Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 14 Dec 1989

Vol. 394 No. 6

Firearms and Offensive Weapons Bill, 1989 [ Seanad ]: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I call on the Minister to conclude.

I would like to thank all Deputies who have contributed to the debate. The general reaction of Members on all sides has been to welcome the Bill. Some of the points that have been raised can be more usefully teased out on Committee Stage. However, I will endeavour to reply now to some of the more general points made.

Deputy Jim O'Keeffe raised a number of points. First, he said that the definition of stun gun in the Bill is too narrow, and he gave some example of items, which might be used like a stun gun, and which might not be covered by the present definition. I recognise that there may be validity in that argument. The Minister for Justice will have the matter further examined before Committee Stage. Second, the Deputy, as well as Deputy O'Dea, asked whether imitation firearms could be dealt with in the Bill? The difficulty with this suggestion — and Deputy O'Keeffe mentioned it himself — is that it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to distinguish between an imitation firearm and a toy gun for the purposes of legal definition.

Third, Deputy O'Keeffe felt that there should be a definition of "lawful authority" and "reasonable excuse" in the Bill. It simply would not be possible to specify all the situations in which these defences could be raised legitimately, and ultimately it must be a matter for the courts to determine on the basis of the particular circumstances of the case whether such a defence has been established. Any attempt to confine these terms in the Bill would cause confusion. In the circumstances it is best left to the courts.

Deputy O'Keeffe questioned whether the search power in section 15 is adequate? I think it is, given that there is a power of arrest and given that searches for knives and other weapons will generally consist of simply frisking people, which is something that can be done on the spot.

Deputy Liam Kavanagh asked why crossbows with a draw weight of less than 1.4 kilogrammes are not being brought within the scope of the Firearms Acts. This point was also raised by Deputy McCartan and other speakers. The answer to these questions is that a crossbow with a draw weight of less than 1.4 kilogrammes would be a toy, which would not present any danger to the public. I understand that the draw weight of a serious crossbow would range from 20 kilogrammes upward.

Deputy McCartan commented that in many cases it would be appropriate that the courts should make community service orders where a person has been convicted under the Bill. I agree with him that such orders could be made in appropriate cases. However, I do not believe it is wise to be seen to water down the penalties, which are provided in the Bill. I think it best that the courts be left to decide whether the circumstances of a case merit the imposition of non-custodial penalty.

The Deputy also raised the question of control on martial arts clubs. I have noted his comments on this matter but, as he will appreciate, it is outside the scope of this Bill.

I agree with Deputy McCartan when he says the Vagrancy Act, 1824, should be repealed in its entirety. However, this will have to wait until other more urgent legislative priorities have been disposed of. As the Deputy is not doubt aware, the most undesirable provision of that Act, a provision which punished homelessness, was repealed by the Housing Act, 1988.

Deputies McCartan, Flanagan and others proposed that longbows should be controlled under the Bill. There have been no reports of serious problems regarding longbows. They do not share the characteristics which make the crossbow particularly dangerous, that is, they cannot be cocked and kept ready to fire; they require skill to use and they are more cumbersome. However, should a problem arise with them the matter can then be considered again.

Deputy McCartan and Deputy O'Dea asked why pocket knives are being exempted from the general prohibition on the carrying of knives etc. in places of public entertainment or resort. The reason for this exemption is that a pocket knife is something a person — for example, a pipe smoker — could carry habitually. It is reasonable therefore that it should be exempted from the general prohibition.

Deputy McCartan mentioned that he found section 8 unnecessarily confusing. I appreciate his quest for simplicity of expression. Unfortunately, in the context of drafting legislation this is not always possible. I am satisfied that the format of the section is sufficiently clear and is what is needed to deal with the carrying of knives and other dangerous articles. However, we can look at this point in greater detail on Committee Stage.

Both Deputies McCartan and Deenihan questioned whether it is appropriate that peace commissioners should be permitted to issue search warrants under the Bill. The position is that in a case which was decided in July 1987 the High Court held that the issuing of search warrants by peace commissioners is not contrary to the Constitution.

Deputy McCartan referred to the need to cover "repair" in section 11. The Deputy will find that this has been done by way of amendment in the Seanad and is covered in the latest text of the Bill.

