2002
Welcome to the GCN Newsletter
The last year has been an
active one for GCN. We have continued to campaign on the issues of
imitation weapons, air guns and age limits. We have attended
international conferences, met with Ministers and Members of Parliament,
given interviews on radio and television, responded to press enquiries and
analysed government statistics. We are represented on the Firearms
Consultative Committee and are founder members of IANSA (International
Action Network on Small Arms).
We hope this newsletter will update you on our activities and give you
food for thought. Do contact us with your comments and queries.
1.
CAMPAIGNS - IMITATION GUNS
In March 2001 GCN mounted an exhibition of imitation
guns in the House of Commons. MPs and Peers were astonished to see the
range and reality of these weapons from AK47s to ‘handguns for the
handbag’. We sought to demonstrate the urgent need to control the
availability of guns that look like the real thing. Whether they fire
pellets, caps, ball bearings or nothing at all, they represent a real and
perceived threat to public safety.
The police have particular difficulty with imitation
guns since they must treat every incident as if the gun is real. On
hundreds of occasions last year their Armed Response Vehicles up and down
the country were called out to firearms incidents involving ‘look alike’
weapons. Within the last few months police shot and killed a man using
such a weapon.
GCN has drafted new legislation which would ban the
sale, import and manufacture of imitation firearms and their possession in
a public place. The new law would be a simple amendment to the Firearms
Act 1968. We are currently seeking to persuade the government that such
legislation is a priority.
What the Papers Say:
June 2001: The Newcastle
Evening Chronicle published a warning over toy gun scares, drawing
particular attention to the metal BB guns which had been mistaken for
weapons in a growing number of incidents reported to Newcastle North
command area police.
16 July 2001:
Derek Bennett was shot dead by police in Brixton, after being seen
brandishing a silver gun – the ‘gun’ turned out to be a cigarette lighter
shaped like a handgun.
18 July 2001: The
Times published an article on the banning of imitation guns in which it
was stated that fake weapons are used in an estimated 80% of all gun
crime. Senior police officers estimate that up to 6000,000 imitation guns
could be in circulation in Britain. It is estimated that the replica gun
industry is worth £9.8 million a year, double what it was worth before
Dunblane. Replicas can be brought over the counter and by mail order for
as little as £45
21 July 2001: The
Times published an article ‘Replica guns prove a deadly threat’ following
the fatal shooting by police of Derek Bennett who was carrying a novelty
cigarette lighter. GCN was quoted as follows: ‘Legislation proposed by
the campaign group Gun Control Network would ban their (replica guns)
sale, manufacture and import and the possession in a public place of
anything that looks like a lethal firearm. Until this is in place, young
people should be strongly discouraged from buying realistic replicas. The
risks, as Mr. Bennett found to his cost are also real’.
26 July 2001:
Derby Evening Telegraph carried a report on Derbyshire police launching a
campaign to rid the streets of imitation guns. The campaign came about
after a group of 13 year old boys, in possession of a replica gun, were
arrested by armed police. Days earlier a group of 15 year old youths were
surrounded by armed police after they had been seen brandishing a
replica. In the first four months of 2001 15 replica guns were seized
compared to 25 in the whole of the previous year.
Availability
Availability of replica guns is highlighted in research
published by Durham University’s Department of Sociology and Social
Policy. They are available from a variety of outlets, apart from by mail
order, and there are reports of them being sold in tobacconists, model
shops and in high street markets. A member of the public wrote to Derby
City Council after a trader at the Eagle Centre Market was seen selling
cigarette lighters that appeared to be guns. The Council responded by
speaking to the trader concerned who removed the article from sale –
others have agreed to do likewise. Derby City Council have forwarded a
copy of the letter to the National Market Trader Federation to ask for
their support nationwide.
Other countries are addressing the problem in the
following ways:
USA
Los Angeles became the first US city to outlaw the manufacture and sale of
replica guns. Other states have comprehensive laws regarding the
design, sale, distribution and ownership of replicas; these include
Connecticut, Kansas, New Jersey and Wisconsin.
Australia A licence is required for blank firing
guns used for film and theatre.
Japan The sale of imitation guns is banned.
Malaysia Imitation firearms are subject to
licensing.
Netherlands Replica firearms than can be used to
frighten people are banned.
Sweden Possession of a deactivated gun without a licence is
prohibited.
France Blank firing replicas must be licensed.
2. CAMPAIGNS - AIRGUNS
There has been a large rise in the number of airguns
used in crime over the past ten years. The figure for 1990 was 5,380
weapons whereas by 1999/00 it had risen to 10,103.
GCN’s submission to the Home Affairs Committee (HAC) highlighted the
extent of the damage that airguns can cause to people, animals and
property by preparing a list of incidents derived from two sources,
reports from a national newspaper during the last five years and
information given by MPs during debates and committee sessions (see list
below).
