In Guiding, shooting at targets dates back to the earliest
Girl Scout days. Over time it became a
rarer activity – at some points due to shortage of weapons and ammunition due
to government requisition at time of war - and post-war fewer suitable
locations for shooting existed.
Attitudes to weapons in society changed too – whereas at one time a
large portion of the population lived in rural areas where gun ownership was
normal for pest control or ‘food for the pot’, rapid urbanisation and
increasing affluence reduced this. There
were gradually fewer ‘old soldiers’ with their service revolvers or battlefield
souvenirs in the attic, or on top of the wardrobe. The gradual introduction of gun licencing
also saw a reduction in the numbers of weapons kept, aided by regular amnesties
for unwanted weapons, such that ownership eventually became restricted to
members of registered gun clubs, and to agricultural workers who had cause to
carry out ‘pest control’. Archery also
existed, but mainly as a niche sport, and usually at roundel targets rather
than live game. The wearing of Guide
knives in uniform was discouraged from the late 1980s onwards, as knife laws in
general started to be tightened.
It was following a couple of notorious gun incidents (not
Guiding-related) in the late 1980s and early 1990s that Guiding tightened up
it’s policies on shooting. The aim was,
as usual with Guiding, to try to manage risk (both physical and reputational)
whilst still enabling an activity to be carried out. So the shooting of arrows, pellets,
cartridges and bullets was allowed to continue - provided it was done under the
supervision of qualified instructors, in appropriate locations and with
appropriate safety precautions, and strictly as a target sport only – so
shooting at roundel targets, tin cans, or ‘clay pigeons’. The only thing which was not permitted - was
shooting guns or weapons resembling guns at either people or animals, or
representations of people or animals.
There wasn’t all that much outcry when the new rules were introduced,
simply because the number of Units which had any cause to alter their
programmes was very small indeed. Most Units
didn’t do any form of shooting, and of those who did, most were doing target
shooting rather than live game anyway.
And having it supervised by qualified people was a reasonable ruling to
make given the safety risks of such weapons if the activity is not properly
managed and supervised.
Although it was gun incidents that helped to encourage the
revision of Guiding’s rules, it was also other sensitivities too – between
those who had been affected by any of the then regularly-occurring terrorist
incidents in the UK, to those whose faith/religious beliefs barred the taking
of life or any simulation of it, to those who felt it inappropriate for
children to become accustomed to pointing deadly weapons at creatures (whether
actual or simulated), especially considering the Guide Law’s references to
being a friend to animals and respecting living things. Most groups saw the new rules as a happy balance
between safety and sport. After all, is
it compatible to be a friend and a sister to every other Guide, while at the
same time deliberately aiming and firing weapons at them, or to respect all
living things whilst deliberately killing or pretending to kill some for fun?
It was around that time that some new activities were
becoming more fashionable and widespread in society – the first fad was
paintball, and the second, laserquest. I
should declare an interest, in that for a while at that time I did some work
for a paintball company. Both of these
sports involved firing guns directly at people.
As soon as Guide Headquarters became aware of the spread of these new
activities, they clarified the rule book in order to confirm what was already
fairly clear to most of us anyway – that because these activities involved
deliberately firing weapons at people (even if the ‘ammunition’ wasn’t quite as
dangerous as arrows or pellets), they did indeed fall under the existing rules,
and thus were not a permitted Guiding activity.
What happened then – well, most Units accepted that the rules prohibited
these sports, and they lived within those rules, even if it meant changing
plans. Unfortunately some Units decided
to carry on with their outings anyway, declaring that they were attending the
venue ‘as a group of friends, who by chance just happened to also all be
members and Leaders of the same Guiding Unit’.
It was clearly a pretence, and the downside of it was that they did not
have the protection of Guiding insurance to cover for any injury or liability
(and in most cases it’s likely the adults in the group did not organise
alternative insurance cover instead).
And of course, even if the paperwork was careful not to mention Guiding
anywhere, even if it specifically stated that this was not a Guiding-sanctioned
outing (and stated why), there was the risk that some parents might not have
fully grasped the implications – that as it was declared as nothing to do with
Guiding, there was thus no accident or liability insurance in place to protect
their girl if she was injured, or if she inadvertently injured someone else,
beyond whatever cover the activity company provided . . . anyone can trip and
break a bone, anyone can slip their facemask off at the wrong moment and get a
paintball in the face . . .
Over twenty years on, and the rules on Guides and weapons
basically read the same now as then. What
is and is not allowed is all fairly clear.
Yet in recent years there has been an increase in the number of people
protesting about Guiding’s restrictions on sports which involve shooting at
people, such as paintball or laserquest.
People complaining that unless their girls are allowed to do Laserquest
or Paintball they will leave the Unit (allegedly for that reason, and that
reason alone), in order to join clubs which will permit it. People complaining that other organisations
break the rules about activities at joint events (rules which forbid the
provision of an activity unless the safety rules of all the organisations
permit participation in it, with whoever’s rules are the tightest prevailing),
causing some participants to be disadvantaged and upset. People getting upset that they are allowed to
use balloons, buckets and plastic bottles in their water fights, but not water
pistols or ‘super soaker’ guns.
So far as I can see, the rules are clear. It seems obvious to me what is permitted,
what is permitted subject to certain safety precautions, and what is not
permitted at all. If we feel that the current
rules are wrong, any one of us is free to make representations to headquarters,
explaining what we think should be altered and why. What we are not free to do is to deliberately
ignore the rules, and in doing so risk having girls in our charge doing
activities without the protection of the insurance cover Guiding normally
provides - and putting ourselves at risk of being sued if a problem occurs.
