aspect of the definition of a firearm has significantly increased with the growth in “airsoft skirmishing” and re-enactment. This is also very much the case in respect of establishing whether or not a particular firearm is an antique. In this respect FELWG considers that greater clarity in law is needed. 4.5 ACPO FELWG absolutely endorses the previous recommendation regarding periodic personal contact between the applicant/certificate holder and the licensing force. This is captured in ACPO policy but is under threat as resourcing diminishes. The appropriate measures of success of this approach over mechanisms such as simple postal renewal should not simply be the number of revocations commenced as a direct result of a personal visit, but of the success of the system as a whole in minimising relevant crime. The visits are part of a whole, and should be reflected in a formal requirement. 4.6 ACPO is strongly in support of the recommendations describing that the administration of the system be eYcient and at no net cost to public funds. The present fees are under national review and ACPO has made a submission supporting their increase, however the system does not operate at no net cost to the public. Whilst acknowledging that eYciency improvements need to continue to be made, regulations and HM treasury guidance still restrict the activities for which a fee can be charged and the extent of activities that can be included in that calculation. For example, where an application is refused the fee must be refunded even though the investigative work has been completed and paid for by the force. There are a number of licensing activities, such as the approval of times and places for the shooting of artificial targets, which are a cost to public funds but for which no fee can be charged. ACPO strongly argues for changes that will enable these activities to be charged for too, in common with existing chargeable activities. ACPO strongly takes the view that the cost of the provision of medical reports should fall to the applicant and not the public purse. Currently the Home OYce guidance advises police should bear these costs. 4.7 ACPO continues to support the introduction of arrangements to replace the previous Firearms Consultative Committee, and would remain to be pleased to assist. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 107
4.8 The diVerence between the shooting disciplines in connection with which a club may achieve Home OYce approval and the lawful shooting disciplines available to shooters means that many shooting activities are not subject to the structures around such approval. This means that provisions such as s44 Firearms (Amendment) Act 1997 relating to target shooters needing to be members of Home OYce approved clubs may not deliver in practice what was intended. It remains sensible to seek to achieve alignment between what is lawfully permitted and what is capable of being approved.
5.0 Information Sharing Between Medical Professionals and Police 5.1 ACPO acknowledges that particularly high profile crimes, including murders, have given greater visibility of this area for consideration. It is ACPO’s view that contact with the relevant General Practitioner (GP) should be made at each application/renewal and that the costs be borne by the applicant. Certain tragic examples have highlighted that there can be occasions where a medical practitioner would raise concerns about immediate access to firearms and/or explosives if they had some indication of that potential access. ACPO considers that by engaging the GP as above, and permitting the GP to maintain some form of marker as to that potential access, would provide a better safeguard than presently exists. Currently police are advised only to approach a GP where a concern already exists, not to find out if there is one. 5.2 ACPO acknowledges that the number of crimes relating to this is relatively low, as are the number of suicides, but the eVects of them are very great indeed. This is a case of low probability but very high adverse impact. Work has progressed with the British Medical Association and General Medical Council towards achieving some form of arrangement. Currently details regarding how the NHS would hold such data are awaited and there is then to be engagement with the Information Commissioner’s OYce, who has recently expressed some concerns about both the proportionality of such an arrangement given the number of incidents, and then whether or not the patient record can be used for such a purpose. The proposal has strong support from the Independent Police Complaints Commission and has been the subject of Coroner’s recommendation. 5.3 The matter of the extent to which personal data can be shared during the application/renewal process has applicability elsewhere than in regard to potential medical matters. In particular ACPO would welcome some legislative basis relating to who should be consulted in the course of an application. This particularly applies to an applicant’s family.
6.0 The Law Relating to Airguns 6.1 Understandably ACPO FELWG is primarily concerned with those airguns that are declared as “specially dangerous” and thus fall subject to certificate control. It is ACPO FELWG’s view that such airguns are even less frequently used in crime than other types of lawfully possessed firearms, such as shotguns. This is probably because these are rifles. ACPO FELWG is not convinced that applying certificate control to low powered airguns, (those at or above the lethality threshold but below the specially dangerous one) will produce proportionate public safety outcomes, but would intend to continue to work with ACPO CUF and pick up on considerations in this area from Scotland and Northern Ireland. 25 August 2010
Supplementary memoranda submitted by ACPO FELWG ACPO FELWG is pleased to provide the following further submission in response to the Committee’s questions and discussion.
A1.0 Information Sharing Between Medical Professionals and Police A1.1 Following the meeting that took place on 17 November 2010 involving the British Medical Association (BMA), the Information Commissioner’s OYce (ICO), ACPO and representatives from the British Shooting Sports Council (BSSC) and British Association for Shooting & Conservation (BASC), ACPO is pleased to be able to advise you that agreement was reached between the BMA and ACPO that police would notify a GP of the grant and renewal of a firearm and/or shotgun certificate. A1.2 We would seek to implement this arrangement within six months. A1.3 This is very much a “first step”, and whilst not oVering quite the same level of assurance as an enduring record, nonetheless will oVer greater assurances than we have at present. ACPO will now draw up a more detailed paper concerning this, and explaining the rationale around grant as opposed to application being the point of notification, but in brief this will be a system of notification by way of a standard letter. It is not then intended the letter be retained unless the GP chooses to take action. The anticipated action is that the GP would alert the police as to having a concern and the police would then request a medical report, as now. The BMA will now draw up guidance to doctors. A1.4 The ICO foresaw no objections to this arrangement, though the BSSC and BASC continue to have concerns regarding the security of the letter. In ACPO’s view the arrangements within the GP service will ensure that these concerns are not realised. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 108 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
A1.5 In the longer term ACPO still wishes to pursue a more enduring record, although there are the anticipated issues including the ICO’s view that legislative change will be necessary because of the existing definition of a health record in data protection law. The ICO also has grave concerns regarding proportionality in respect of such a step.
