FIREARMS CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
ELEVENTH ANNUAL REPORT

Legitimate uses of imitation firearms

3.17 The FCC would suggest that there is a range of legitimate uses for imitation firearms, as set out below, and amounting to a considerable number of imitations in circulation. While some of these will be of more consequence than others and not all would be accepted by all FCC members as essential; there is a consensus that at least some legitimate uses would have to be accommodated in any further legislation. It should be borne in mind that in many cases the use of imitation firearms has grown up to avoid the potential dangers of using real working firearms.

• Historical re-enactment and living history displays. In particular, groups portraying the Second World War and other recent conflicts may use replicas of machine guns, handguns and other weapons that would otherwise be prohibited.
• Sport Shooters and Hunters. Very low powered replica air weapons are used for informal target shooting. Blank-firing pistols are used by hunters for training gun dogs.
• Collectors. Imitation firearms may be displayed in museums and private collections where real guns would either be rare and expensive or a potential safety and security risk.
• Theatre and film use. Apart from professional use in film, theatre and television, this would also include amateur dramatics.
• Race starting. Blank-firing starting pistols have replaced the use of real pistols with blank ammunition in most circumstances.
• Western Quick Draw Competitions. These use blank-firing replicas of ‘Wild West’ revolvers to burst balloons as a test of speed and skill.
• Wargames and Skirmishes, including ‘paintball’ games and similar activities.
• The Toy trade. While most toy cap guns, water pistols etc have only a vague resemblance to real firearms, some ‘cowboy’ guns or ‘secret agent’ guns are loosely modelled on real weapons.
• Interior Decoration. Non-firing reproductions of vintage guns are commonly used as wall decoration in ‘rustic’ public houses and similar circumstances.
• Deactivated weapons. These are real guns with their working parts modified so that they cannot be restored to working order and thus cease to be ‘firearms’ for legal purposes. These are commonly held as collectors’ items or in museum displays, and any controls on imitation firearms would have to address them.

Possession of an imitation firearm in public

3.30 At Committee the British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC) supported by the police have proposed a new offence of possession of an imitation firearm in a public place without lawful authority or reasonable excuse. This should not interfere unduly with the legitimate uses of imitation firearms, but would allow the police to deal with those who were either misusing replicas or carrying them around in suspicious circumstances which appears to be at the centre of their current difficulties.

3.31 The FCC as a whole, including the police service, supported this measure in principle. Subject to our comments on defining imitation firearms above, we believe that it would provide a useful measure for the police in curbing the misuse of imitation firearms. The police would be able to detain those found with such items in suspicious circumstances and perhaps confiscate the item concerned even if no formal criminal charges were brought.

3.32 The present legislation on the carrying of knives in public imposes the burden of proof on the defendant to show that he has lawful authority or reasonable excuse to carry a knife. This is accompanied by a list of statutory ‘reasonable excuses’, for example carrying a knife for work or religious reasons or as part of a national costume. We would suggest that a similar approach might be appropriate for the possession of imitation firearms in public, with film or theatrical use or historical re-enactment being ‘reasonable excuses’ in themselves.

3.33 In our Tenth Annual Report, the FCC recommended that the Home Office and police may wish to launch a publicity campaign against the misuse of imitation firearms. We would still support this measure, perhaps as part of the promulgation of any new offence. It is possible that many criminals and others who carry imitation firearms do so casually and might be deterred from doing so if they believed that a swift armed police response was likely.

CHAPTER 9
Air Weapons

9.1 In responding to the report of the Home Affairs Select Committee, the Government rejected introducing a licensing system for low-powered air weapons, but undertook to see if other measures might be needed to deal with the misuse of air weapons. This might include education on safe air weapon use, enforcement of the existing law, and identification of any changes to the existing law that might be needed to aid its enforcement. We were asked to consider this further and did so initially through a sub-group as detailed at Annex D.

