Rónán Mullen (Independent)

This Legislature should undertake a proper consideration of this matter. I hope it is not too late for us to refer this matter to an Oireachtas committee, which could hear precisely what the Garda has to say about what it thinks is involved in the activities of the International Practical Shooting Confederation. We should also hear from those who participate in this sport, before making a judgment for ourselves. The Minister of State is asking us to trust him and his senior colleague. They have suggested that decent people have told them there is something wrong with this activity, but the decent people to whom we have spoken are telling us they are being unfairly targeted and represented. The Minister, Deputy Curran, said in the Dáil some weeks ago:

Not all forms of target shooting activities are as legitimate and credible as they claim to be. For example, the United States Practical Shooting Association on its website advertises, "If shooting has an 'extreme' sport, USPSA-sanctioned practical shooting is it".

That may very well be true of USPSA-sanctioned practical shooting; if so, it should by all means be outlawed.

I understand that some members of the Cabinet are fond of skiing. I mentioned last week that although I have seen enough James Bond films to know that plenty of those who come down the slopes in goggles are dodgy characters, I would not outlaw skiing on that basis. I ask Members to consider what might happen if they and members of other parliaments were fond of a sport called "parliamentary practical skiing" that involved certain practical skills, such as dodging, that would be useful on the slopes, but it came to light that a body called the "American Parliamentary Paramilitary Practical Skiing Association" was involved in throwing hand grenades and developing various other marshal-type skills. Would we ban all forms of parliamentary practical skiing simply because they happened to be described as "practical"? This is folly of the worst kind.

I thank the Minister of State for acknowledging that I believe in the rule of law. I do not want a gun culture to emerge in Ireland. I agree that all possible means should be used to prevent unsavoury anti-social and criminal elements from developing the kinds of skills they would like to use to the detriment of all of us. I do not think we should criminalise a particular kind of shooting activity in such a blanket way, simply because it is described as "practical". I have not yet received an answer to one of the questions I asked the Minister of State in this context. Can he guarantee that practical shooting will continue to be permitted if what the International Practical Shooting Confederation is saying is true? I refer to its statement that the activities its members practice do not involve human or animal targets or combat defensive techniques. The proposed new section 4C(4) of the Firearms Act 1925 states that "in this section 'practical or dynamic shooting' means any form of activity in which firearms are used to simulate combat or combat training". Does that mean practical shooting activities will not be illegal, as long as they do not "simulate combat or combat training"? If that is the case, we can all go home. I am worried that when the Government talks about practical shooting, it keeps implicating the International Practical Shooting Confederation, which strenuously denies it is engaged in any kind of combat activity. Perhaps we can all go home because my amendments are unnecessary. I will withdraw my amendments if the Minister of State confirms that if the International Practical Shooting Confederation is not involved in any kind of combat training or simulated combat activity, its practitioners will escape prosecution because they will not be committing an offence.

I raised the issue of the parliamentary party meeting because I had spoken to a member of it and while it is my understanding it was represented to the Dáil that people's concerns had been allayed by the Minister's explanations, according to at least one member of the parliamentary party, that was not the case at all. That is why I said it because it is important to put it on the record. It is too easy for us to say under parliamentary privilege in the House that we were talking to members of the Garda who said it was dodgy or that we had been talking to the members of the Fianna Fáil Party who are happy now that we are right. One can avoid every argument by pretending one knows something no one else does, but that is not fair on the citizens who are carrying out a legitimate activity and believe they are being misrepresented.

i will not draw the Cathaoirleach into this because he is in the Chair but I know he is a sportsman and I am sure he appreciates how bizarre all this is. We all hate the idea of a gun culture and dislike people who are trigger happy. We all worry about immature people getting their hands on guns. I believe it was Michael Moore, a man for whose judgement I do not have much regard, who brought out the fact in one of his films, "Bowling for Columbine", that although there was a relatively high degree of gun ownership in Canada, that did not make it a violent society. That is why I believe the Minister of State would be foolish not to accept my amendments because they do not propose to legalise any activity. They propose to allow the Minister to prohibit a certain type of shooting activity where it involves simulated combat or combat training. It leaves the Minister with the power. The other amendment I propose says in effect and even more appropriately that if there is a problem about the way a particular sporting organisation is behaving or the type of sport in which it engages despite its repeated protestations, all we need do is regulate and establish conditions under which a particular sport may take place, up to and including how such guns may be obtained, where they may be stored and what activities may be practised under the heading of that particular sport. It is mad to fixate on the word "practical" and ban everything that carries that in the title.

If we were to worry too much about what might happen, would we allow any type of sport? Would we allow private flying licences when one thinks about what some people have done with aeroplanes in the past decade? Where does one stop once one departs from the need to focus specifically on the evil activity, so to speak, when one moves away from focusing on the wrong intention and activity, and instead begins to focus on activity that might or might not provide a context for criminality? It is very dangerous to ban an entire sport, especially one that is recognised in 80 countries.

I am not persuaded there is a case simply because the International Shooting Sport Federation, for example, refuses to admit the International Practical Shooting Confederation. We do not have before us the reason for this decision by that organisation. There may be all manner of turf wars in terms of the regulation of sport. It may have nothing to do with the perception that trigger happy people are involved in the IPSC. We simply do not know. It is not satisfactory for the Oireachtas as the Legislature to be making this decision on the basis of what is effectively a hearsay situation to the effect that other bodies do not like them either.

Can we not look at the issue on its own merit and hear from the Garda? Have we not got forums within the Oireachtas that would allow us, before we make this decision, to consider properly in committee the nature of the activities the Minister proposes to outlaw, and to hear from all the interested parties? Would that not be a more sensible way to go about making law?

I am not happy that we simply accept the views of other international associations or the view among certain bodies not to accept IPSC's claims or application for a particular status. We simply do not know enough about the reasons they have for that view, just as we do not know enough about what lies behind the view of certain senior gardaí to the effect that this shooting activity should be outlawed. It could be because they know something which, if were all aware of it, would mean we might share their viewpoint, or perhaps it is because they are being lazy in this regard. We are entitled to say that in the event. We have excellent forces of law and order within the Garda Síochána, but sometimes it is easier to ban something in a blanket way rather than doing the hard work of policing. It is our job as Members of the Oireachtas to be aware of that risk and difficulty, try to be specific about what we are proposing to prohibit, and prohibit only to the extent necessary to protect the common good.

Will the Minister of State clarify whether, if IPSC activities do not involve simulated combat training or techniques, people will be free to carry out the activities unmolested by the law? If he can clarify that this is the case, then I certainly will be open to withdrawing my amendments. If he cannot, then I shall have to push this to a vote because I believe it is bad law, being rushed through without being properly considered and without due regard for the legitimate interests of respectable citizens.