Lethality & registration:
GCN was disappointed at the Government’s response to
the HAC report. Although all airguns are not going to be licensed, we
hope that the definition of a ‘lethal weapon’ will be such as to require
the certification of a large number of airguns that are not currently
within the licensing system.
Airgun incidents - examples from the press & MPs:
Daily Telegraph
7 August 1998
Airgun boy cleared of intent over a shot girl.
A 16 year old teenager shot a
12 year old girl, Jasmine Proverbs, in the head while showing off a new
£195 rifle fitted with telescopic sights and silencer. A bit of the
pellet is still lodged in her brain. He had also shot Jasmine’s brother
in the leg the previous day.
11 November 1998
Air rifle attack on pupils.
Four children and a dinner lady
were hit by pellets fired from an air rifle at a playground of a Primary
School. A 16 year old was arrested.
16 January 1999
Teenager shot in ‘war game’.
Richard Bryant, 13, was
critically injured when a pellet fired from an airgun lodged in is skull.
Four boys aged 11 to 14 were involved. A 14 year old was arrested.
13 July 1999
George Atkinson, 13, was fatally wounded after being hit by an airgun
pellet in the garden of his aunt’s house.
Derby Evening Telegraph
28 August 2001
Cygnets shot in the head.
Two young swans have been left
with serious head injuries after being shot…. An RSPCA Inspector said ‘Two
people appear to have gone and deliberately used these swans as target
practice with no regard to the suffering they must have gone through.’
Ripley & Heanor News
20 September 2001
Teenager is shot in airgun incident.
15 year old Darren Harrison
underwent emergency surgery on his stomach after being shot while walking
along a public footpath. Surgeons were unable to remove the airgun pellet
which wounded him. The police found evidence of target practice taking
place on the path which runs between a wood and open fields.
The Middlesbrough
Gazette
May 2001 Child killed.
A Teeside child was killed on 3rd
May 2001 by another child using its father’s air rifle, prosecution
pending.
Examples given by MPs
Mr Doug Henderson (Newcastle
upon Tyne N). Standing Committee E. 21st November 1996.
A 65 year old Aberdeenshire man
died instantly after a pellet fired by a 17 year old taking pot-shots with
his new airgun hit him after he stepped into the line of fire.
Mr Gordon Prentice (Pendle)
Standing Committee E. 21st November 1996. Residents on Leigh’s biggest
housing estate have had enough of teenage troublemakers who use waste bins
for airgun practice even though young children are playing there.
Dr Nick Palmer MP (Broxtowe) 21st
January 1998.
Reported that the Cat
Protection League has estimated that every year 10,000 cats are killed or
maimed.
Jeff Ennis (Barnsley, East and
Mexborough). Air Guns (Safety) 23rd June 1999.
Adam Yoxall, aged 10, was hit in the eye by an airgun
pellet while playing in a local wood. He lost the sight in is left
eye
A 12 year old boy was left in agony after being shot in
the back by a sniper
3.
CAMPAIGNS - GUNS AND CHILDREN
Currently there are no minimum age limits for the
possession/use of a firearm in clubs and on private land. This means
children of ANY age can shoot. The HAC recommended that ‘there should
be a minimum age limit below which a child should not be allowed to handle
a lethal firearm, even under supervision…this should be at least twelve
and possibly fourteen’. The Government threw out this proposal.
Local Education Authorities (LEAs)
GCN wrote to the Chairs of Education Committees, asking
them to consider their policy with regard to any references to guns in
their schools and, principally, to discourage participation by pupils in
any activities involving firearms – including low-powered air riles and
pistols. Derbyshire County Council was the first to review its policy
with all headteachers receiving letters strongly advising staff against
undertaking shooting activities. In addition, the Health and Safety
Adviser wrote to all Leaders and voluntary organisations who were, or had
been, in receipt of grant aid informing them that “air rifle shooting, or
similar use of ‘weapons’ is not to be undertaken as part of our programme
with young people.” Other LEA’s have issued similar guidelines.
Scouts
Despite the recommendations of the Home Affairs Committee regarding the
use of guns by young children, and the action taken by many LEA’s, the
Scouting Association continue to promote children’s usage of air rifles by
encouraging those as young as eight to handle and shoot real guns.
