Why the Keyham Test is so important for the future of shooting

[Conor O'Gorman]

With the Home Office soon to announce a consultation on firearms licensing following the coroner’s inquest on the Keyham shootings, BASC's Martin Parker explains why the Keyham Test is so important for the future of shooting.

Why the 'Keyham Test' is so important for the future of shooting

With the Home Office shortly expected to deliver a statement on firearms licensing, BASC has devised the so-called ‘Keyham Test’.

basc.org.uk

 

[long_range_rob]

Just one point. Wasn’t there supposed to be a national register implemented after ‘97.

 

[stubear]

With the Home Office soon to announce a consultation on firearms licensing following the coroner’s inquest on the Keyham shootings, BASC's Martin Parker explains why the Keyham Test is so important for the future of shooting.

Why the 'Keyham Test' is so important for the future of shooting

With the Home Office shortly expected to deliver a statement on firearms licensing, BASC has devised the so-called ‘Keyham Test’.

basc.org.uk

Thanks @Conor O'Gorman

Will BASC notify the shooting community when the consultation opens so we can respond?

 

[cjm1066]

The worrying part is the reports recommendation for a good reason for shotguns. Once good reason is established for 1x gun applying it to multiple guns wastes Police time and resources.

 

[12gsnapcaps]

The worrying part is the reports recommendation for a good reason for shotguns. Once good reason is established for 1x gun applying it to multiple guns wastes Police time and resources.

You'd also start getting conditions for each shotgun you own. ie: closed and open land, what gun you can shoot on what land, what quarry you can shoot etc. It would make an already pointlessly convoluted and confusing licensing system even more so. Considering they can barely do variations now (some people are on 4-6 mon waits for a o-f-o variations) on FAC's (200k) imagine when they start having to do them on ALL SGC's too (a further 500k!!)

 

[NullMac]

They could change the law and make the Police implement the correct procedure rather than this guidance nonsense. Given Plymouth they would seem to be the biggest issue in England, how hard was it to get it right really.

 

[JTO]

It's a psychological problem, and FEOs are not forensic psychologists.
I think the village Bobby, (remember him?) would have the best idea of who is suitable to have a gun license.

 

[Kersnow]

Why do we need a review, the Police were in error and should bear full responsibility for their action

 

[Selous]

A review of firearms licensing is long overdue in my opinion. The Home office guidance needs to be made mandatory and there needs to be a centralised body giving consistency across the country rather than each constabulary being separate. A rethink of the red tape that hamstrings shooters, creates much of the workload for licensing staff and gives no protection at all to the general public is essential.
For example sound moderators should be able to be sold freely without the need for variation. Rifle calibres could be banded to allow purchase of a maximum number of rifles within each group for such as Fox calibres from .22Hornet to 6.5mm and deer rifles from 6mm to .30 calibre etc much as is done already. These could then be exchanged freely on a one in and one out basis at a dealer. These bands are much the same as it is now in the Home Office Guidance. If notification to the licensing authority is kept as a mandatory step via their online portal then there would be no greater risk and much less bureaucracy.
Screening of medical records is clearly here to stay. Re-issue of certificates after revocation needs to be given greater thought, especially where violence or mental heath are concerns. Perhaps more in depth interviews of family members and friends in this circumstance is needed to identify concerns they have.
The appeal process needs to be taken away from the Crown Court in the first instance because this only increases costs whereas mediation with a central body would allow most issues to be solved. I would consider it valuable to have shooting organisations represented as stakeholders in this mediation process.

 

[12gsnapcaps]

A review of firearms licensing is long overdue in my opinion. The Home office guidance needs to be made mandatory and there needs to be a centralised body giving consistency across the country rather than each constabulary being separate. A rethink of the red tape that hamstrings shooters, creates much of the workload for licensing staff and gives no protection at all to the general public is essential.
For example sound moderators should be able to be sold freely without the need for variation. Rifle calibres could be banded to allow purchase of a maximum number of rifles within each group for such as Fox calibres from .22Hornet to 6.5mm and deer rifles from 6mm to .30 calibre etc much as is done already. These could then be exchanged freely on a one in and one out basis at a dealer. These bands are much the same as it is now in the Home Office Guidance. If notification to the licensing authority is kept as a mandatory step via their online portal then there would be no greater risk and much less bureaucracy.
Screening of medical records is clearly here to stay. Re-issue of certificates after revocation needs to be given greater thought, especially where violence or mental heath are concerns. Perhaps more in depth interviews of family members and friends in this circumstance is needed to identify concerns they have.
The appeal process needs to be taken away from the Crown Court in the first instance because this only increases costs whereas mediation with a central body would allow most issues to be solved. I would consider it valuable to have shooting organisations represented as stakeholders in this mediation process.

An excellent post, I agree with all points.

 

[timbrayford]

You'd also start getting conditions for each shotgun you own. ie: closed and open land, what gun you can shoot on what land, what quarry you can shoot etc. It would make an already pointlessly convoluted and confusing licensing system even more so. Considering they can barely do variations now (some people are on 4-6 mon waits for a o-f-o variations) on FAC's (200k) imagine when they start having to do them on ALL SGC's too (a further 500k!!)

It would be far better to apply S2 controls to S1 firearms. Fit to be entrusted is the crux of the matter.