9.2 We noted the recommendations of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSCPA) and the GCN that a licensing system be adopted. It remains the view of GCN that the government should reconsider bringing more air weapons into the licensing system and banning their sale, import and manufacture if they are designed to look exactly like a lethal barrelled weapon. As this had been rejected by the Government we did not seek to explore this issue, but noted that the range and type of incidents described in both papers submitted by these organisations suggested that the misuse of air weapons was a serious problem. While the exact levels and changes over time may be difficult to measure, the Home Office has received sufficient letters and other representations to suggest that this was at least a common persistent mischief worth addressing further.

9.3 The term ‘air weapon’ has been used in its legal meaning in the 1968 Act as an air or CO2 powered gun that is below the ‘specially dangerous’ limits that would require licensing, but powerful enough to be lethal (see Chapter 10 Lethality). While ‘soft-air’ guns did not fall within these terms, it was likely that at least some of the problems associated with their misuse would be addressed by a general campaign against air weapons misuse.

9.4 As a first step, we believe it would be helpful for Ministers to write to chief officers setting out their concerns about the misuse of air weapons. Apart from encouraging chief officers to address air weapon misuse as a matter of increased priority having regard to local patterns and peaks of misuse, the letter might seek to elicit specific examples of successful education and enforcement which might be promulgated as good practice. The FCC therefore recommends that Ministers should raise this issue with chief officers and in doing so should have regard to the issues raised in the remainder of this chapter.

9.5 A Home Office survey of trading standards officers (TSOs) indicated that they conducted extensive campaigns against the sale to young people of items such as knives, solvents, alcohol and tobacco. However, almost all TSOs contacted had suggested that the enforcement of the Firearms Act was, in law and practice, a matter for the local police rather than for TSOs. From the involvement of Peckham TSOs in a police campaign against the sale of knives, it was possible that TSOs would be willing to assist the police in a campaign against under-age air weapon sales. However, in view of the response received to the Home Office survey, the FCC makes no recommendation on the involvement of TSOs in enforcement of controls over air weapons.

9.6 Education might include a range of audiences. Apart from young people themselves, a ready source of information may be useful to parents, teachers, shop staff and police officers. We accept that some of the young people involved in air weapon misuse are likely to be persistent offenders with little time for law or formal ‘education’. In these cases, enforcement action may be the most effective form of ‘education’ as such. However, much air weapon misuse may be due to the ignorance of young people and adults about the law and the potential dangers of airguns.

9.7 Signs in shops may be useful in informing staff and customers of the main points of the law. They may be of particular use as a reminder to untrained or causal staff, of interest to purchasers who may not know the law, and a deterrent to young purchasers who might be tempted to bluff staff into selling them an air gun. Current posters on the sale of alcohol and tobacco might serve as a model. A poster focussing on the main issues might also be suitable for display in shooting clubs, halls used by scouts and guides, and other places where young people and adults might read it. The FCC recommends that the Home Office should produce a suitable poster for this purpose.

9.8 The original Home Office leaflet on air weapons adopted on the recommendation of the FCC some years ago was withdrawn due to concerns about its style. However, it was re-issued last year in a purely text form and with minor updating. Stocks of this latest version should be available from the Home Office publication unit, but there seems to have been some confusion over the serial numbers of the two leaflets making them difficult to identify and order. The Home Office has therefore taken action to ensure that those requesting copies of its air weapons leaflet are supplied with the new leaflet and the FCC support this measure.

9.9 Both the Air gun Manufacturers and Trades Association (AMTA) and BASC also produce their own leaflets, the latter is also available in a Welsh version. The GTA work with importers and wholesalers to ensure that a copy is included in the box of every air weapon sold in Great Britain. The FCC endorses this measure. Retailers could also distribute copies to existing owners of air weapons who only visit retailers to buy pellets. It may be helpful to distribute copies to air gun pellet wholesalers who could then distribute them to their vendors, and the FCC would recommend that this should be adopted.