The Women’s Institute (WI)
The following is a copy of a speech given by C. Hall, a member of the
Derbyshire Federation WI on behalf of her local Institute to Derbyshire
Federation in support of legislation to introduce a minimum age limit of
14 years below which a child may not hand an airgun, rifle or shotgun:
“On 13th March
1996 my son was six. I was in my kitchen baking his birthday cake, with
the radio on, when I heard that Thomas Hamilton, a former Scout Leader,
member of a licensed gun club, owner of an arsenal of perfectly legal
weapons and ammunition, had walked into Dunblane Primary school and gunned
down sixteen five and six year olds, and a teacher. Since then I’m
suspicious when gun owners say ‘responsible gun ownership poses no threat
to society.’ That’s why I was appalled when my son’s Cub Pack, and later
his primary school, arranged to take him, and other nine and ten year
olds, away for a weekend, to do exciting gun sports. Children are
vulnerable, we cluck over them. ‘Clean your teeth, look both ways before
you cross the road, wash your hands when you’ve been to the loo.’ We have
laws to protect them. My son is not married; the law says he’s too
young. He is not old enough to go to work. He can’t drive a car until he
is 17, he can’t buy a sparkler for bonfire night – you can get a nasty
burn from a sparkler. He’s not allowed in the cinema to watch a violent
film until he’s 18 BUT, (and how crazy is this?) he can have a real gun,
with real ammunition, capable of causing real injury, real death, as long
as there’s an adult around at the time. We have a serious loophole in our
law. We’ve no lower age limit for children shooting real guns. We want
to close that loophole. As you’ve already heard, a House of Commons
Committee recommended a minimum age of fourteen. The recommendation was
thrown out. In May this year two boys from Teeside thought they’d have
‘fun with a gun.’ One of them died of gun shot wounds, the other
didn’t. Last week a local lad was seriously injured – large bowel
punctured by an airgun pellet. This hall holds around a thousand. Look
around you. Double this. That’s roughly how many of us are injured every
year by air rifles, in England and Wales. That’s a drop in the ocean
compared to the numbers of swans, ducks, badgers and birds. Ten thousand
cats are killed or injured every year. Add on all the criminal damage to
property, then ask yourself, why do we still allow people to give children
real guns? Have you heard them say it’s ‘character building’ for a child
to pull a real trigger? Have you heard that having a gun somehow
magically instils discipline, and respect, into a child? We have age
limits for alcohol, credit cards, getting married, driving, having sex;
what planet were those law makers on, (remember they’re mostly men), what
planet were they on when they threw out that recommendation to bring in a
minimum age for shooting? Fellow members, it’s time we brought those
politicians back down to planet earth, our planet.”
The following resolution was adopted by Derbyshire
Federation at their Autumn Council Meeting: “This meeting urges H.M. Government to create legislation which introduces a minimum age limit
of 14 years below which a child may not handle an airgun, rifle or
shotgun” where it was carried by a big majority.
4. CURRENT ISSUES
HOME OFFICE FIGURES SHOW VIOLENT CRIME TO BE FALLING OVERALL – BUT
FIREARMS STILL HAUNT THE UK CRIME SCENE
The gun lobby has made much of the recent crime
statistics for England and Wales claiming that violent crime, especially
firearm related crime, is on the increase. They argue that this ‘proves’
that the handgun ban introduced in 1997 is not working and should be
repealed. In the month before Christmas 2001, four TV documentaries
concerned with firearms and crime were broadcast in Britain. GCN members
and supporters took part in these when invited and the debates these
programmes generated prove beyond any doubt that the case for retaining
our existing gun controls needs to be strongly reasserted against the gun
lobby’s claim that the legislation was unfair and unworkable.
Any debate about the crime statistics and what they reveal is fraught with
problems but the following facts attempt to clarify the picture. In fact,
overall violent crime appears to be falling and firearms were used in only
a tiny minority of offences. Contrary to the impression given in some
media reports and eagerly seized upon by the gun lobby, the streets of
Britain are not ‘awash’ with illegal guns, notwithstanding the serious
criminal problems in some cities.
-
Guns were used in only 0.3% of notifiable offences in
1999/00. Even in relation to violent crime, only 4.7% of robberies and
8.5% of homicides involved guns, so the violence problem in Britain is, to
a very large extent, not gun-related.
-
Handgun homicide
figures are very low and since 1980 have fluctuated from a low of 7 in
1988, through to 35 in 1993 and a previous high of 39 in 1997. So the 42
handgun murders in 1999 do not represent a statistically significant
increase.
-
The figures for overall
handgun crime have also fluctuated peaking at 4273 in 1993, followed
by a sharp drop to 2648 after Dunblane and then a rise last year to 3685.
There is clear evidence that this recent growth is being driven by the
trade in illegal drugs, gang activity and ‘organised’ crime in a few large
cities. Recent TV documentaries have focussed upon this criminal activity
(and police operations against it) but the real point is that it
represents a quite exceptional phase in a very particular type of crime in
Britain.
-
There is evidence of
growth in the use of imitation guns in crime but no accurate
figures can be put on this. Estimates, however, based upon recent
research, suggest that around 40% of handgun crime is attributable to
imitations and that this proportion may be growing given the easy
availability of these, often very realistic, weapons.
