TUESDAY 29 OCTOBER 2002

MR DAVID ROBINSON, MR JOSEPH HUGHES, MR GORDON NEWELL AND MR ROBERT IRVINE

  80.—are clearly causing a lot of harm, as you recognised, in Britain. From personal experience I know of a number of cases in my own area. The fact that you say, "well, compared to a bow and arrow", the problem is kids are not going round with a bow and arrow on the streets, they are going round with air weapons and we have to address it in that light and not, perhaps, make comparisons with other weapons that are not, to my knowledge, being used.
  (Mr Irvine) Your point being?

  81. My point being that you seem to dismiss air weapons as some powerless weapons when they are clearly causing a lot of damage both to animals, peoples' pets and to people, both their person and indeed buildings and cars. They are being used by vandals to cause damage and harm to people.
  (Mr Irvine) They are in Great Britain, but I would answer that in two ways, first of all I am not dismissing it, that is why I said I want it as part of the firearms certificate. I do not want them taken out of the licensing system as such, I think they should be kept in it so that those people who have got a firearms certificate to cover shotguns and rifles...On the relative scale of things an air rifle is quite small in comparison with a shotgun, if you want to take muzzle energy you can work whatever statistics you want. As far as the actual licence is concerned I have never suggested we would want that taken out and deregulated, we wish it to remain within the licence certificate. If a person has gone through the firearms application system, they have been vetted, processed, checked out, and so on, there is no reason why they cannot be trusted with an air rifle. Basically they are glorified air pumps, inside they have a pistol propelled by a spring. There are lots of people making their own air rifles. It is not the case that we are dismissing it lightly, we are not. On top of which I think the statistics I read also show that the majority of those offences I related to were not against the person, they were mostly against property. I am not dismissing that, I am simply stating that as a fact. We are not suggesting they are removed from the licensing system, we suggest they stay and they do so in proportion to what they are and what they can do[3].

  82. Would you advocate a ban on air pistols or air rifles that were not licensed?
  (Mr Irvine) No.

  83. The memorandum from the Gun Trade Association is concerned about the discrimination against young shooters just because of their age. What changes would you want to see in the provisions of the draft Order to end this discrimination? Would you see that any risk of increased firearm abuse would come about if there were to be changes?
  (Mr Robinson) Where discrimination exists with young shooters is that in the province we regularly ship bus loads of young shooters to Scotland and England where they can go and be taught how to shoot under supervision. There is also discrimination locally, depending on which mode a young shooter wants to go down. If he wants to become a target shooter he can join a club and he can be supervised by a firearms certificate holder and be shooting a target rifle at 13 or 14 years of age. If we wants to shoot a shotgun we have to put him on a bus to England or Scotland. If he joins the Army Cadet Force at 14 years of age he can go to one of our military ranges and under supervision by a non firearms certificate holder he could have a lesson with a level GPMG which can fire 600 to 1,000 rounds a minute, so our problem is, why can I not take my 14 year old son across the field with a 4.10 shotgun. It has never been proved to be unsafe. If I can just address my notes on this particular subject, in its response to the Home Affairs Committee Inquiry into Firearm Controls in Britain the government rejected the imposition of a minimum age for shooting on the grounds that it would not improve public safety. In this response the government also said that it wished to, "encourage the responsible attitude of responsible parents and shooting organisations in teaching young people a safe and responsible attitude towards firearms handling". My point being that young people educated in the safe and responsible use of firearms is no less important in Northern Ireland than it is in Great Britain. It is discriminatory on several levels. It discriminates young people in Northern Ireland against their counterparts in Great Britain and it also discriminates against what they want to shoot. If they want to go out and shoot full bore rifles or small bore rifles or shoot machine guns with the Army Cadet Force they can quite freely do so but if they decide they want to shoot a rifle or a shotgun it is discrimination.

  84. If you are saying, which I think you are, age restriction is not really an effective way of protecting and ensuring sensible gun use what sort of competency standards would you have, if you would have them, and how might a draft Order be revised to take effect of that?
  (Mr Robinson) It is our stance that no non firearm certificate holders should not be under supervision, regardless of his age he should be supervised by a firearms certificate holder.

  85. If you do not have a definite age surely there must be some age that you think really—?
  (Mr Robinson) I have an opinion of 12 years of age.

  86. Why 12 as opposed to some other?
  (Mr Robinson) The average physical capability of a child to handle a firearm. I do not have a problem with age per se, however it is impractical to take a 6 year old out with a 12 gauge shotgun.

  87. Thank you. You state in your evidence you believe the Chief Constable's consideration of an individual's competency in relation to an application for a firearm certificate could be "subjective and potentially unfair". What do you think could be done to ensure that the test of competency is fair and effective?
  (Mr Robinson) My answer to this question is if we have an 18 year old who applies for a firearms certificate and say, for example, he applies for a 2.2 rim fire rifle to go hunting with - this could apply to any firearm—if the Chief Constable's decision is that this guy does not have the experience or the necessary competence to be issued with a licence where does this guy go to get competent? It is not there.

