Police: Personal Protection Devices (Hansard, 23 November 1992)

The Minister of State, Home Office (Earl Ferrers)
My Lords, devices which emit a disabling effluvium are relatively novel as a matter of protection. Home Office scientists undertake research into new products and I have asked them to look at this one. Decisions about the selection and purchase of equipment are, of course, the responsibility of chief officers.

§ Lord Constantine of Stanmore
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. Is he aware of a product called Mace, which is freely used in America and Europe? The intention of those who have imported RAPEL from America is to stop the activity of an assailant without inflicting injury upon him. Unfortunately, Mace inflicts injuries to the lungs and to the eyes. Will the Minister consider whether that alternative might be used?

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, under Section 5(1) (b) of the Fire Arms Act 1968, any weapon, of whatever description, which is designed or adapted for the 793 discharge of any noxious liquid, gas or other matter is a prohibited weapon. I believe that the item to which my noble friend referred in his supplementary question would fall into that category. Whether or not the item referred to in the original Question would do so is a different matter because it is designed to be broken against the carrier's own body rather than to be sprayed on the attacker. Therefore, the court may decide that it is not a weapon.

§ Lord Mellish
My Lords, have the police requested this equipment?

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, I do not know whether the police have requested it. Periodically we invite the Home Office police scientific development branch to carry out research into various items. One advantage of RAPEL is that it gives off the most appalling smell. It is suggested that it should be used by ladies as protection against rape. I understand that the phial shatters and, in the words of the manufacturers, it emits the foulest, putrid and overpowering smell which is unimaginably awful. The manufacturers go on to say that, whatever the thoughts of the attacker are before sensing the smell, those thoughts are very soon forgotten. It is one matter for potential attackers to arm themselves, but whether or not it is a suitable weapon for the police is another matter.

§ Baroness Gardner of Parkes
My Lords, can the Minister tell us whether further thought is being given to products such as Mace? The noble Earl may be aware that in the United States advertisements offer two cans at a cheaper price than the price of one. Is the noble Earl aware that a number of cases have come to court here in which tourists were carrying Mace because they were not aware that the product was not allowed in this country? Is our ban because of the danger to the lungs of the human being, as described by my noble friend Lord Constantine, or are we merely opposed to the general principle? Women value some form of protection.

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, if women wish to give themselves some form of protection and not be contrary to the law, they may try the product mentioned in my noble friend's Question. Many funny things happen in America. If friends of my noble friend were to be carrying Mace in England, it would be found to be a prohibited weapon for the reasons which I have given. It is a noxious fluid which passes onto a person. That is slightly different from using an aerosol hairspray, which is used for different purposes but can also be used for the purposes which my noble friend has in mind.

§ Lord Morris of Castle Morris
My Lords, is it not the case that those devices which emit disabling effluvia are only of use to deter at close range attackers who, like rapists, intend to stay at close quarters for a certain amount of time? That is not the most likely scenario for those who attack the police, which is the subject of the Question. Such people tend either to hit, kick, stab or shoot and then get away as fast as they can.

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, the noble Lord makes a good point. As I understand it, the product in question is an oil which depends for its success upon a chemical reaction with the skin. It is similar to ladies putting on scent. It smells better after it has been on the body. This product operates in a similar manner but with rather different effects. The noble Lord suggests that the product may not be suitable for use by police officers. But if they are being attacked and if they had this product, I gather that it would repel the attacker just as it would repel other people. That is why I have suggested that this matter should be investigated.

§ The Earl of Winchilsea and Nottingham
My Lords, most police officers that I know would not wish to be armed with any sort of gas as a means of self-protection. They feel that the early introduction of the side-handled baton might give them more protection, as by far the highest percentage of attacks made on police are from people armed with knives. Can the noble Earl say whether the current Home Office studies on those devices are anywhere near completion?

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, I can understand that police officers do not wish to be armed with a gas. Moreover, many of them would not wish their colleagues to be armed with this product. Not many of them would wish to accompany a colleague in a van who had been so sprayed. With regard to the side-handled baton, my right honourable friend the Home Secretary last Friday confirmed that he did not consider it to be an appropriate weapon for police use. It is aggressive in appearance, difficult to carry and would alter fundamentally the style of policing in this country.

§ Lord Stallard
My Lords, does the Minister accept that one of the problems in North London is not how to repel the police but how to attract them?

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, of course. That is why the police must be adequately prepared to protect themselves. The noble Lord is looking uncomfortable.

§ Lord Stallard
My Lords, I was saying that we never see any policemen. We have no reason to repel them. We would rather attract them into the area.

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, my modest intellectual capacity had not reached that point. I had not realised that the noble Lord had asked me such an offensive and irrelevant question. There are many policemen about.

§ Lord Constantine of Stanmore
My Lords, the manufacturers of RAPEL, which is being made under licence here from America, tell me that the Home Office Crime Prevention Centre at Stafford has tested and is testing it. Anyone who is interested may refer to Chief Inspector Brian Hewitt of that centre who will keep them informed of the up-to-date position.

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, that is as near to a commercial as one could possibly get. My noble friend is right that this matter was referred to the Home Office Crime Prevention Centre. Because I thought my 795 noble friend might refer to it, and being a prudent kind of fellow, I asked what the conclusions were. It has been concluded that the smell is so vile that it is beyond description and it could act as an extremely effective deterrent for some people.

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, perhaps the Minister would care to reconsider his answer to my noble friend Lord Stallard. It may be that he thinks that my noble friend's question was wide of the Question on the Order Paper. But I do not believe that he would wish it to be recorded that he thought that my noble friend was being offensive and irrelevant.

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, that was my first reaction to the fact that I had not realised the import of the question. It was not irrelevant or offensive, but it had nothing much to do with the Question on the Order Paper.