-
Recorded crime figures are
always affected by police activity and, in a number of areas, police
forces are proactively addressing firearm related crime (Operation Trident
in London and Manchester for example). One outcome of this activity will
undoubtedly be an increase in recorded gun crime as more of it is brought
to light by police operations.
-
Any claim about rising
violence based only on crimes recorded by the police is very unreliable
because only around 40% of violent crimes are ever reported to the
police. The authoritative British Crime Survey, published by the Home
Office, and based on directly asking the public their experience of
violence, shows a continuing decline in the level of violence. Thus the
recent 2001 Survey showed an overall decrease of 19% in violent crimes
between 1999 and 2000. This included a 34% decline in wounding, a 14%
decline in common assault and a 22% decline in robbery.
-
Much recent research has highlighted the fact that the UK does not have a
particularly low rate of violent crime compared to other modern western
societies but it does have a low rate of gun crime and homicide. In our
view this is because of our tight gun laws and the relative
inaccessibility of guns in our society.
-
The
gun lobby point to a relatively small and quite exceptional increase in
firearm related crime in order to support their case for repealing our gun
control legislation. However, it is clear to the vast majority of the
British public that any relaxation of gun controls or the routine arming
of the police would lead to an increase in the use of guns in crime. For
these reasons GCN members have resisted such developments.
SOME PERSONAL THOUGHTS ON RECENT CRIME FIGURES
by Mick North
“I
began campaigning for a ban on the civilian ownership of handguns in April
1996, shortly after the death of my daughter Sophie in the Dunblane
massacre. Like the other Dunblane families who became involved in the
campaign I wasn’t driven by revenge or, as the gun lobby used to suggest,
a desire to find somebody to ‘scapegoat’ because I’d suffered personal
tragedy. My motivation, one indeed that I shared with every campaigner I
met, was a desire to reduce the risk of such an outrage ever happening
again. It was obvious that no test existed that could ever predict
whether or not any handgun owner would always be one hundred percent safe
with his lethal weapons. There was only one logical conclusion: if public
safety could not be guaranteed it was not appropriate for individual
citizens to own handguns. The politicians agreed.
The
campaign to ban handguns was successful, and all legally-owned handguns in
Great Britain were surrendered by February 1998, their owners receiving
compensation. A Home Office study of firearm homicides in the 1990s
showed that 13.4% were committed with legally-held weapons. It is these
crimes that would be significantly reduced by the handgun ban. However,
no campaigner was naïve enough to believe that the removal of legally-held
handguns alone would rid the UK of handgun crime. According to the Home
Office no homicide relating to organised crime or drugs was committed with
a legally-held gun, so these would be less affected by the handgun ban.
Other measures, including stricter law enforcement, were needed to deal
with the large pool of illegal handguns involved. Nevertheless the occurrence
of these crimes was no reason to avoid dealing with those committed with
legally-held guns. The Dunblane massacre was a horrific example of the
enormous damage that just one gun owner inflicted with one legal handgun
on totally innocent victims.
What then do I make of the reaction that greeted the July publication of
the report on Illegal Firearms in the United Kingdom from the Centre for
Defence Studies at King’s College, London (Commissioned by the Countryside
Alliance) which reported that in the two years after the handgun ban was
introduced handgun crime had increased by 40%. ‘Government attempts to
ban handguns are a failure’ was a typical headline, with the gun lobby at
home and abroad eager to blame the handgun ban for increased crime rates.
To do so was absurd and a careful reading of the report suggests that even
its authors were more qualified in their conclusions. Nevertheless the
impression left was of a Britain in the throws of a huge gun crime wave.
A
key statement from the executive summary suggests that the findings of the
report could not support any worthwhile conclusion. ‘The long term impact
on the use of handguns in crime cannot be judged with any accuracy at this
time’. I agree, it is far too soon for the full effects of the handgun
ban to have been achieved and it is mischievous to pretend that continuing
gun crime means that it is a failure. The report highlights some of the
factors that are contributing to the continued use of guns in crime. For
example the authors explain that there are two types of handgun that are
popular with criminals – both of these involve the conversions of items
that can be obtained legally. Rather than reversing the prohibition this
is a reason for extending it to deactivated and replica guns, something
for which Gun Control Network has been campaigning and something that
members of the gun lobby oppose.
Whilst increasing crime figures would worry most of the population some of
those who champion the rights of gun owners greet them with apparent glee,
seizing the opportunity to criticise the legislation that took away their
guns. Rather than seek further measures to restrict the availability of
guns to anyone who might use them in a crime they want to re-establish the
right for anyone to own handguns. The question I would ask them is this.