A2.0 Exemptions from the Requirement to Hold a Certificate A2.1 ACPO makes further observations on two such areas; young people who shoot with s1 and s2 firearms, and miniature rifle ranges. In respect of young people and shooting, it may be helpful if some further details are first set out. This subject was not covered in the ACPO review reports because it was not relevant to Cumbria, nor do young shooters give particular cause for concern. However there are inconsistencies that could be addressed alongside any other legislative changes that might be made in due course. A2.2 Currently the exemptions from the need to hold a firearm certificate (with certain exceptions) apply to children of any age, thus including those under 10 who have not yet reached the age of criminal responsibility. This means that it is lawful for a child under 10 to shoot with a rifle without the need for a firearm certificate, and in some cases without any supervision. This would be the case for a child full member of an approved shooting club for example. If the child was a probationary member of an approved club then they would have to be supervised, but the supervisor need not be an adult, nor be a certificate holder either. A child of any age can shoot at a miniature rifle range without a certificate, without any supervision at all. In fact a child could be the operator of the range, though could not purchase the firearms in the first instance. In respect of shotguns then a child under 15 has to be supervised by an adult of 21 years or more, but that adult does not need to be a certificate holder. So whilst the lower age limit for a firearms certificate is currently 14 years of age, it should be understood that children younger than that can, and already do, shoot with rifles without ever needing a certificate at all.
A2.3 ACPO recommends that an absolute minimum age for shooting with firearms and shotguns be introduced, where there is no lower limit at all at present, of 10 years of age. ACPO further recommends that new provisions are introduced to require all children under 15 who are shooting to be supervised by an adult over 21 who is a certificate holder. ACPO suggests that the term “occupier” in the Firearms Act 1968 and related legislation is clarified to reflect present day arrangements for shooting. Harmonising the minimum ages for both firearm and shotgun certificates subsequent to the above provisions being in place is then a more straightforward matter, and to a large extent the age selected would be of less consequence. The minimum “minimum age” would clearly be 10, but in practice, particularly if the occupier definition matter is attended to, the number of shotgun certificates to be applied for by children under 15 would be likely to be less than is currently the case, and in terms of firearm certificates is likely to be smaller still as it would only have relevance for non Home OYce approved shooting club applications. It should be borne in mind that a certificate still would not permit the purchase or hiring of firearms and ammunition by anyone under 18.
A2.4 Since the above provisions would provide a minimum age where currently there is none, and would add greater controls in terms of formal supervision, then the interests of public safety would be better served than they are now, despite the apparently very low risk.
A2.5 In the case of a miniature rifle range then there is no currently requirement for any supervision of anyone at all, and in fact such ranges are exempt from any certificate control through the police. A2.6 ACPO considers that the exemptions for miniature rifle ranges provide a clear opportunity for a person who has had a certificate refused or revoked, or who would be refused a certificate if they applied, to legally acquire rifles and ammunition that in all other respects should be controlled by the firearms certificate arrangements. There is no police involvement in supervising such ranges or the people using them, the numbers of firearms possessed and the quantities of ammunition involved are not known or recorded on the NFLMS. A2.7 The exemption came into being under the Firearms Act 1920 and reflected the use of a particular round of ammunition that was in use for military training. Accordingly, the exemption does not even limit the ammunition to being .22” rimfire.
A3.0 Home Office Approved Shooting Clubs A3.1 There is a diVerence between the types of shooting for which a club can gain approval and the types of shooting that are lawfully permitted. To some extent ACPO considers that this reflects concerns that approval might be an indication that the shooting discipline itself is approved as opposed to the club.
A3.2 Given the overall criteria a club needs to meet to secure approval are very desirable it seems sensible that the approval criteria in terms of shooting disciplines is expanded to include all lawful shooting disciplines, and thus encourage all clubs to seek approval. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 109
A4.0 Shortening the Certificate Renewal Period A4.1 From 1920 to 1994 (having eVect from 1995) certificates were valid for three years. Reverting from the current five year life to three once again, or to a lesser period than that, would give a greater number of inspection visits and checks for a given period of time, which would theoretically oVer greater assurances than is currently the case. However it is very diYcult to quantify that benefit. A4.2 The additional visits and related activity would create greater demand on the police service and whilst ACPO has made submissions separately concerning increasing the fees, ACPO would recommend that in order to accommodate any such increase in certificate renewals there would need to be a fundamental change to the fees regime. In eVect this would amount to a full cost recovery approach, and ACPO would seek to achieve the charging of fees for some activities that cannot currently be charged for, such as approving artificial target (clay pigeon) shoots. ACPO considers that this would be necessary to avoid the greater costs falling to the public purse.
