It is my pleasure to offer a few words of welcome to this Bill since I was one of the first people to raise this question in this House by way of parliamentary questions some five or six years ago when weapons such as cross-bows and various prehistoric weapons were being introduced into the country, firstly, in the pursuit of sport and, secondly, by young people who wanted to be seen to be macho and tough, and part of a new era and a bygone era. They felt they had to possess such weapons which were used on occasions in violent incidents. For that reason I should like to compliment the Minister on introducing the Bill because we cannot ignore such incidents.
We cannot allow the use of offensive weapons to continue. That is not acceptable to our citizens. We cannot give the impression that such offensive weapons are acceptable. Their use should not go unchallenged. There is great concern among all citizens about the growth in the use and carrying of those offensive weapons. Old people are frightened and young people have been the victims of threats by people carrying such weapons. Timid teenagers who are not part of the "in gangs" or the macho image feel vulnerable to attack and intimidation from young people carrying knives and other weapons. People in my constituency have expressed concern about the existence of crossbows and other offensive weapons. They have asked if the Government intend introducing legislation to regulate the manufacture and sale of such weapons. I am sure those people will welcome the Bill.
In the course of his speech the Minister referred to crossbows and the developments that have taken place in the production of such weapons in recent years. One never knows if a Bill of this type will be able to deal with further developments in the production of such weapons. The Minister should try to cover any developments that will take place. There is a fear that at some stage in the future similar weapons will be outside the scope of the Bill. Legislation should be thorough and cater for all eventualities.
There is a reference in the Bill to the carrying of offensive weapons with intent to cause injury. A weapon may be carried for defensive or offensive purposes. However, a person who carries a defensive weapon indirectly is encouraging his or her peers to do the same. Some young people going to a dance may feel intimidated and decide to carry a flick knife but that cannot be tolerated. If we did we would be encouraging others to carry them. We would not know where that would end. In the heat of an argument such offensive weapons could be used with disastrous consequences. The only way to deal with them is to prohibit them. There is no reason a person should carry a knuckleduster or a flick knife that has four or five variations. There is no reason a person should have a crossbow and arrows in the boot of a car or on a motorbike.
However, it is important to emphasise that it is the duty of the State to protect all members of the public, young and old. People walking down the street of any town or city during the day or at night should be free to do so without fear of an attack from any quarter. I was astonished to read in recent days of an horrific attack on a young person in this city. The newspaper described it as a vicious and unprovoked attack. The unfortunate young person was maimed in that attack. It may be said that if that young person was carrying a defensive weapon he would have suffered greater injury, but we must condemn such a savage attack in broad daylight by other young people. His attackers, who had malicious intent, were carrying offensive weapons and they caused serious injury to the young boy. If I was the parent of such a young person I would be slow to permit him to go outside the house on his own.
Where will it all end? We must ensure that we have a sufficient number of gardaí to prevent such incidents. We must eliminate the marauders and the predators. The sooner we do that the better. The best way to do it is to ensure that there is a Garda presence in all our streets. It is the Garda who can intimidate such young hooligans out of business. Those violent young people have no function on our streets. They roam with the intention of intimidating people, snatching handbags, knocking people down, opening car boots, breaking car windows or breaking into houses. They try to intimidate as many people as possible and we should not tolerate that.
The Firearms Act covers air guns and so on. The Minister should keep in mind that there is a possibility that weapons may be developed which will fall outside the scope of that Act and the Bill under discussion. We should ensure that there is no latitude for young thugs to carry out their acts of terrorism. The ownership of offensive weapons is an important element of the Bill. We should not tolerate the operation of a brokerage or people who make available to hooligans and professional or amateur criminals any offensive weapons. We should not tolerate those who manufacture, sell or hire offensive weapons. It is most reassuring that the Bill makes an attempt to put such people out of business and I hope it will be permanent. The only place where those weapons should be on display, with the exception of those places where they are used under supervision for sporting purposes, is in a museum and other such similar places where we go to see the weapons used by our forefathers when fighting wars in bygone years.
I have made reference to the supposed need to carry weapons. In my view there is no need to carry weapons and there is a responsibility on the State to ensure that the Garda Síochána are sufficiently well equipped to deal with them.
There is one other matter I would like to refer to, even though it does not relate directly to the Bill. Let me say this, and I hope some legislation will be introduced on this one also in the not too distant future, that some very large dogs are now being used by gangs of young people to intimidate other young people and the elderly in the pursuit of crimes of whatever kind. The time is fast approaching when we will have to seriously consider introducing legislation in an effort to curtail such activities. There are those who will say that certain species of dogs, such as guard dogs, are bred for a specific purpose and that these do not present a threat to nor interfere with people in their day to day lives. I am aware of a number of recent cases where young people carrying weapons had with them the type of mastiff I have in mind and used these animals with the sole purpose of achieving their objective which was to maim or cause injury, rob and intimidate the people they were after.
We will have to seriously consider whether we should introduce strict and rigid controls on who may own, lend or deal in such animals. It may be said that these are fine animals and are used for legitimate purposes but so are lions, tigers and various other animals. At one time I heard the ridiculous suggestion, I presume it was of a frivolous nature, that a pet lion be kept in a certain area. If we head down that road, of people wanting to be totally ridiculous, we will eventually go from the sublime to the ridiculous. The Minister might consider at a later stage introducing legislation in this area encompassing such controls.
In his speech, the Minister rightly said that the public should not be allowed to take the law into their own hands nor should they, in my opinion, consider it necessary to do so. Be that as it may, the number of break-ins and attempts to intimidate are obviously on the increase. Whether we like it or not, and this may be open to contradiction, the general public feel that if they are being intimidated in their own homes or subjected to a breakin by a marauder, they have the right to protect themselves. I am aware that this does not relate directly to the Bill but while on the one hand, I accept that the public cannot take the law into their own hands, at the same time I believe that any member of the public has the right to defend himself when under attack. This should be kept in mind in cases — this has been referred to by Deputy O'Dea — where the person under suspicion may be able to prove that he or she was simply trying to defend himself or herself.
Incidentally, a whole range of sprays and stun guns are now available on the market which could be regarded as either offensive or defensive weapons depending on the way they are used. Reference is made to these in the Bill. Technological developments proceed at a very fast pace and in order for us to control the use of these items it may be necessary to be far more specific on Committee Stage and to clearly define how far the Minister should go in limiting the use of these items.
In conclusion, this Bill is timely and is to be welcomed by all of us in this House. I hope it is sufficiently far-reaching to ensure it will still be effective some years hence and does not go out of date within a short period for the very reasons I have stated. There is a number of items we can deal with on Committee Stage but I hope we will reach the position following the enactment of this Bill where young people will be able to convene in a public place in the knowledge that no member of the group has access to weapons which are not acceptable in our society and that they can frequent such places without the fear and underlying worry of an unnecessary or unprovoked attack similar to the one I have referred as having taken place in this city during the past few weeks.
