NRA Journal - Spring 2007 - National Rifle Association

the destruction of the sport with its Firearms(Amendment) Act No 2, 1997 which extended theprohibition to small calibre pistols as well.With a few minor exceptions, the private possessionof what most of us would regard as target pistols ofany calibre was now effectively banned. Yes, it is truethat pistols are not actually banned, they are merelyraised to Section 5 status under the Firearms Acts, butwe have, on several occasions, been informed by theHome Office that target shooters would not normallybe granted Section 5 authority to possess and usetarget pistols. It is also true that we can still use muzzleloading pistols under the Section 1 provisions of theFirearms Act, but even though that is an excellentsport in its own right and an interesting one too, as Iknow from my personal involvement in it, it is not thesame as the sport we have lost and does not appeal toall former target pistol shooters. The same commentmay be made about the perfectly legitimate Section 1long barrelled pistols and revolvers that some of usare using to enable us to continue some form of pistolshooting. It is interesting, but not surprising, to notethe hostility that has been levelled at these firearmsby the Home Office and by some police forces whoseem to regard these firearms as an attempt to getround the ban rather than an attempt to comply withit. It was recognised when the 1997 Acts were beingdrafted that there was no easy way clearly to define inlaw that which the Government wished to ban. It waseventually decided that the only way that this could bedone that would avoid an overly complex definitionwas to rely upon dimensional limits. After all, thesupposed danger of the pistol was its concealabilityand repeat fire capability. To avoid the ban the firearmwould have to have a barrel length of at least 30 cmand an overall length of at least 60 cm. Compliantpistols were certainly not ‘small’ firearms! Someconsiderable ingenuity has been applied by gunsmithsto make firearms that comply with these limits and yetstill function as reasonably handy pistols. There is noHome Office Approval category for such firearms foruse in Home Office Approved target shooting clubsand so, although this is still a bit of a legal grey areathat should, perhaps, be tested through the Courts,it is my understanding that members of such clubscannot take advantage of the benefits accorded underSection 15 of the Firearms (Amendment) Act, 1988 iethey cannot use their membership of a Home OfficeApproved Club to use long barrelled pistols withoutholding personal Firearm Certificates that authorisesuch use.In 1997 the SAGBNI transferred its efforts fromdefence of target pistol shooting to efforts to get thesport back again. Some politicians have now had thehonesty to admit that the banning of the sport was afutile gesture and that it was unfair and even wrong.However, that is a far cry from any of them having thecourage to put matters right by repealing the Firearms(Amendment) Acts 1 & 2, 1997. There are, obviously,very few votes in that!The question then became: What could we do toencourage the Government to repeal the pistol ban?Our best opportunity arose when it was announcedthat London’s bid to host the 2012 Olympic Gameshad been successful.It may not be generally known but the Games arecovered by a document called the Olympic Charter.That Charter is a binding document on the OlympicAssociation of the host for the Games and it containssome very interesting clauses.These are contained in the sections of the Charterentitled: ‘Fundamental Principles of Olympism’ and‘The Olympic Movement and its Action’.Summarising the parts that are most relevant to thetarget pistol shooting situation we find that the BritishOlympic Association, and by extension, the BritishGovernment, to be in breach of the Charter in twoimportant aspects:i British laws impose very definite discriminationagainst target pistol shooters. The laws are noteven uniform across the country as target pistolshave not been banned in Northern Ireland, theChannel Islands or the Isle of Man.ii There is supposed to be a permanent beneficiallegacy to the host country and to the sport fromthe Games. We understand that the pistol facilitiesthat will be built for the 2012 Games will bedismantled after the events. Hardly a permanentlegacy!This Association has formally informed theInternational Olympic Committee and the BritishOlympic Association of this situation.Our present Labour Government has recognised that‘something will have to be done’ to enable the pistolevents to take place in the Games and I have no doubtthat ‘something’ will be done. However, that will be oflittle use to the grass roots pistol shooters and wouldbepistol shooters in mainland UK as they will havelittle opportunity to practise the sport in their ownlocalities unless the present law is revised.Rumours abound concerning what proposals theGovernment has to deal with this problem. Onepossible option would be for the Government to issueSection 5 authorities as required – not forgetting theneeds of coaches, officials etc as well as the actualshooters. This could be done without any needfor what is called primary legislation to amend theFirearms Acts.If they can issue Section 5 authorities to the Olympiccompetitors etc, what about the aspirants or thosewho merely wish to try out the sport? Where is thedanger to the public safety or to the peace that firearms33