A5.0 Including Lower Powered Air Weapons in the Certificate System A5.1 Against a background of significant reductions in air weapon enabled crime, the increased controls on sale, (through registered firearms dealers), the increases to the minimum age for purchase/hire, and with the forthcoming controls on security to prevent unauthorised access by young people, ACPO does not consider that bringing air weapons under the certificate system is proportionate. Continued enforcement of existing controls, together with that due in the future, is necessary and very desirable.
A6.0 The Impact on Police Workload of a Single Certificate System A6.1 ACPO considers that the increase in research and checking that the single certificate proposals would introduce in respect of shotgun certificate holders would largely be oVset by the administrative savings. It would be very important to secure the proposed fees increase as a pre cursor to enable this change to take place. 18 November 2010
Memorandum submitted by the British Medical Association Executive Summary — Doctors’ involvement in this area is complex. Doctors can identify that patients hold firearm or shotgun certificates in several ways. They can be asked to act as a referee or counter-signatory, they can be approached by the police in order to obtain factual information about the applicant for such a certificate, or it can emerge during consultation. — Doctors owe a duty of confidentiality to their patients, but such a duty is not absolute. Where doctors have a reasonable belief that an individual in possession of a firearm may pose a threat of serious harm to himself or to others, this information can be disclosed without consent. — Not all patients who hold shotgun or firearm licences will make that fact known to their doctors. — The BMA is concerned about an increased role for doctors in the supervision of certificate holders due to the diYculty of assessing the future dangerousness of certificate holders. Any proposed changes to medical involvement in firearms control must be prefaced by full consultation with the medical profession.
About the BMA 1. The British Medical Association (BMA) is an independent trade union and voluntary professional association which represents doctors and medical students from all branches of medicine all over the UK. With a membership of over 143,000 worldwide, we promote the medical and allied sciences, seek to maintain the honour and interests of the medical profession and promote the achievement of high quality healthcare.
Medical Involvement in the Provision of Firearm or Shotgun Certificates 2. The medical role in the provision of firearm or shotgun certificates is not straightforward, and this needs to be taken into account when considering any potential reform of information-sharing practices. 3. Doctors can be involved in such certification in a number of ways. Applicants can ask doctors to act as a referee for applicants for firearms or as a counter-signatory for a shotgun application. For both of these applications, doctors can act as one of a number of “persons of good standing”. Any such person acting as a referee for a firearm is required to complete forms relating to the mental and physical health and welfare of the individual and whether there are any causes for concern. Counter-signatories for shotgun certificates are requested to confirm that they know of no reason why the applicant should not be permitted to possess a shotgun and to “bear in mind the character, conduct and mental condition of the applicant in so far as they are relevant.” In addition the police may request information from a patient’s GP in order to obtain Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 110 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
factual information about the applicant’s medical history. Doctors may also learn about whether a patient holds a certificate during a routine consultation. It follows from this, therefore, that GP’s will not always be aware that a patient possesses a firearm or shotgun certificate.
BMA Concerns About Medical Involvement in the Provision of Firearm or Shotgun Certificates 4. Although Home OYce guidance limits the role of the counter-signatory or referee to the provision of information and opinions police can take into account when making a decision, the BMA has some concerns that an excessive emphasis may still be given to endorsement by a doctor because of the specialist nature of his or her expertise. Doctors who have contacted the BMA with concerns about this process point out that they very rarely have suYcient knowledge of an individual to certify that he or she has not suVered from any mental disorder, nor will they be able to give a meaningful medical opinion on more general issues such as the “character, conduct and mental condition” of the applicant. The BMA therefore advises doctors that where the applicant is not their patient, there is nothing to stop them from endorsing an application, providing this is made clear. Where the applicant is a patient, the BMA advises doctors not to endorse applications unless they have a suYciently detailed knowledge of the patient’s mental and physical health to be confident that the individual can safely possess a firearm. In the BMA’s view, few doctors are likely to have this level of knowledge.
Managing Future Dangerousness 5. A key aspect of firearms control is the ability to manage risk, in particular the ability to assess likely future dangerousness. In the BMA’s view, the likelihood that an individual will present a risk of harm in the future is extremely diYcult to predict, as the best indicator of future behaviour remains prior behaviour. The BMA would therefore be extremely concerned if responsibility for managing the risk presented by individuals with shotguns and firearms were transferred to the medical profession. Any intended changes to this process must be prefaced by consultation with the profession.
Information Sharing 6. Doctors owe a duty of confidentiality to all their patients. The duty is not absolute. Where there is a reasonable belief that an individual either applying for a firearm or shotgun licence or already holding one, may represent a danger to themselves or others, the BMA advises doctors to strongly encourage the applicant to reconsider or revoke their application. If the applicant refuses, doctors should consider breaching confidentiality and informing the police firearms licensing department as a matter of urgency.