 

[nic531]

A review of firearms licensing is long overdue in my opinion. The Home office guidance needs to be made mandatory and there needs to be a centralised body giving consistency across the country rather than each constabulary being separate. A rethink of the red tape that hamstrings shooters, creates much of the workload for licensing staff and gives no protection at all to the general public is essential.
For example sound moderators should be able to be sold freely without the need for variation. Rifle calibres could be banded to allow purchase of a maximum number of rifles within each group for such as Fox calibres from .22Hornet to 6.5mm and deer rifles from 6mm to .30 calibre etc much as is done already. These could then be exchanged freely on a one in and one out basis at a dealer. These bands are much the same as it is now in the Home Office Guidance. If notification to the licensing authority is kept as a mandatory step via their online portal then there would be no greater risk and much less bureaucracy.
Screening of medical records is clearly here to stay. Re-issue of certificates after revocation needs to be given greater thought, especially where violence or mental heath are concerns. Perhaps more in depth interviews of family members and friends in this circumstance is needed to identify concerns they have.
The appeal process needs to be taken away from the Crown Court in the first instance because this only increases costs whereas mediation with a central body would allow most issues to be solved. I would consider it valuable to have shooting organisations represented as stakeholders in this mediation process.

I agree with most points except family... not everyone lives locally to each other or sees their family very often...my family is spread all across the country and in one case is estranged.

 

[Selous]

I agree with most points except family... not everyone lives locally to each other or sees their family very often...my family is spread all across the country and in one case is estranged.

I can see that my terms may not fit all and apologies if that is doesn’t fit your situation. The intention was for a survey of closest associates (which may often be family) be carried out to identify if any misgivings about the return of a certificate exist.

 

[12gsnapcaps]

It would be far better to apply S2 controls to S1 firearms. Fit to be entrusted is the crux of the matter.

That’s not going to happen though is it. The report states suggesting s1 controls for s2 - we will only ever get more gun control laws as time goes on, not less. Remember, it’s only about public safety in name only. In reality it’s about control. Every single firearms act since our first in 1920 has been about control - with each iteration tightening the noose and/or banning something or other. I would enjoy being proven wrong, but I don’t see it.

 

[Stevie/P]

That’s not going to happen though is it. The report states suggesting s1 controls for s2 - we will only ever get more gun control laws as time goes on, not less. Remember, it’s only about public safety in name only. In reality it’s about control. Every single firearms act since our first in 1920 has been about control - with each iteration tightening the noose and/or banning something or other. I would enjoy being proven wrong, but I don’t see it.

Absolutely agree it’s only ever been about control.
The ruling class will always control the masses that what a democracy is isn’t it

 

[12gsnapcaps]

Absolutely agree it’s only ever been about control.
The ruling class will always control the masses that what a democracy is isn’t it

The firearms act of 1920 was about removing firearms brought home from the First World War (and just the general
Amount in circulation due to tens of millions being build globally in general) from the working class, as they feared a soviet style socialist revolution. Every act and/or amendment since has been some further reflection of this. I say this as a fervent anti socialist, but ironically the rifle ontop of the working man’s mantle is one of the lefts principle tenents. I find it very funny in todays world that it is the right that now argues for firearms liberty.

 

[Eddie P]

A review of firearms licensing is long overdue in my opinion. The Home office guidance needs to be made mandatory and there needs to be a centralised body giving consistency across the country rather than each constabulary being separate. A rethink of the red tape that hamstrings shooters, creates much of the workload for licensing staff and gives no protection at all to the general public is essential.
For example sound moderators should be able to be sold freely without the need for variation. Rifle calibres could be banded to allow purchase of a maximum number of rifles within each group for such as Fox calibres from .22Hornet to 6.5mm and deer rifles from 6mm to .30 calibre etc much as is done already. These could then be exchanged freely on a one in and one out basis at a dealer. These bands are much the same as it is now in the Home Office Guidance. If notification to the licensing authority is kept as a mandatory step via their online portal then there would be no greater risk and much less bureaucracy.
Screening of medical records is clearly here to stay. Re-issue of certificates after revocation needs to be given greater thought, especially where violence or mental heath are concerns. Perhaps more in depth interviews of family members and friends in this circumstance is needed to identify concerns they have.
The appeal process needs to be taken away from the Crown Court in the first instance because this only increases costs whereas mediation with a central body would allow most issues to be solved. I would consider it valuable to have shooting organisations represented as stakeholders in this mediation process.

One of my sisters is vegan, the other doesn't feel that anyone should own firearms, so by your reckoning, no guns for me,

 

[Selous]

I think you lot are stretching the point… if you had had your certificate revoked for any reason then there needs to be greater consideration /consultation of your friends, family, colleagues, neighbors, heath professionals etc who need to individually and collectively agree that you remain a fit person to have a firearm.

 

[Dunwaters]

I think you lot are stretching the point… if you had had your certificate revoked for any reason then there needs to be greater consideration /consultation of your friends, family, colleagues, neighbors, heath professionals etc who need to individually and collectively agree that you remain a fit person to have a firearm.

In natural justice should that not have happened prior to revocation?

 

[Selous]

In natural justice should that not have happened prior to revocation?

Perhaps but could depend on the circumstances, potential suicide threats etc may require more immediate response