  88. What would you like to see in this draft Order?
  (Mr Robinson) The simple thing here is, gentlemen, realistically—I do not know if any of you are from a shooting background—it would be my personal opinion that most people who apply for a firearms certificate obviously have never been convicted of a firearms offence or have committed one. Who wakes up in the morning and says, I am going to apply for a firearms certificate, he is probably the guy that has never shot, he has never had a gun in his hand and he suddenly decides to apply for a firearms certificate. I would suggest to you this is the guy we do not want having a firearms certificate. He learned because he was out with his friends shooting clay birds or hunting across the fields illegally, he decided that he liked the sport and applied for a firearms certificate. We think the legislation should reflect that and make somebody responsible for that and make him be supervised by a responsible FAC holder. This is the reality, this is how people learn to shoot. I had my first firearm in my hand when I was 13 years of age and I went on to represent my country—I am not being modest—I was taught the correct and safe use of firearms by responsible people. That is certainly allowed to happen in Great Britain and we want it here.

  89. Are you saying in relation to this what can be done to ensure that the testing is fair is in effect, for want of a better word is a probationary period of firearms use under supervision of somebody who is certified is an effective criteria by which this should be judged?
  (Mr Robinson) What I am saying is that young shooters, indeed any non-firearm certificate holder of any age, how do we progress the sport? We are not talking about R plates, what we are suggesting is, as in England, Scotland and Wales, a non FAC holder of any age should be able to go out with a firearms certificate holder and be supervised by that person in the safe use of firearms.

  90. I can see we have a catch 22 situation here insofar as you say people do not just wake up in the morning and decide they want a firearms certificate, they must have had some use. By definition the fact they have had some use it could be argued they are unsuitable, having acted unlawfully, to hold a firearms certificate. I suppose we are looking for a way that breaks through that particular contradiction. Do you have any proposals that you might want to put forward?
  (Mr Robinson) It is a simple proposal for us, it covers two subjects, one is the handling of firearms by non FAC holders, which is implied that is for adults, and the other is for young shots. What you have to realise is what actually goes on in the shooting world goes on very safely. Northern Ireland has a safety record second to nowhere in the world, so the system obviously works. What we are saying for young shooters and adult non FAC holders is they should put their names down, make it 12 or whatever, and allow people from that age to go out with an FAC holder under supervision and be allowed to shoot.

  91. Can I move on, are there any other criteria set out in the draft Order for the grant of a firearms certificate appropriate and adequate?
  (Mr Robinson) Are you referring to competency, sir?

  92. Yes.
  (Mr Robinson) Our safety record is second to none here in Northern Ireland. There is not an argument for introducing a test. The agreement that we had with the Northern Ireland Office in previous discussions was that what we would do—this was a discussion that took place between the Gun Trade Association, BSAC and the Northern Ireland Office—is we would formalise what any contentious firearm dealer would do anyway if you happened to buy a firearm off them, they would take you through the safety aspects of loading and unloading and the care and maintenance of it and point out to you the safety aspects of using it. What is proposed in this is actually way beyond what was previously agreed with the Northern Ireland Office. We as dealers had agreed, the BASC had agreed in consultation with the NIO a code of conduct which we would give to every new application for a firearms certificate and talk them through what it meant in real life. We agreed to do that. The problem that we have with this as proposed is, one, we do not think it is necessary given the track record and, two, our legal advice is we as firearms dealers would be held legally liable, so we cannot do as proposed.

  93. The Ulster Rifle Association might want to make a contribution. The Ulster Rifle Association made it clear they have stringent vetting procedures before allowing anybody into their Association, how far do you think that the criteria set out in the draft Order conforms to the vetting procedures done by the Ulster Rifle Association? If you feel that they are the same then, surely, in effect based on the evidence of the Ulster Rifle Association those would be reasonable criteria?
  (Mr Irvine) What vetting procedures are you talking about?

  94. Those set out in the draft Order.
  (Mr Irvine) Our submission is that the word "competent" is far too vague and they have given no definition of it. They have not stated who will determine competency. They have not used any criteria for competency and they have made no mention of legal liability should anything happen, should there be an accident. It might seem like I am going off on a tangent but I am not, our submission has been this legislation as drafted is—it is a hypothetical argument which it is covering—attempting to solve problems which don't exist, that is basically a nonsense. We have certain procedures in place for vetting. We also have certain procedures in place for training people in the safe use of firearms. When you used the word "vetting" I was not sure what you meant by that, whether you meant access to the Ulster Rifle Association or when they get in as such. To me the word vetting means—

  Mr Bailey: The word vetting was submitted in your note.

  95. You say you scrupiously vet applicants who join your Association. That is what Mr Bailey means.
  (Mr Irvine) That is right "join". I was asking what the relevance of our vetting procedures were to somebody who wants to buy an air rifle to shoot across the fields.

  96. The thrust of the question is, do your procedures reflect the conditions set down in this proposed legislation?
  (Mr Irvine) Our vetting procedures would not, no. What we do once they get there may or may not have relevance.