“Tagging”Medical Records 7. Following a coronial inquiry into a firearms-related death, in 2009 the BMA was involved in discussions concerning the desirability of GPs placing electronic tags in medical records to indicate that the patient either held a firearm or shotgun certificate or had applied for one. In the BMA’s view such an approach can be appropriate, provided it is used as part of the ordinary care given to a patient. Any such system must not, however, imply that the GP or practice has taken on particular obligations to monitor the threat presented by the patient. 25 August 2010
Supplementary memoranda submitted by the British Medical Association The Home AVairs Committee requested further information from the BMA regarding medical conditions that would trigger concern when diagnosed in firearms holders. Doctors may contact the police or other appropriate authorities where they have concerns about a patient who they know holds a current licence and is in possession of firearms. Such cases would be based upon individual assessments of the patient in question. The type of circumstances whereby GPs may contact the police or other appropriate authorities with concerns about a patient who they know is in possession of firearms include where the patient was depressed and especially expressing significant suicidal ideation, has diagnosed dementia, or where the patient demonstrated a florid psychosis. Concomitant use of drugs, including recreational drugs such as cannabis, or prescribed medication with eVects on mental function (including hypnotics, benzodiazepines, antidepressants and major tranquilisers) will be relevant to the assessment of the patient. In many such cases, the GP will take expert advice, for example from a local psychiatrist or from his/her practice partners. 19 November 2010 Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 111
Memorandum submitted by the Home OYce 1. Introduction The recent tragic shootings which took place in Cumbria and Northumbria have brought the use of firearms into sharp relief. The control of firearms is a complex area and the policy is focused on ensuring that there are appropriate controls in place that are practical, proportionate and consistent with our international and other legal obligations. But above all, the Government is focused on making communities safe. The Government has confirmed that it will look closely at existing controls in the light of the findings of the ACPO peer review commissioned by the Chief Constable of Cumbria Police and the Home AVairs Select Committee (HASC) inquiry. The Government welcomes the HASC inquiry. This evidence is factual and focuses on the topics highlighted in the HASC Press Release announcing this inquiry. More specific evidence on a particular topic or topics can be provided if required.
2. Legally Held Guns Used in Criminal Activity Intelligence around firearms has improved considerably since 2008 when ACPO and the Home OYce established the National Ballistics Intelligence Service (NABIS). Prior to NABIS, there was no national system of recording the recovery of firearms and ammunition, and identifying links between criminal incidents was slow and costly.NABIS manages a complete registry of all firearms and ammunition recovered by the police and operates a fast-time ballistics comparison capability to link individual crimes and incidents. The introduction of NABIS has provided a more detailed intelligence picture of how firearms enter the UK and the life of firearms. The Government believes that this data, the significant safeguards and strong sentencing framework,3 restrict the number of guns in criminal hands, by reducing theft and other illegal diversions of weapons to the illegal market. The evidence suggests that the vast majority of crimes involving firearms are carried out with illegally-held guns.
3. Relationship Between Gun Control and Gun Crime Gun crime makes up a small percentage of all crimes committed but causes significant and lasting harm to our communities. A 2006 Home OYce Study observes that criminal activities, such as the conversion of imitation firearms, suggest the UK’s gun controls significantly constrain the ability of criminals to obtain original lethal-purpose firearms.4 The Government works with police forces and a wide range of partners to tackle gun crime as well as the gang culture which drives it. The intelligence-led initiatives of individual police forces are at the centre of law enforcement activity, including Operation Trident in London, Matrix in Merseyside and X-Calibre in Manchester. The success of these activities depends on accurate and timely intelligence and strong border controls. The UK Border Agency is responsible for intercepting and seizing a wide range of prohibited and restricted goods at the border, including firearms and other weapons, their parts and ammunition. UKBA has protocols in place with its partners to agree any follow up enforcement action. Provisional figures show that 7,995 firearm oVences (excluding air weapons) were recorded in England and Wales in 2009–10, representing 0.2% of all recorded oVences and a 3% decrease from 2008–09.5 Of these oVences, the number resulting in fatal injury remained unchanged at 39 and those resulting in injury rose by 8% to 1,901. However, every life lost to the gun or through gang violence is one too many; the Government will remain resolute in working with its partners to protect the public from gun crime.
4. Impact of Firearms (Amendment)Acts 1997 Following the tragic shooting incident in Dunblane and the subsequent Cullen Report, the Firearms (Amendment) Acts 1997 were introduced which eVectively banned handguns from private ownership. There were a small number of exemptions relating to slaughtering instruments, the humane killing of animals, shot pistols for vermin control, starting races, trophies of war and handguns of historic interest. Over 162,000 handguns and 7,000 tonnes of ammunition were handed in and subsequently destroyed. The handgun ban was not intended to tackle the problems of illegal guns or firearms related crime, rather it was a direct response to the tragic events at Dunblane, which involved the misuse of legally held handguns.