How exactly would rearming 57,000 men lead to a decrease in gun crime? It
wouldn’t, in fact the risk of a Dunblane-like multiple shooting would once
again increase.
We
have heard very little from the gun lobby about the recent figures for gun
crime in Scotland announced in September 2001. I wonder why. Could it be
because the number of crimes was actually at an all time low and the
number of handgun crimes had fallen by over 40% from 1999 to 2000. I was
pleased with the trend, but recognise the dangers of over-interpreting one
set of statistics. Nevertheless there is certainly nothing in these, nor,
despite the headlines, in those for England and Wales to suggest that the
handgun ban has led to an increase in crime. I am convinced that the ban
reduced the risk of the general public being victims of gun crime.”
TORIES IN MARGINALS BACK REPEAL OF GUN BAN
According to the article ‘Tories in Marginals back Repeal of gun Ban’
published in The Independent (4th June 2001) a number of Tory
candidates in the forthcoming election were to support a campaign by The
Sportsman's Association to repeal the 1997 Firearms (Amendment) Acts which
resulted in a ban on the private ownership of handguns. The
Sportsman's
Association’s website said that “Several Tory candidates…came out very
strongly in support of shooting”. GCN issued a press release urging “those
millions of the electorate who hoped that private ownership of handguns in
Britain was a thing of the past to consider carefully the implications of
voting for a Conservative candidate. He or she may support the return of
handguns into private hands and all the dangers that would accompany it.”
Labour gave no specific manifesto commitment to gun legislation, but prior
to the election there was a clear commitment by Charles Clarke, Minister
of State for Home Affairs, to tighten and simplify gun laws in a number of
respects.
11th
SEPTEMBER 2001 - Increase of guns and ammunition in the States
Mounting concern over one of the responses to the tragedy of 11
September has been the dramatic rise in the sale of guns and ammunition in
the States. On 16 September 100,000 rounds of ammunition
were sold at the Central Florida Arms Show. 2,000 people had attended the
show by the Saturday afternoon, a significant increase over the several
hundred who had attended the previous year. One exhibitor reported that,
as the World Trade Centre tower started to fall, he took orders for more
than 196,000 bullets on that Tuesday afternoon alone – normally he would
only sell about 50,000 during the entire weekend of a gun show. Another
report from Fort Collins, Colorado, notes that since President Bush has
been telling the country to get ready (re the war on terrorists), gun
sales are up 20%, ammunition sales 50%.
Air
Marshals on UK flights? - GCN
is looking very carefully at any law that proposes the carrying of guns by
airline security guards or personnel and is very cautious about
suggestions that this will increase personal safety. All evidence
suggests that the fewer guns there are around, the safer people will be.
5.
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCES
UN
Small Arms Conference
The world is awash with small arms. Every year they
kill 500,000 people. Most of the deaths occur, not among military
combatants, but within civilian populations affected by violence in
conflict zones or by criminal activity. Many victims are women and
children. At the heart of the problem is the international arms trade,
the manufacturers, brokers and shippers who continue to supply these
deadly weapons. They frequently disregard the consequences of their
actions, pouring more and more guns into areas, mainly in the developing
world, where they worsen existing conflicts.
In response to increasing disquiet throughout the
world, the United Nations has attempted to address the problem. In July
this year the UN held a two-week conference in New York aimed at curbing
the trade in small arms. Many countries, including the EU states, were
pushing for wide-ranging reforms and a legally-binding agreement.
However, largely as a result of the attitude of the United States
delegation the outcome fell well short of that desired by most of the
nations and non-government organisations involved. The representatives of
more than 140 nations did eventually agree a voluntary and
unenforceable pact to stem the illegal flow of small arms to conflict
zones. At the very least this was a lost opportunity, but many see it as
an almost total failure that is unlikely to have significant impact on
arms trafficking and the misery it brings.
Two factors that no doubt influenced the US delegation
were, firstly, the size of the US arms industry (it produces half the
weapons involved) and, secondly, the attitude of the National Rifle
Association (NRA). The NRA had run a huge campaign vilifying the UN,
informing its members that the UN conference’s main aim was to deprive
American civilians of their right to keep and bear arms. The US
delegation’s insistence on blocking any measure that would affect private
ownership of guns, including military weapons (permitted in the USA) was
not unrelated to this. As a result the pact simply urges States to
establish new laws aimed at regulating arms brokers and ensuring ‘control
over the export and transit of small arms and light weapons’. And it only
appeals to states to destroy surplus stocks of small arms and to
criminalize the illegal production, possession, stockpiling and trade in
small arms. The US blocked a plan to prevent states selling guns to rebel
groups.
