Jura
Well-Known Member
Me too.
BASC full response to firearms safety consultation
- Thread starter Conor O'Gorman
- Start date
I am looking at the consultation now. infuriating.
The questions are closed questions. Your options are (a) do you think a lot more restrictions are required OR (b) do you think a few more restrictions are applied?
It is a bit like a prosecuting barrister asking a defendent "have you stopped beating your wife?"
Where is the option to say: "current status quo is fine". [or produce evidence to the contrary]
The questions are closed questions. Your options are (a) do you think a lot more restrictions are required OR (b) do you think a few more restrictions are applied?
It is a bit like a prosecuting barrister asking a defendent "have you stopped beating your wife?"
Where is the option to say: "current status quo is fine". [or produce evidence to the contrary]
I put that into the written section, saying approximately the current legislation is strong enough and the use of legally held firearms in criminal activity is vanishingly small so there is no need to bring in new legislation unless it is to remove unwieldy and pointless difficulties.
David.
David.
I have completed the survey.
I have used the free-form text options to explain the selections made. I doubt they are considered.
The way that they have phrased the survey, all of the alleged options are on a sliding scale of endorsement for incremental legislation.
You have to ask WHY? None of this is evidence-lead.
To be clear: no one will be safer. Criminals, who mostly use illegal pistols, will continue as before.
For most of us, air rifles were where our fathers taught us good safety rules. Muzzle awareness, firearm safety. Once taught, we practised solo. Millions of us. Over many decades.
What is the basis for this new legislation? As stated, the upheaval is based on one misadventure. That is not proportionate.
Even worse: there are zero negative examples on which to base changes to the regulations re reloading components. [Lord Gisborough your nation needs your wisdom!]
The whole HME argument is utterly moot. And once again zero evidence given where lawfully held rifles lead to unlawful acts. But making changes here is just a stalking horse. BASC and others may well think that level 3 security for HMEs is fine...
As sure as taxes, two things will follow in the years ahead: (1) changes to the definition of "level 3" and (2) the notional kinetic energy threshold for HME will be tweaked. That will be the easiest handle for a metro-demographic-chasing politician to crank.
I have used the free-form text options to explain the selections made. I doubt they are considered.
The way that they have phrased the survey, all of the alleged options are on a sliding scale of endorsement for incremental legislation.
You have to ask WHY? None of this is evidence-lead.
To be clear: no one will be safer. Criminals, who mostly use illegal pistols, will continue as before.
For most of us, air rifles were where our fathers taught us good safety rules. Muzzle awareness, firearm safety. Once taught, we practised solo. Millions of us. Over many decades.
What is the basis for this new legislation? As stated, the upheaval is based on one misadventure. That is not proportionate.
Even worse: there are zero negative examples on which to base changes to the regulations re reloading components. [Lord Gisborough your nation needs your wisdom!]
The whole HME argument is utterly moot. And once again zero evidence given where lawfully held rifles lead to unlawful acts. But making changes here is just a stalking horse. BASC and others may well think that level 3 security for HMEs is fine...
As sure as taxes, two things will follow in the years ahead: (1) changes to the definition of "level 3" and (2) the notional kinetic energy threshold for HME will be tweaked. That will be the easiest handle for a metro-demographic-chasing politician to crank.
The HME definition should be a concern for all who shoot and is a point I have made to others who have taken the view that there is no civilian need for a 50cal.
It will be interesting to see how this change is brought about re storage and how HME is defined. Personally, I'd prefer the HME definition to be set out in primary legislation by an amendment to the Firearms Act. That way, future change would require parliamentary support and could not be achieved by a minister acting by statutory instrument. Whilst I hold no faith in parliament to stop future changes, it would at least make it a more complicated process which could not be done without publicity.
I do feel BASC are in a pretty impossible position though with HMEs. The government was dead set on banning them altogether and I do think credit is due to seeing off a total ban. As unpalatable as it is, I guess it is better for a ban to be avoided even if greater security has to be conceded. On this occasion, I really don't think BASC could have had its cake and eaten it.
It will be interesting to see how this change is brought about re storage and how HME is defined. Personally, I'd prefer the HME definition to be set out in primary legislation by an amendment to the Firearms Act. That way, future change would require parliamentary support and could not be achieved by a minister acting by statutory instrument. Whilst I hold no faith in parliament to stop future changes, it would at least make it a more complicated process which could not be done without publicity.
I do feel BASC are in a pretty impossible position though with HMEs. The government was dead set on banning them altogether and I do think credit is due to seeing off a total ban. As unpalatable as it is, I guess it is better for a ban to be avoided even if greater security has to be conceded. On this occasion, I really don't think BASC could have had its cake and eaten it.
Harry mac
Well-Known Member
As far as the authorities are concerned, the stumbling block in this proposed legislation is the proving of intent. Unless the accused is actually in possession of excess/unauthorised, complete rounds of ammunition, this would be impossible to prove. The only way I can see for them to give this proposal any teeth is to either ban handloading alltogether,so that the proof of intent becomes the very possession of ammunition components, or to say "if you're authorised to possess 200 rounds of .303, or .243 or whatever, then you're only allowed to possess 200 cases, 200 bullets and 200 primers.
BASC giving this any support at all, even "in principle" is a very dangerous thing.
BASC giving this any support at all, even "in principle" is a very dangerous thing.
This looks to be a very badly considered law, one coroners opinion on air-rifles and “concern” about illegal ammunition supply.
I have concerns about burglary, assault, rape perhaps we should legislation agin the tools used for these crimes.