3 Section 5 of the Firearms Act 1968, section 1 of the Firearms Act 1968, section 16 of the Firearms Act 1968 and section 170 of the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979. 4 Home OYce (2010), Gun crime: the market in and use of illegal firearms, Home OYce Research Study 298, p. 114. 5 Home OYce (2010). Crime in England and Wales 2009–10: Findings from the British Crime Survey and police recorded crime. Available at: http://rds.homeoYce.gov.uk/rds/pdfs10/hosb1210.pdf. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 112 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
5. Current Laws Governing Firearms,Including Progress on Implementing the Committee’s Recommendations set out in its Second Report of the 1999–2000 Session The possession of firearms, their parts and ammunition in England, Scotland and Wales is regulated by the Firearms Act 1968 and other legislation.6 (Firearms controls in Northern Ireland are subject to separate legislation). This package of legislation provides some of the toughest gun controls in the world. The HASC held its first inquiry into the control on firearms in 1996 following the Dunblane tragedy. In July 1999, the HASC initiated a second inquiry into the control on firearms to consider those issues outstanding from the legislation on firearms in 1997. The majority of recommendations from the second inquiry were welcomed and accepted. Significant legislative and non legislative changes have been introduced since the second inquiry including: — the introduction and implementation of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 which included raising the age limit at which a person could buy an air weapon from 14 to 17; banning air guns designed or adapted for use with a self-contained gas cartridge system; and making it an oVence for a person to have with him an unloaded air weapon or an imitation firearm in a public place without lawful authority or reasonable excuse; — the introduction and implementation of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 which introduced a mandatory minimum sentence for the unlawful possession of certain types of prohibited firearms and increased the maximum penalty for smuggling certain types prohibited weapons; — the introduction and implementation of the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 which strengthened the controls on air weapons by raising to 18 the minimum age at which a young person may purchase or hire an air weapon or ammunition for an air weapon; requiring anyone wishing to sell air weapons by way of trade or business in Great Britain to register with the police as a firearms dealer; requiring that sales are on a face to face basis, so that all air weapons are handed over in person to the purchaser; and making it an oVence for anyone to fire an air weapon beyond the boundary of premises. The Act also banned the manufacture, import and sale of realistic imitation firearms, subject to a limited number of defences; — the introduction of section 46 of the Crime and Security Act 2010 which made it an oVence for a person in possession of an air weapon to fail to take reasonable precautions to prevent it coming into the hands of a person under 18 who is not lawfully permitted to have the weapon with him; — the introduction and implementation in July 2010 of secondary legislation, as a result of amendments to the Weapons Directive 91/477/EEC, which makes it an oVence to sell, or let on hire, a firearm or ammunition to a person under 18; — increasing the fees for firearms licensing through The Firearms (Variation of Fees) Order 2000; — updating Guidance on firearms control in 2002—supported by the issue of Home OYce circulars reflecting changes in legislation; — revising, in 2005, the Firearms Security Handbook to provide up to date advice for police and users on the secure storage of firearms; — the establishment of NABIS which draws together intelligence information on gun crime; — working with the police to set up the National Firearms Licensing Management System, which allows them to manage the issue of firearms certificates nationally; — providing support for the development of stringent testing measures for air weapons by the firearms industry in conjunction with forensic experts; — running an amnesty for firearms in 2003, including air weapons, which reduced the number of firearms in circulation; — working with the firearms industry to provide safety literature with all air weapons sold; and — consulting, in 2009, on Controls on Deactivated Firearms. The views of HASC on improvements to firearms controls would be welcome.
6. Proposals to Improve Information Sharing Between Medics and the Police Current arrangements provide for applicants for firearms certificates to be subject to robust checks by local police. The police must satisfy themselves that applicants are fit to be entrusted with a firearm and will not present a danger to public safety. They must also be satisfied that applicants have a legitimate reason for wanting a firearm. Police visit applicants at home to interview them about their application and to check security arrangements.
6 Principally sections 37–39 Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003, sections 287–293 Criminal Justice Act 2003, sections 28–41 Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006, section 46 Crime and Security Act 2010 (to be commenced), and Firearms Act 1968 (Amendment) Regulations 2010. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 113
The current process for issuing certificates is deliberative rather than mechanistic. The Government believes there may be scope for improving the sharing of data between the medical profession and the police, provided it can be done in a controlled and secure manner. ACPO and the medical associations are discussing the possibility of placing a marker on NHS patient records so that a GP will know whether a patient has access to firearms. GPs can then notify the police of any concerns about a certificate holder’s suitability. The Government is following progress closely and will feed this into subsequent work on gun controls.
7. Information Sharing Between Police and Prisons in Assessing the Risk of Offenders who may have Access to Firearms Arrangements currently in place facilitate the proactive and routine sharing of information between the police and prison service, and other appropriate law enforcement agencies. Information is shared only when it is in the interests of national security or public safety; for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of an oVence; for the recovery of the proceeds of crime; or to prevent or reveal a miscarriage of justice. It is a matter for the police or prison to decide what information should be disclosed according to the individual circumstances of the case. In some instances this may mean disclosing information contained in prison security intelligence reports, CCTV, intercepted mail or the content of a phone conversation. As part of handling the release of prisoners, a Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference (MARAC), typical for domestic violence cases, or Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) meeting might be called. These allow for a much closer working relationship to be developed between the police and probation service (and other agencies). Sections 67 & 68 of the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act (2000) initially placed these arrangements on a statutory footing. Sections 325–327 of the Criminal Justice Act (2003) re-enacted and strengthened those provisions. In making decisions relating to the disclosure of personal information, the police and prison have regard to their obligations under the Data Protection Act, the Human Rights Act and other relevant legislation. In addition to these requirements, there is also a positive obligation on authorities, established by the Osman ruling (Osman v UK (1998 ECtHR)), to protect the right to life. The failure to disclose relevant information to law enforcement agencies is an important issue and can have serious implications for law enforcement and other government agencies. The Bichard and Mubarak Inquiries have firmly established the concept of “Critical Intelligence Loss” where critical data are not shared. The IPCC is at present conducting an independent investigation into the tragic events in Northumbria covering two aspects of the incident—the handling of intelligence sent from the prison authorities to the police on Mr Moat’s release and the circumstances surrounding his death.