GCN, as an organisation concerned primarily with
domestic gun control, has no doubts that weak domestic gun laws make it
easier for weapons to enter the illegal market, and cannot see how
measures to curb illegal arms trafficking can ignore domestic gun
control. To rely on individual states adopting their own measures, as the
pact suggests, means that all states become potential victims of the weak
gun laws of a few reluctant participants. At gun shows in the US it is
possible to buy guns without any background check on the purchaser, and it
is no surprise that, on more than one occasion, terrorists have attempted
to use gun shows to obtain weapons.
The more optimistic of the commentators on the
conference have highlighted the fact that, despite its limitations, the UN
pact does represent the first time the international community has struck
an agreement to curb the gun trade. This has placed the issue firmly on
the agenda. Another hopeful sign to some is that a meeting to review the
process has been agreed for 2006, although even this modest outcome was
initially opposed by the United States.
GCN is a member of the International Action Network on
Small Arms, an international network of organisations who are campaigning
for greater curbs on small arms trafficking. Through our contacts with
other NGOs involved, GCN will continue to raise the issue of the link
between domestic gun laws and the degree of slippage of guns into the
illegal arms market.
Helsinki - Conference on Small Arms, Gun Violence & Injury
Guns and Small Arms kill
500,000 civilians a year.
On September 27 gun control campaigners and doctors
from around the world met in Helsinki to discuss the issue of Small Arms,
Gun Violence and Injury. GCN’s Mick North gave a moving account of the
tragedy in Dunblane in 1996 and many others testified to the horrors of
gun violence. Small arms i.e. guns, rocket launchers, mortars etc that can
be carried by one or two people, are estimated to kill around 500,000
civilians a year many of them in post conflict areas in Africa. Countries
such as Ethiopia, Uganda and Somalia are awash with the military weaponry
supplied by arms manufacturers in the West to support governments or
rebels perceived to be the ‘good guys’. During the conflicts thousands of
civilians are shot by soldiers and security forces, and afterwards the
weapons slip into civilian hands because there is no-one to collect and
destroy them.
The International Physicians for the Prevention of
Nuclear War (IPPNW) hosted the 3 day conference in recognition of the
overwhelming need to reduce the availability of guns in society in the
interest of public health and safety.
Participants expressed strong support for the creation
of effective domestic gun controls and a reduction in the global arms
trade.
6. TESTIMONY OF A FORMER SHOOTER
The following is a synopsis of a letter sent to
GCN by a former shooter:
The writer tells of a
background which saw active and long term shooting, enjoyment in a high
standard of training and success in competitive shooting. Writing of the
memory of joining a local pistol shooting association as a seventeen year
old, the writer says
“… in love with guns, this was
heaven. I will never forget the first evening—the smell of the burned
nitro powder and gun oil blending with the tobacco and cigarette smoke.
The sight of people removing real Smith & Wesson handguns from polished
wooden boxes. Fresh, shiny .357 cartridge cases as long as my index
finger. And as for the noise... Flame and thunder from the muzzle of the
.44 someone brought in, and the still-airborne arc of all seven cases from
a Colt Government .45 semi-automatic. It was as much of a man’s world as
it was possible to get into a single pre-fabricated building. I was
enthralled, and dreamed of owning my own pistol.
One evening at my new
Nirvana I was standing with my colleague at the sign-in table waiting my
turn to book a time slot on the range, when in walked two members I hadn’t
noticed before. Both were wearing dirty jeans and leathers and had
obviously arrived by motorbike. As I watched, one of them unzipped his
jacket and removed from a shoulder holster a S&W .357 long barrelled
revolver. His companion similarly divested himself of a clear plastic bag
contained shiny home-loaded cartridges. I don’t remember any of the other
club members batting an eyelid at this, and I certainly looked. What I do
remember with clarity however is the slight feeling of unease that crept
over me, and the exchange of glances between my colleague and myself. Had
they really driven on a motorbike through a large town with a concealed
handgun in a shoulder holster?……..my desire to own a pistol waned.”
The writer goes on to tell of a
career where guns still played a major part. Then there was the tragedy
at Hungerford. It was at about this time that the writer says the ‘rot’
started to set in. “
I started to hear, with increasing frequency, stories from shooting
friends and associates of firearms stolen from vehicles and homes (often
neither locked) or those which were ‘being borrowed’ or ‘on loan’ without
appearing on any certificates. I am not talking about just one incident
here—almost everyone could tell a tale about a gun they or a friend had
either lost/had stolen or had acquired ‘off ticket’. People who say this
sort of thing is rare haven’t been around long-term shooting folk very
much. The doubts that started to erode my love of guns merged with my
increasing certainty that killing animals for pleasure was pretty
indefensible and not a very socially-acceptable leisure activity.