Deputy Deenihan expressed concern that the Bill could create difficulties for cutlery manufacturers. The Deputy can be assured that neither the Bill nor the regulations will adversely affect them.

Deputy O'Dea referred to the need to review the question of an appeal procedure where a Garda superintendent refuses a firearms certificate and I have noted this point for future reference. Deputy O'Dea also referred to the definition of firearm in section 4 (1) (a) and asked for clarification as to whether it might be interpreted to include longbows, catapults etc. Section 4 (1) (a) is merely a repetition of the definition contained in the 1975 Act. The interpretation he suggests has not been taken by our courts down through the years. Deputy O'Dea also mentioned an English case, where a firearm without a firing pin was held to be an imitation firearm. I will certainly look into this case.

Deputy O'Dea queried the use of the term "unlawfully" in section 8 (3). This term is intended to cover members of the security forces — for example, a garda who might carry a baton. Deputy O'Dea also suggested some amendments to section 8 to deal with articles not covered, such as a hammer or an iron bar. I will look at this but I think we may get into difficulties with definitions. Towards the end of this contribution the Deputy also raised questions on the wording used in certain sections, but these are matters we can examine in more detail on Committee Stage.

Deputy Flanagan asked about the necessary arrangements to be made for the issue of firearm certificates for stun guns and crossbows. As the only use to which a stun gun can be put is to incapacitate another person, it is not envisaged that any firearm certificates would be issued for these weapons. Crossbows will be permitted for legitimate sporting and recreational use only. Deputy Flanagan suggested that crossbows should not be permitted for hunting. As the Deputy knows the killing of a wild bird or animal with a crossbow is an offence under the Wildlife Acts for which I had some responsibility during the period of the last Government. Deputy Flanagan and Deputy O'Sullivan, among others suggested there should be some controls on Army surplus shops selling dangerous weapons. This will be covered by the regulations to be made under section 12.

Deputy Flanagan also queried the position where a person brings a length of pipe or other dangerous article to a football match or other sporting occasion. This is the type of situation that will be covered by amendments which the Minister for Justice will bring forward on Committee Stage to implement the recommendations of the committee on public safety and crowd control.

Deputy Joe Jacob asked what will happen to stun guns already in the country when the Bill is enacted. I want to assure the House that these stun guns will then be treated as firearms and it will be an offence for a person to have one of them in his or her possession or control. Deputy Jacob appealed that something should be done about replica guns. It should be mentioned that our law already provides severe penalties for the use of imitation firearms in the commission of crimes, including up to 14 years imprisonment for possession of an imitation firearm with intent to commit an indictable offence. This is the way to deal with persons who misuse imitation firearms.

Deputy Dermot Fitzpatrick asked that dangerous offensive weapons be prohibited. This will be done under section 11 of the Bill, which gives the Minister for Justice power to make regulations banning such weapons. The Deputy also asked that the Minister should take account of possible future developments in the definition of firearms. I wish to assure my colleagues that this will be examined before Committee Stage. Deputy Fitzpatrick also requested that controls should be introduced on dangerous dogs. I can well understand that a person who represents the Phoenix Park area is interested in this problem. I know that the Leas-Cheann Comhairle has an interest in this area and will also share his concern. I share the Deputy's concern in this matter but he will appreciate that it is outside the scope of the Bill which we are presently debating. Deputy Fitzpatrick and others queried the position about aerosol weapons. There is no need to deal separately with spray weapons because any weapon which is designed for the discharge of noxious liquid or gas is already covered by the Firearms Acts.

Excellent contributions were also made by Deputies Durkan, Wallace and Flood. Deputy Gerry O'Sullivan asked whether catapults and other dangerous articles should be controlled or banned altogether. This will be looked at, but the Deputy will appreciate that catapults have legitimate uses. Deputy Flood, in an excellent contribution, asked if pistol crossbows were covered by the Bill. I assure the House that they are most definitely included.

I thank all the Deputies who have made positive and sincere contributions to this Second Stage debate. The Minister for Justice looks forward to the Committee Stage debate and I am confident that, with the broad consensus in the House on the Bill, a very worthwhile Act will emerge thereafter.

Question put and agreed to.
Committee Stage ordered for the first Tuesday of the new session.
Top
Share