8. The Danger Presented by, and the Legislation Regulating,Airguns The vast majority of airguns are used in a responsible and disciplined manner for legitimate purposes such as target shooting. The sport of target shooting with airguns is a recognised Olympic sport at which the UK has traditionally excelled. Airguns are also frequently used by clubs to introduce new members to firearms and to the safe handling of them before allowing these probationers to handle more powerful conventional firearms. Despite this responsible use of airguns and the requirements of the law, there is still a minority of people who either own or have access to an airgun and who choose to use them irresponsibly and sometimes dangerously. There are between four and seven million air weapons in circulation in this country and the majority are used safely and responsibly. Statistics show that oVences involving air weapons have fallen each year since 2003–04. There were 6,042 oVences in 2008–09—a fall of 19% on the previous year.7 Section 57 of the Firearms Act 1968 defines a firearm as a lethal barrelled weapon capable of the discharge of any shot, bullet or other missile. Lethality has been interpreted by the courts as meaning “capable of inflicting a more than trivial injury”—which means that if the pellet from a particular gun is capable of penetrating the skin, that gun is a firearm. Under this definition, some air weapons are controlled by this legislation and some are not. There are three basic categories of air weapons. Airsoft guns—which usually have muzzle energy of less than one joule, and because of this they are not considered lethal and do not fit the definition of a firearm and do not come under the control of the Firearms Act. Low-powered airguns—which have muzzle energies above one joule. Due to their comparatively low power, the law does not require these to be kept on a police-issued firearm certificate or otherwise licensed but, because they are capable of inflicting a penetrating wound, they are nonetheless classed as “firearms”.
7 Figures taken from the Home OYce Statistical Bulletin—Homicides, Firearms OVences and Intimate Violence 2008–09 (Supplementary Volume 2 to Crime in England and Wales 2008–09 (Second Edition)) http://rds.homeoYce.gov.uk/rds/ pdfs10/hosb0110.pdf Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 114 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
Higher powered airguns—these are air pistols with muzzle energy in excess of 6 foot pounds or other air weapons with muzzle energy in excess of 12 foot pounds. They must be kept on a firearm certificate in the same way as any other of the firearms which come under the control of section 1 of the Firearms Act. High-powered air pistols are treated as conventional handguns and are prohibited accordingly. There are a wide range of oVences relating to firearms but the ones which have most relevance to airguns are about age limits, the carrying and discharging of guns and the carrying of airguns in relation to other crimes. For example, it is an oVence to: — sell or give an airgun to anyone under the age of 18;8 — have an airgun in a public place without lawful authority or reasonable excuse;9 — fire an airgun within 50 feet of the centre of highway, if in consequence any user of the highway is injured or endangered;10 — trespass with an airgun, be it in a building or on open land;11 — have an airgun with the intention of committing a crime;12 — have an airgun with the intention of endangering life or property;13 There is a range of penalties for these various oVences from £5,000 for the lesser ones to life imprisonment. The punishment imposed in any individual case will naturally depend on the judgement of the court, upon the circumstances and gravity of the oVence committed. Following high profile incidents with airguns, there was a further tightening up of legislation, to reduce the risk of air weapons coming into the hands of young people, through the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003, the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 and the Crime and Security Act 2010.14 The Government has agreed to implement the recommendations from the Calman Commission to devolve air weapon control to Scotland. The aim is to introduce a Scotland Bill in the autumn. 27 August 2010
Memorandum from Peter J Nickles, Attorney General, District of Columbia TRENDS IN HOMICIDES IN WASHINGTON DC SINCE THE INTRODUCTION (IN 1976) AND SUBSEQUENT WITHDRAWAL (IN 2008) OF A BAN ON HANDGUNS
500 479 1991: Homicides peak at 479 before 450 starting a gradual decline.
400 1969: Homicides, along with all serious crimes, increase the year after 350 the MLK riots. 1986: Crack epidemic 300 287 leads to spike in 1964: Homicides homicides. jump almost 40%, 1987: Homicides 250 climbing over 100. climb over 200 & remain there until 198 200 2004.
141 147 143 150 132 1985: Homicides drop to 147. 131 100 2009: 143 homicides, the lowest total since 1966. 2010: If the current trend holds through December 31st, DC may 50 end the year with 131 homicides, the lowest total since 1963, the last year there were fewer than 100 homicides.