It is important at this
point to try to convey to you the mixed emotions at this time, because I
am utterly convinced that many other people go through exactly the same
thing. Shooting is a highly sociable sport, enjoyed as much for the pre
and post-event activities as the shooting itself. I cannot deny that I
have had some wonderful times shooting, be it swapping barbed banter with
my neighbour whilst pheasant beating, or downing scalding tea and hot
toast by the Agar in the farmhouse kitchen after a winter’s night lamping
rabbits. To deny these and many other memories would be to make me a
liar. Many, many shooters have a gun history similar to mine, and giving
it all up is not something that is done lightly”
By now the writer had reached
the late twenties, mixing with people who had school aged children….
knowing people with children at Dunblane. As a reaction to that tragedy
they write: “… I felt
like a criminal. My guns were all legally owned and securely stored, but
Dunblane had been committed by a ticketed (lawful) weapon, ergo I was as
guilty as Hamilton himself, albeit implicitly. At the time, any
suggestions to me that guns were bad or should be controlled were met with
rage and hostility. To this day I am deeply ashamed at how I reacted, but
my apparent anger was in fact deep disgust. I was guilty by association.
I felt dirty and cheap and suddenly part of a pariah group of anti-social
misfits; law-abiding and accepted one moment, Public Enemies the next.
So no more pretence, no more
lies or self-hypnosis. No more pretending that a carefully swaged, lubed
and loaded match-grade bullet to punch a .38” hold in an Olympic target is
a noble sport. Read the history books—guns were invented to kill……….
Liquidisation and vaporisation of muscle tissue is not noble. Controlled
expansion and kinetic energy dissipation through fluid-bearing organs is
not a sport fit for Olympians. We all know the javelin, discus etc. began
as weapons, but do we really think the Olympic hammer is the same as a
bullet? Would Hamilton have been able to kill 16 people without challenge
armed with a javelin?
With the background and
experience I have had, I am utterly of the opinion that one of the appeals
of a gun is its ability to make a small man feel big (- retrospectively I
perhaps aim that at myself as well). A gun is a towering symbol and
object of both power and masculinity. Hold a 7.62mm cartridge in your
hand and then feel the massive brute force of the kick in your shoulder as
it punches the bullet through four railway sleepers, and you will know
what I mean. Even the lowly .22 rimfire is an intoxicating tool when
combined with an Anschutz rifle, telescopic sight and sound moderator,
lethal at up to a mile. How many schoolboys have played the army sniper
with such a weapon, hapless rabbits the unwitting (and unarmed) enemy?
What kind of personality does this encourage in a person? Perhaps one who
is more likely to destroy than to create, or at least one who is less
sensitive to the details and wonders of the world around.
The public have a right to
feel safe, and a right to a more morally acceptable society. No matter
how you turn it, shooting is a destructive and negative activity. I
really believed at one time that if I gave up shooting my quality of life
would suffer. People need to understand that a gun is not essential to
life, but it certainly helps reach death. Maslow’s (Maslov’s) ‘Hierarchy
of Needs’ chart doesn’t contain a gun anywhere that I recall. Oxygen yes,
food certainly, even sex. But no guns. And giving them up doesn’t hurt
physically either. I know
No matter how much a shooter
claims to be in tune with the countryside (as I did), it cannot be good
logic that anyone who can raise a firearm to destroy another living animal
can at the same time appreciate life. That equation just simply doesn’t
compute. And to take that a step further, how can we as a society be sure
that those who blast other animals to death with firearms for amusement
will always draw the line at doing the same to his fellow Man? Of course
we cannot, and that means that another Dunblane or another Hungerford
cannot be ruled out. If a farmer, gamekeeper or other ‘legitimate’ gun
owner goes on the rampage with a legally-held firearm, what then? What do
we say to the families of the victims left behind? “Sorry; we didn’t
think it would happen.” Of course I hope it never does, but I believe it
will—it’s just a matter of time.”
7. FIREARMS AND SUICIDE RESEARCH
DATA
The
following data on suicide and firearms suggests that this evidence can
be viewed as a warning to us in the UK that these are some of the effects
of firearm possession. Most articles predict that the storage of a
firearm in the home predicts an increased rate of a violent death. The
articles have been referenced so that those interested can obtain further
information.
Rich, C L; Wagner, J;
Fowler, R C;
Young, J G;
Black, N A ‘Guns and suicide: possible effects of some specific
legislation’ in American Journal of Psychiatry; 147 (Mar 90)
p.342-6 IS: ISSN
Describes suicide rates in Toronto and Ontario and methods used for
suicide in Toronto for 5 years before and after enactment of Canadian gun
control legislation in 1978. Presents data form San Diego, California,
where state laws attempt to limit access to guns by certain psychiatric
patients. Both sets of data indicate that gun control legislation may have
led to decreased use of guns by suicidal men, but the difference was
apparently offset by an increase in suicide by leaping.