  97. Do you believe that the draft Order displays an appropriate level of caution?
  (Mr Irvine) I think the draft Order has lost its focus entirely. Throughout the whole document there is emphasis on the types of firearm, upon responsibility, upon what people will be permitted to do, what they will not be permitted to do with firearms. To me proper firearms legislation should go away from the object. I mentioned earlier about the bow and arrow generating 55 pounds of muzzle energy. To me an object is not a weapon unless it is used as such and we do not have weapons in the Ulster Rifle Association we have target firearms. I could very easily turn one into a weapon if I wanted to. The whole thrust of the document is it refers to firearms as being weapons and it starts to impose conditions for this, that and everything else. To us and to our way of thinking, the main thrust of the certificate should be to the person who is applying for it, making it much harder to get a firearms certificate and once that is acquired instead of laying down lots of conditions there should be much more responsibility placed on the individual for their own actions, either in terms of supervision or in terms of usage. All the members of the Ulster Rifle Association who do take part are scrupulously responsible people and they do place very high priority on safety, and so on. How that would apply to field shooting I have no absolutely no idea. The only connection I can think of is whenever people come before the firearms licensing branch to get a firearm for, for example, deer shooting they will not be issued with that until they have got a certificate from us to state that they have received a period of instruction and that we consider them sufficiently competent in the use of that firearm and they will hit whatever they are aiming at. What we do is much along the lines of what the Gun Trade Association suggested, and I would think may be suggested in the legislation. We put them through a period of instruction on the care and maintenance of firearms, preparation before firing, maintenance after firing, safety zone, ballistics, and so on, and then we put them on the range for a couple of sessions, or whatever it takes, and they are then asked to put five shots into a four inch circle at 100 metres. If they cannot do that they do not pass. We have refused people in the past and have got in touch with PSNI and said, "that person you sent us did not pass the test and we are not issuing a certificate". It has brought us into conflict with a few people, that is the sort of thing we do, that is for full bore rifles. That is a very long process. Again, to apply that to air rifles it seems to me to try and solve a problem that does not exist, it is a pointless exercise. There is no abuse over here or it is so small that the PSNI think it is so small it is inconsequential. Considering the number of shotguns and air rifles in this country when was the last time anybody was shot with one? There has not been. It does not exist. Getting a firearms certificate in Northern Ireland is such a difficult process people do not act that irresponsibly. I do not see the point in getting a Firearms Act that is going to be long, bureaucratic and full of emphasis on the object, to me it should be focusing on the individual. In setting up all of these little conditions which may or may not be part of the process, this whole draft seems to have lost its focus.

  98. This is for the Gun Trade Association, moving beyond the contentious issues, how you require a firearms certificate and what its contents are, the draft Clause 8 of the Firearms Order for Northern Ireland refers to the duration of a firearms certificate and it is the view of the Gun Trade Association that they favour the increase of the period for the renewal of a certificate to five years, beyond three, and in fact suggest that it could be extended to 10 years. Do you see any disadvantage in the suggestion in terms of public safety?
  (Mr Robinson) I do not see any disadvantage whether it is five years or 10 years. Given the fact that in Northern Ireland—answering Mrs Bailey's question as well—when you apply for a firearms certificate you are interviewed by the local firearms officer, he checks you out through the Special Branch, the Criminal Records Office, the local collator and it is then signed off by the district commander and then goes to firearm licensing for any other checks. There is no problem giving somebody a 10 year firearms licence. What needs to be in place is that in some way if people are convicted of an offence in Northern Ireland which makes them a prohibited person under the Order the system has to be in place internally within the police force so that firearms licensing are informed of this. It used to happen in Northern Ireland when we had the old warrant offices in the court houses—they were done away with because of cutbacks—so it is sort of left a little vague as to how switched-on the local firearms enquiry officer is. Giving somebody a licence for 10 years reduces the cost to the public purse, bearing in mind the Chief Constable can evoke it at any time if the person becomes prohibited. All we are saying is there has to be an internal system that allows firearms licencing to be informed when somebody becomes a prohibited person.

  99. There are a couple of arguments that you use about the 10 year period for renewal, one is the argument that it means that this sort of cycle and bulges of renewals have to be engaged in because of that and the other is that if there are long intervals then people just forget to renew it. It might not be a good idea, even if you feel these were people who were trustworthy, not to have themselves legitimately covered, because after 10 years they would forget to renew their firearms certificate.
  (Mr Robinson) I have never forgotten to renew my driving licence or passport. If somebody fails to renew a licence we will revoke it and if the word goes out that is the policy people will pay attention to it. As far as the cycle is concerned, again with the powers devolved to the Chief Constable he can smooth that out. For example if we do decide to go for a five year or 10 year licence—my licence is up for renewal in 2004—if we decide it was five years my licence might remain at three, it could be for five, it could be for four. This is an administrative task that the Chief Constable has and if something goes out of kilter, he can realign that again.

  Mr Barnes: Thank you.