9.10 Prior to the Dunblane tragedy, the NSRA had met with considerable success in promoting safe air weapon use. The Home Office had received representations from schools concerned about soft-air weapons and who might welcome information on law and good practice. However, in recent years the NSRA has not been invited to schools, in part due to pressures on school timetables and lack of teachers with firearms training, as well as school concerns about firearms. It may be helpful for police officers involved in schools liaison to deal with air weapon safety, perhaps in co-operation with shooting groups. It may be politically difficult for the Home Office to support bringing firearms into schools, but the FCC recommends that the Home Office discusses the matter further with the Department for Education and Skills (DfES). The Gun Control Network is opposed to the idea of bringing guns of any kind into schools and is concerned that a high profile safety education strategy might serve to encourage young people’s interest in guns.

9.11 Essex Police have brought an ‘air gun in a box’ (i.e. a self-contained kit for safe airgun shooting which could easily be set up without a purpose-built range) to Southend sea-front. This area has seen considerable air weapon misuse during summer holidays and the facilities served as a useful focus to young people who might otherwise not have had contact with safe shooting practices. The GTA has pioneered the ‘air gun in a box’ approach at fairs and village fetes. The FCC commends this approach and recommends that it be adopted more widely.

9.12 Following a FCC recommendation, the Home Office produced some years ago, a public education film on air weapon misuse which was shown on television as a ‘filler’ advertisement. However, Government departments do not control the timing and frequency with which ‘fillers’ are shown on television, and this may be an expensive measure to address a narrow target audience compared with Home Office films on fire and road safety. The FCC recommends that the Home Office explore this idea further.

9.13 Some members were concerned that a national hand-in campaign for air weapons may do more harm than good. Those prone to misuse air weapons (or simply ignore them languishing in storage) were unlikely to hand them in. Air weapons may also be held for contingent use (for example against possible problems with rats and other vermin). The experience of Northumbria Police suggested that hand-ins required considerable resources for limited returns. Furthermore a campaign may be seen by legitimate gun owners as seeking to reduce the number of air weapons being held for lawful purposes. To make best use of police resources, we believe that any hand-in campaign should form part of a wider amnesty for firearms. Police experience showed that air weapons were regularly handed in during such amnesties by people who might otherwise be cautious about handing in a ‘firearm’ to the police. The FCC do not therefore make any specific recommendation for an air weapon hand in, but we do recommend that air weapons should be borne in mind in implementing any further amnesties.

9.14 A formal requirement to store air weapons securely would not be enforceable without a licensing system. However, it would be worthwhile encouraging owners to keep air weapons under lock and key and store pellets away from the gun itself. Many air weapon incidents have arisen from young people accidentally finding an air weapon and pellets to which lawfully they should not have had access. The FCC recommend that any literature or other material on air weapon safety should encourage secure storage as part of air weapon safety. The possibility of offering a trigger lock with every weapon sold, perhaps free of charge as they were relatively inexpensive, might usefully be explored by the trade.

9.15 We have considered whether the sale of air weapons might be restricted only to registered firearms dealers (RFDs). At present, a majority of new air weapons are sold other than through RFDs, for example through hardware, fishing tackle or sporting goods shops. As there is little profit margin for dealers in selling ordinary second-hand air weapons, these are mostly sold informally through private sales. Anecdotally, air weapons are seldom sold at car boot sales so most transfers would tend to be private. A majority of our members saw little merit in confining air weapon sales to RFDs. It can be argued that RFDs know the law better than other retailers do and may be less prone to break it accidentally or deliberately, there is no evidence to support this theory, and most air weapon vendors appeared to be responsible and reliable. Below are sales figures supplied by the Gun Trade Association for the year 2000;

Total Sales: 230,000 of New ‘Low Powered’ Air guns for Year 2000

9.16 While some measures applicable to RFDs (such as record keeping and secure storage) might be applied to air weapons, it is not clear what this might achieve. Most retailers selling air weapons already take steps to deter theft (for example chains and steel grilles), simply because air weapons might be tempting targets for thieves. Most thefts of air weapons are opportunistic measures from houses and sheds rather than shops. Record keeping would be difficult, as most air weapons do not have unique serial numbers.