Wintemute, G J;
Kraus, J F;
Teret, S P;
Wright, M W ‘The choice of weapons in firearm suicides’ in
American Journal of Public Health; 78 (Jul 88) p.824-6
Reports on the firearms used in 235 suicides in Sacramento County,
California, during 1983-85. Handguns were used in 69 per cent of firearm
suicides, 65 per cent for males, 88 per cent for females, and in all such
deaths among women ages 35 and older.
Shah, S;
Hoffman, R E;
Wake, L;
Marine, W M in Journal of Adolescent Health; 26 (3) Mar
2000, p.157-63
Aimed to determine whether,
compared with age- and sex-matched controls who did not commit suicide,
adolescents who committed suicide by firearms were more likely to have had
household access to firearms. Concludes that two types of public health
interventions to prevent adolescent firearm suicides are likely to be
successful: limiting household access to firearms, and identifying
adolescents at high risk of firearm suicide
Cummings, P;
Koepsell, T D;
Grossman, D C;
Savarino, J;
Thompson, R S ‘The association between the purchase of a
handgun and homicide or suicide’ in American Journal of Public Health;
87 (6) Jun 97, p.974-8
A case-control study was done
among the members of a large health maintenance organization. Case
subjects were the 353 suicide victims and 117 homicide victims among the members from
1980-1992. 5 control subjects were matched to each case subject on age,
sex, and zip code of residence. Handgun purchase information was obtained
from the Department of Licensing. For both suicide and homicide, the
elevated relative risks persisted for more than 5 years after the
purchase. Legal purchase of a handgun appears to be associated with a
long-lasting increased risk of violent death.
Kaplan, M S;
Adamek, M E;
Geling, O;
Calderon, A ‘Firearm suicide among older women in the US.’ in
Social Science and Medicine; 44 (9) May 97, p.1427-30
Contrary to the common view
that older women (65+) in the United States use suicide methods that have
relatively low potential for death, firearms have become the most common
suicide method in this group. Examines the association between demographic
and geographic factors and the use of firearms vs other suicide methods.
Dudley, M;
Cantor, C;
Moore, G de ‘Jumping the gun: firearms and the mental health
of Australians’ in Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry; 30
(3) Jun 96, p.370-81
Reports that 85% of firearm
deaths are triggered by distress as opposed to crime and that most firearm
homicides are intrafamilial or involve familiar people. Finds a causal
relationship between gun ownership and firearm suicides and homicides.
Suggests a modest increase in risk of firearms misuse among those
suffering from a psychiatric disorder.
Liu, T;
Waterbor, J W ‘Declining use of firearms to commit suicide in
Alabama in the 1980s’ in Journal of Death and
Dying; 30 (2) 1994-95, p.145-53
Trends in method of suicide was
examined from 1980-1989. 78.7% of suicides were victims of firearms.
Whites had a higher risk of using firearms in suicide. Comparing to single
marital status, married, widowed, and divorced people all had increased
risks of using firearms. Those living in rural areas were more likely to
use firearms in suicide; there was an increasing trend of firearm use with
age. But the risk of using firearms to commit suicide has declined in
recent years
Zwerling, C;
Lynch, C F;
Burmeister, L F;
Goertz, U in American Journal of Public Health; 83 (11) Nov
93, p.1630-2
Tests the hypothesis that the
use of handguns, rifles, and shotguns in such suicides reflects the
availability of these weapons. The percentage of firearm suicides
involving handguns increased from 36.6% in 1980-1989 to 43.3% during 1990
and 1991. Data suggest that handguns are disproportionately represented
among firearm suicides and that this overrepresentation has increased
during the last decade.
Malmberg, A;
Hawton, K;
Simkin, S ‘A study of suicide in farmers in England and Wales’
in Journal of Psychosomatic Research; 43 (1) Jul 97, p.107-11
A psychological autopsy study
of suicide in 84 farmers who died between 1991-1994 is presented and some
preliminary findings are discussed. The proportional mortality ratio for
suicide is higher in farmers than in the general population. The reasons
for this are likely to be complex, but may include easy availability of
firearms, stress related to work, financial difficulties, and family
problems.
Shah, S;
Hoffman, R E;
Wake, L;
Marine, W M ‘Adolescent suicide and household access to
firearms in Colorado: results of a case-control study’ in Journal of
Adolescent Health; 26 (3) Mar 2000, p.157-63
Aimed to determine whether, compared with age- and
sex-matched controls who did not commit suicide, adolescents who committed
suicide by firearms were more likely to have had household access to
firearms. Concludes that two types of public health interventions to
prevent adolescent firearm suicides are likely to be successful: limiting
household access to firearms, and identifying adolescents at high risk of
firearm suicide.
