Ahh but that’s only a car, not something dangerous like a gun…… ohh hold on
If firearms licensing was to be reformed what should it look like?
- Thread starter Selous
- Start date
I would like to see a banding system. Rabbit, fox deer etc. and guidelines set for this. Not one officer arguing over a 223 Vs a 222. 5 year licences are ok, the medical is no bad thing.
Being issued with 1 rifle of a certain band, then if you want to swap it do so, no variation. I'm not bothered by a mod being on ticket but similar again. If your allowed 1, as long as you only have 1 that's fine.
Ammo limits are a bit pointless. As if a mad man on a rampage has any more than say 20 there doing a lot of damage. So to argue between 40 and 300 is largely pointless.
Being issued with 1 rifle of a certain band, then if you want to swap it do so, no variation. I'm not bothered by a mod being on ticket but similar again. If your allowed 1, as long as you only have 1 that's fine.
Ammo limits are a bit pointless. As if a mad man on a rampage has any more than say 20 there doing a lot of damage. So to argue between 40 and 300 is largely pointless.
Digital licences similar to a car licence holding the details of firearms would be a huge step forward.
Also if you had to do sales or exchanges at an RFD and they had access to the database to enter details for a nominal fee that would also be good in my opinion i.e. just plug the card in and move stuff about instantly.
Take moderators off ticket everyone thinks its a good idea and takes off loads of paperwork.
Also calibre banding or slots similar to the Norther Ireland system would be a good idea i.e. you have a calibre slot for small vermin control and its just a slot so this allows you to say swap a .22lr for a .17HMR without a variation on a 1-4-1 but you cant swap it for say a .308 as that's a different band / use.
Also if you had to do sales or exchanges at an RFD and they had access to the database to enter details for a nominal fee that would also be good in my opinion i.e. just plug the card in and move stuff about instantly.
Take moderators off ticket everyone thinks its a good idea and takes off loads of paperwork.
Also calibre banding or slots similar to the Norther Ireland system would be a good idea i.e. you have a calibre slot for small vermin control and its just a slot so this allows you to say swap a .22lr for a .17HMR without a variation on a 1-4-1 but you cant swap it for say a .308 as that's a different band / use.
nun_hunter
Well-Known Member
This would work well but only if all the other agencies involved such as your GP and the wider NHS are mandated to be involved and report medical conditions that may affect your suitability to hold firearms.Increase the validity of SGC & FAC from 5 Years to 10 Years will reduce admin load on renewals
At the moment it is too much of a polite request and hope they will comply which is why it would not be deemed safe enough to extend FAC durations.
In theory moving everything online and having the FAC as a card with information held on it to allow a number of different categories of guns/rifles that is updated in real time by the FLD and RFDs would save huge amounts of admin time and make things easier for us.
Just a bit of streamlining of the system would work miracles. With that, the cops should be able to cope better and the certificate holders would know what they can and can't do better. Of course the devil would be in the detail (or more accurately in getting rid of the detail).
Most of those certificate holders that have gone rogue over the last decade or two had issues that should have been picked up. With a simpler system and longer lasting certificates perhaps the police would have more time to not ignore problem children.
Most of those certificate holders that have gone rogue over the last decade or two had issues that should have been picked up. With a simpler system and longer lasting certificates perhaps the police would have more time to not ignore problem children.
TringSaint
Well-Known Member
Self reported afaik, so not exactly stringent testing of their abilities.
I think the current system, certainly with regards to ownership suitability is robust and fit for purpose. Theres clearly been an issue lately with a forged cert that wants looking at. Id agree with doing away with alot of the unnecessary paperwork. How does mods on cert, or 1 for 1 variations protect public safety?
There's very much a risk of the baby going out with the bathwater though, plus a lot of new nonsense added to boot.
There's very much a risk of the baby going out with the bathwater though, plus a lot of new nonsense added to boot.