0 1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
8 Section 24 of the Firearms Act 1968 9 Section 19 of the Firearms Act 1968 10 Section 161 of the Highways Act 1980 11 Section 20 of the Firearms Act 1968 12 Section 18 of the Firearms Act 1968 13 Section 16 of the Firearms Act 1968 14 Section 46 of the Crime and Security Act 2010 has yet to be commenced Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 115
Measures in Place to Ensure Responsible Gun Ownership Our recent changes in the District’s firearms laws have included the following measures to promote responsible firearm ownership. They include: — The registrant must submit fingerprints for a national criminal background check and identification purposes. — All handguns must be submitted to the Metropolitan Police Department (“MPD”) for a ballistics identification procedure, for which the registrant must pay a reasonable fee. The ballistics may be used in the event of a crime traced to a legally registered weapon. — The registrant must demonstrate satisfactorily a knowledge of the laws of the District of Columbia pertaining to firearms and, in particular, the safe and responsible use, handling, and storage of the same in accordance with training, tests, and standards prescribed by MPD. — The registrant must have vision better than or equal to that required to obtain a valid driver’s license under the laws of the District of Columbia. — The registrant must have completed a firearms training or safety course or class conducted by a state-certified firearms instructor or a certified military firearms instructor that provides, at a minimum, a total of at least one hour of firing training at a firing range and at least 4 hours of classroom instruction. — The registrant must specify, inter alia, any business or occupation in which he or she has engaged during the previous five years, the intended use of the firearm, where the firearm will generally be kept and any other information that MPD deems necessary to carry out the registration provisions.
— Unless the registrant is a new resident of the District, MPD shall register no more than one pistol per registrant during any 30-day period.
— Registration certificates expire three years after the date they are issued, unless the registrant renews the registration.
— The registrant’s firearms certificate includes a photograph so that law enforcement can more easily link a legally registered firearm to its owner.
— The registrant may renew his or her registration if he or she continues to satisfy all of the initial registration requirements.
— The registrant must submit to a background check once every six years to confirm that he or she continues to meet the registration qualifications.
— The registrant must notify MPD if his or her firearm is sold, transferred, lost, stolen or destroyed, or if the information submitted to procure the registration changes.
Strategies to Reduce Gun Violence The control of illegally obtained firearms is a critical factor in reducing gun violence within the District. More than three-quarters of all homicides, more than two-fifths of all robberies, and one-fifth of all assaults with a weapon are committed with illegal firearms. Unfortunately the flow of weapons into the District from other states is beyond the ability of our local government to control. From a policy perspective, our Mayor meets routinely with Governors of the surrounding states and has raised the need to take action to reduce the flow of weapons. We have continually sought to persuade these jurisdictions to increase limitations on firearms purchases—such as the number purchased by an individual each month.
From the enforcement perspective, recovering illegal guns and reducing gun crimes is a top priority for police. For instance, the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) works with federal law enforcement partners to try to prevent illegal guns from coming into the District from other jurisdictions. MPD also recently established a Firearm Tip Reward Program that encourages community members to provide tips to police about illegal guns in their neighborhoods. The process is absolutely anonymous—calls can not be traced to identify the source of the call. Rewards up to $1,000 are paid for tips that result in a firearm recovery and/or arrest. Individuals providing tips are assigned a unique Tip Number. To receive payment, callers follow up after seven days. If the tip has been deemed reliable, payment will be made through a single-use debit card. This program will help MPD to recover illegal guns. Since 2007, the Department has taken more than 9,000 illegal guns oV the streets.
Of course, our police also focus on known violent oVenders, working with partners in the criminal justice system to monitor them. Just last year, DC launched an innovative Gun OVender Registry, which requires gun oVenders to register with police for 2 years past the end of any other parole or probation. Since we found Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Ev 116 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence
that many oVenders would re-oVend shortly after the end of supervision, this helps to increase the time they stay clean, hopefully leading to less recidivism. And if they do oVend, it will be easier for the police to get them oV the street.
Memorandum submitted by Professor Dr John R Ashton CBE Please find my submission as requested on the topic of injury and violence prevention. This has been proposed in association with my colleagues at Liverpool John Moores University under the direction of Professor Mark Bellis OBE. Liverpool John Moores University is a World Health Organisation Collaborating Centre for work on the evidence base for injury and violence prevention. I would especially draw the committee’s attention to the section on reducing access to lethal means as well as to that on victim identification, care and support programmes although all sections are relevant to a public health approach to reducing levels and injury and violence at a population level and should be viewed in the current policy context of active citizenship and rebuilding community resilience. During the present recovery phase in Cumbria, tertiary prevention ie. reducing the long term harm to bystanders and witnesses of the mass killings is now the priority and is the focus of the multi agency recovery group which I chair. Extensive arrangements have been put in place to identify those at risk and ensure that support is readily available to them in a non-obtrusive way. our concern has also turned to the responsible role of the media in performing its public function without sensationalising recent events in ways which might sow the seeds for contagion and the next mass shooting event somewhere else—an occurrence for which there is an evidence base to believe is all too sadly likely to occur in the absence of media restraint. 7 December 2010
APPENDIX 1 There is a developing evidence base identifying a range of measures that can prevent violence from occurring, reduce violence in individuals who are already involved in violence, and identify and support victims of violence to limit its long term eVects. The following sections summarise a selection of the key strategies for preventing violence identified by the World Health Organization. Further information on all measures is available through the Prevent Violence: The Evidence series produced by the WHO and Liverpool John Moores University.