9.17 It is also likely that those air weapons being misused tend to be acquired second-hand from family or friends, and controls on sale would be unenforceable. There may be as many as a million secondhand sales a year. Allowing that there are probably some four million air weapon owners and seven million air weapons in the UK, many of the latter serviceable for several decades, the attrition rate requiring the purchase of new air weapons is limited. The proportionality of restricting sales to RFDs in these circumstances might thus be called into question. Although it could also be argued that such a requirement would be ‘restraint of trade’, this in itself should not over-rule the Government’s duty to protect public safety. We do not believe however, that there would be an enhancement of public safety and do not recommend that the sale of air weapons should be confined to RFDs. This view is not shared by the GCN, which believes that air weapons should be brought into the licensing system and sold only through RFDs.

9.18 Air weapon sales through mail order are difficult to regulate. While vendors generally require a signed declaration that the purchaser is over eighteen, this is difficult to check. Many vendors insist on payment by cheque or credit card, as young people would be unlikely to have these. This might be adopted more widely as best practice, and the FCC so recommends. The GCN’s view is that no gun of any sort should be sold through mail order.

9.19 Enforcement of the existing law is subject to a range of practical issues. We agree that any further measures to control air weapons, including changes to the law, would need to be supported by adequate policing resources in order to be worthwhile. A brief and focussed campaign of enforcement aimed at peak times and places (for example parks and canal banks during summer school holidays) might produce useful results. On the other hand, it is accepted that police resources will always be subject to competing priorities both of more serious crimes and wider policing issues. For example, levels of housebreaking also rise during the summer months. The prosecution of offences has also become more complex, for example the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) frequently need to confirm with the FSS that an airgun or soft-air gun is a ‘firearm’ for legal purposes.

9.20 The Courts are generally willing to take a firm approach to those brought before them who misuse airguns. However, prosecution policy is subject to the decisions of the CPS and Home Office ‘Firearms Law: Guidance to the Police’ on cautioning. Both of these took a considered approach to bringing young people before the courts, which should not be waived lightly in the case of air weapon misuse.

9.21 The view might be taken that the casual misuse of air weapons by young people, especially when no damage was done, is not a serious problem worthy of a firm approach. We reject this idea on the grounds that many of the offences (for example, possession in a public place) were intended to head off more serious problems and should therefore be enforced.

9.22 We regard the confiscation of air weapons as central to any campaign of enforcement. While the Courts could order such a forfeiture, the police can also request the parents of a young offender to sign a disclaimer allowing the police to retain the air weapon. Apart from removing the means to commit further offences, young people would be likely to warn their friends thus serving as a wider deterrent. As such it might serve to ‘educate’ those persistent offenders who may reject conventional education on airgun misuse. The FCC therefore recommends that the forfeiture of air weapons should be encouraged in cases of misuse, independently of whether criminal proceedings are instituted.

CHAPTER 10
Lethality

10.1 The Firearms Act 1968 defines a ‘firearm’ as a lethal barrelled weapon. It is generally understood that this is the level at which a weapon becomes capable of inflicting a lethal injury on a person, although there was some uncertainty when evidence was being given to the Home Affairs Select Committee as to how this level is set. Accepting their recommendations on the matter, the Government saw merit in setting at least a non-statutory ‘rule of thumb’ under which manufacturers and law enforcement authorities can operate. Asked to take this forward, we concluded that this was best handled by a subgroup of technical experts, constituted as at Annex D. The sub-group produced a comprehensive report and in view of its detailed, technical nature we think it would be helpful to reproduce it in full, see Annex F.

10.2 The FCC fully endorse the approach which was adopted and recommends that a statutory threshold of one joule (0.7376 ft/lbs.) muzzle energy should be embodied in primary legislation on the basis that any air weapon which exceeded this limit would be deemed to be a firearm for the purposes of the Firearms Acts.