Burglars use a variety of tools – lets ban all possible tools, crew drivers crow bars etc, the list goes on…………
Assault, - lets ban knives, crowbars and the other tools, etc etc
Rape – any volunteers from the advocates of this law to become eunuchs, given some of the music produced today this might enhance society
I have concerns about burglary, assault, rape perhaps we should legislation agin the tools used for these crimes.
Burglars use a variety of tools – lets ban all possible tools, crew drivers crow bars etc, the list goes on…………
Assault, - lets ban knives, crowbars and the other tools, etc etc
Rape – any volunteers from the advocates of this law to become eunuchs, given some of the music produced today this might enhance society
If you reload for this friend of yours you are already braking the law! As soon as you seat the bullet
long_range_rob
Well-Known Member
Do all the prep work and get him round to seat his own bullets.
Yes but that’s not what the person I was quoting said
Harry mac
Well-Known Member
I'm amazed. Well, not really. Reloading as a branch of our sport/hobby/pass time appears to be facing a thinly veiled but serious threat, and we're getting bogged down with irrelevancies, such as "reloading for a friend" and "case annealing services".
Our organisations need pinning down on this; "will they oppose, 100% any further restrictions on handloading?"
BASC seems to have nailed its colours to the mast when it comes to members' rights by binning members' legal insurance, supporting GP involvement in licensing and apparently aligning itself with the "ban lead" movement, and they are our biggest organisation.
I've been quietly asking myself "how long have we got left?" ever since the SLR ban of 1987. That voice in my head is becoming more of a despairing shout these days.
Our organisations need pinning down on this; "will they oppose, 100% any further restrictions on handloading?"
BASC seems to have nailed its colours to the mast when it comes to members' rights by binning members' legal insurance, supporting GP involvement in licensing and apparently aligning itself with the "ban lead" movement, and they are our biggest organisation.
I've been quietly asking myself "how long have we got left?" ever since the SLR ban of 1987. That voice in my head is becoming more of a despairing shout these days.
.... and it seems there is nowhere to go to avoid it
Wokism in the west is more infectious than covid and a great deal more dangerous
Seeing as we are theoretically innocent until proven guilty, just how do you prove intent? It is not sufficient to say that you have the means and in my opinion the intent. We all own vehicles, -which have been used to commit violent crimes-, so the mere possession of a vehicle could be seen as intent, however very few of us would even consider doing so. The whole of the population have the ability to commit crimes, but how many actually intentionally set out to do so?
The whole shebang is a 'woke' virtue signalling exercise, in that those who intend to break the law will continue to do so, and those of us who obey the law will be subject to more restrictions.
I would suggest that the 'woke' morons get away from their tippy tappies and get out and catch the real criminals! After all that is what they are employed to do.
The whole shebang is a 'woke' virtue signalling exercise, in that those who intend to break the law will continue to do so, and those of us who obey the law will be subject to more restrictions.
I would suggest that the 'woke' morons get away from their tippy tappies and get out and catch the real criminals! After all that is what they are employed to do.
We are an easy target and by nature are unlikely to fight back, look at the recent stabbings, will they ban knives? Of course not, so to be seen to do something to reduce violent crime, out will come the next headline grabbing violent crime reduction bill and in it will be the changes to young people using air guns, more restriction on reloading components and 50cals.
As they know not what to do, that will stop the scum that no longer see law enforcement and punishment as a deterrent, because they live by different values to you and I.
As they know not what to do, that will stop the scum that no longer see law enforcement and punishment as a deterrent, because they live by different values to you and I.
Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
Last week, BASC held its latest meeting of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Shooting and Conservation, with the guest speaker being the Minister of State for Crime and Policing, Kit Malthouse MP. The Minister, who is responsible for firearms licensing, said that he was in favour of increasing the length of firearms certificates when an effective system of medical verification of applications and oversight of license holders is achieved. He updated the group on the Home Office’s proposals for the new statutory guidance on firearms licensing and discussed the current consultation on air rifles with MPs and Peers. BASC made our position clear and promised to continue to work with Ministers and parliamentarians on this important issue.
That sounds a rather disturbing 'when'.
We need to keep in mind that BASC has already (apparently inadvertently) supported a scheme whereby all applicants for FACs have to pay unspecified fees to medical practitioners at the whim of their FLDs: and to hope, despite all appearances, that BASC has learnt something from that débacle about the skills which the Home Office will continue to exercise in achieving outcomes detrimental to the shooting public, even when superficially they might seem to be something worth 'welcoming'.
I like this poem by Norman Cameron. It's called 'The Compassionate Fool'
My enemy had bidden me as guest.
His table all set out with wine and cake,
His ordered chairs, he to beguile me dressed
So neatly, moved my pity for his sake.
I knew it was an ambush, but could not
Leave him to eat his cake up by himself
And put his unused glasses on the shelf.
I made pretence of falling in his plot,
And trembled when in his anxiety
He bared it too absurdly to my view
And even as he stabbed me through and through
I pitied him for his small strategy.
I quote it here because I like it, and it reflects a position I think I've sometimes been in, one way and another.
In this situtation however, if BASC wants to avoid getting the shooting public stabbed through and through again it needs to be careful to avoid not compassion, but hubris; and to keep in mind that the enemy's strategies are not small, but well-though-out and manifold.
Last edited:
Effective system of medical verification of applications and oversight of license holders is achieved, just words unless GP contracts are amended to engage in the process and oversight of license holders, exactly what is the scope of that?
But will the new statutory guidance be primary legislation?
Sure it was a pleasant meeting, sadly they talk the talk but will they walk the walk?
Last edited:
Similar threads