Developing Safe,Stable and Nurturing Relationships between Children and Their Parents and Caregivers Early relationships are central to a child’s social, emotional and intellectual development. There is good evidence that interventions that encourage safe, stable and nurturing relationships between parents or caregivers and children in their early years can reduce childhood aggression and prevent violence in adolescence and early adulthood. Such measures can also prevent child maltreatment and consequently its life-long negative impacts on mental and physical health and social functioning. Examples of programmes that have been proven eVective in preventing violence include the Nurse Family Partnership home-visiting programme and the Positive Parenting Programme (Triple P). In home visiting programmes, trained personnel visit parents and children in their homes and provide health advice, support, child development education and life coaching for parents to improve child health and foster parental care-giving abilities. Parenting education programmes, such as the Triple P, are usually centre-based and delivered in groups and work to improve parents’ child-rearing skills, increase their knowledge of child development and encourage positive child management strategies. Evidence also suggests that parent and child programmes—which typically incorporate parenting education along with child education, social support and other services— can prevent child maltreatment and youth violence later in life.
Developing Life Skills in Children and Adolescents Interventions to develop life skills in children and adolescents address some of the key risk factors for violence, such as poor social competence, low self-esteem and low academic achievement. Preschool enrichment programmes, that provide children with academic and social skills at an early age and prepare them for formal education, have been shown to reduce both aggression in childhood and later violent oVending. By involving parents, they can also reduce child maltreatment. The eVects of these programmes are most pronounced in children from poor families and neighbourhoods. In formal school settings, social development programmes that build social, emotional and behavioural competencies (eg self-esteem, problem solving, empathy, relationship skills and critical thinking) have also been shown to prevent youth violence. Programmes that target children early in life can also boost educational achievement and improve job prospects, providing long lasting benefits. They have been found to be cost eVective. Processed: 16-12-2010 22:08:32 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 006950 Unit: PAG7
Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 117
Reducing the Availability and Harmful Use of Alcohol There are strong relationships between alcohol use and violent behaviour. Measures that reduce the availability and harmful use of alcohol can be important strategies in violence prevention. Alcohol availability can be regulated by restricting the hours or days it can be sold, reducing the number of alcohol retail outlets and raising the price of alcohol. Reduced sales hours have generally been found to be associated with reduced violence and higher outlet densities with higher levels of violence. Economic modelling strongly suggests that raising alcohol prices can lower consumption and, hence, reduce violence. Brief interventions and longer-term treatment for problem drinkers—using, for instance, cognitive behavioural therapy—have been shown to reduce various forms of violence such as child maltreatment, intimate partner violence and suicide. There is also some evidence to support interventions in and around drinking establishments that target factors such as crowding, comfort levels, physical design, staV training and access to late night transport.
Reducing Access to Lethal Means The use of weapons such as firearms and knives increases the lethality of violence. Limiting access to such lethal means can prevent homicides, suicides and injuries and reduce the costs of these forms of violence to society. In general, jurisdictions with restrictive firearms legislation and lower firearms ownership tend to have lower levels of gun violence. Strengthened firearms legislation to control the sale, purchase and use of firearms has been associated with reduced suicides and homicides in several countries, including Australia, Austria, Brazil and New Zealand. Restrictions imposed can include bans, licensing schemes, minimum purchase ages, background checks, limits on quantities purchased and safe storage regulations. Legislation that prevents high risk individuals (eg perpetrators of domestic violence) from possessing firearms has also shown positive eVects. Measures that increase the enforcement of firearms legislation (targeting traYckers, retailers and users) and provide social support to violent gang members (eg with employment) have also shown benefits in reducing the supply of firearms and firearms violence. Given the widespread availability of knives and a lack of research, there is currently little evidence available on the impact of measures to reduce access to knives on violence. Knife amnesties have been associated with reductions in violence immediately following their implementation, but their eVects are short lived.
Changing Cultural and Social Norms that Support Violence Rules or expectations of behaviour—norms—within a cultural or social group can encourage violence (eg gender norms supportive of male dominance over women) and prevent individuals from seeking help when needed (eg with depression and mental health problems). Interventions that challenge cultural and social norms that are supportive of violence can prevent violence and have been widely used, but the evidence base for their eVectiveness is currently weak. The eVectiveness of interventions addressing dating violence and sexual abuse among teenagers and young adults by challenging social and cultural norms related to gender is supported by some evidence. Other interventions appear promising, including those targeting youth violence and education through entertainment (“edutainment”) aimed at reducing intimate partner violence.
Victim Identification,Care and Support Programmes Interventions to identify victims of interpersonal violence and provide eVective care and support are critical for protecting health and breaking the cycles that spread violence from one generation to the next. Evidence of eVectiveness is emerging for the following interventions: screening tools to identify victims of intimate partner violence and refer them to appropriate services; psychosocial interventions—such as trauma-focused cognitive behavioural therapy—to reduce mental health problems associated with violence, including post-traumatic stress disorder; and protection orders, which prohibit a perpetrator from contacting the victim, to reduce repeat victimization among victims of intimate partner violence. Several trials have shown that advocacy support programmes—which oVer services such as advice, counselling, safety planning and referral to other agencies—increase victims’ safety behaviours and reduce further harm.
Printed in the United Kingdom by The Stationery Office Limited 12/2010 6950 19585 PEFC/16-33-622