I think a centralised National Body should exist, administering Scotland, England, and Wales under a unified system based on the existing Home Office guidelines, but with a few changes. Ten year licenses, for one. No requirements for moderators to be on-ticket. No ammunition holding limits. DSC1 to be a mandatory requirement (I know, I know) All tickets to be issued AOLQ, with no idiotic restrictive conditions applied. FAC to be issued with maximum calibre listed, and maximum number of firearms to be set based on initial agreed requirements. Under those terms, no restrictions on acquiring, selling, or replacing firearms. So for example you could be authorised to hold five firearms, with a maximum calibre of .308, 9 x 25, .338 or whatever, and freely acquire calibres below the maximum, and change as you like subject to notifying the administrative body, rather than seeking permission.
And all information held on a central database, available to the police and other appropriate authorities online as-required.
Big ask, I know.
And all information held on a central database, available to the police and other appropriate authorities online as-required.
Big ask, I know.
Any reform would have to be public safety first. So make a system that any police officer could simply mine a database and get full information on a user on the use etc. Then use ease of admin to push for a digital license (credit card sized) that can be used to purchase from RFD.
The application process needs a tweak, so that the calibre is any legal quarry rather than 7mm deer 243 fox etc.
However reform like this will probably need a new act. To get change we need to look at a Legislative Reform order - one that changes the administration of an act and not the purpose. A specific agency under HO control paid for by the licence as full cost recovery - so no public money - might be accepted.
The application process needs a tweak, so that the calibre is any legal quarry rather than 7mm deer 243 fox etc.
However reform like this will probably need a new act. To get change we need to look at a Legislative Reform order - one that changes the administration of an act and not the purpose. A specific agency under HO control paid for by the licence as full cost recovery - so no public money - might be accepted.
national body
mods off ticket
ammo - show ticket at purchase no limits, most of us reload so its just irrelevant paperwork
If you can store it, seems a fair way to decide how many you can keep at home
make club storage much much easier - I would love to keep one or two stalking rifles at home but store the target stuff elsewhere, my clubs lockers are tiny, we could just have an armoury.
Blockchain solution - distributed ledger so trades would be notifications.
pistols on second grant
full auto - second grant and club use/storage.
if we really wanted to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals how about, a preference for wildcats and take downs. Spare barrels are very unlikely to be used in crimes, (except as clubs) and if only three hobbyists in the country are shooting 7.7 x 51.5 then the crims are going to be hard pressed to sort out ammo.
mods off ticket
ammo - show ticket at purchase no limits, most of us reload so its just irrelevant paperwork
If you can store it, seems a fair way to decide how many you can keep at home
make club storage much much easier - I would love to keep one or two stalking rifles at home but store the target stuff elsewhere, my clubs lockers are tiny, we could just have an armoury.
Blockchain solution - distributed ledger so trades would be notifications.
pistols on second grant
full auto - second grant and club use/storage.
if we really wanted to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals how about, a preference for wildcats and take downs. Spare barrels are very unlikely to be used in crimes, (except as clubs) and if only three hobbyists in the country are shooting 7.7 x 51.5 then the crims are going to be hard pressed to sort out ammo.
Firstly, I don't buy the argument that new Acts of Parliament are needed for this. The mess that firearms licensing is in is not a result of the primary legislation, it is a consequence of poor administration (surprise surprise). All of the dysfunctional elements have been devised and implemented by either police forces or the Home Office. I don't think there's anything that couldn't be sorted out by Statutory Instruments or revoking existing ones.
Public safety isn't first, the law is. Second is making sure it is effectively implemented. Public safety is important, but it's just one factor. The most important thing is that you have a functional system which adheres to the law, doesn't create arbitrary nonsense and that this is done by dealing with the problems with the current system:
1. Inaccurate record keeping by police forces, and a possibly .
2. Arbitrary and unnecessary rules creating unnecessary work and choking up the system.
3. Pointless, slow, expensive and dysfunctional medical requirements.
4. Some forces having bizarre system of "approving" land suitable for shooting on.
5. Unnecessarily pedantic approvals for specific calibres.
6. 1 for 1 variations.
7. Moderators.
8. Ignorant pretence that X calibre is more dangerous than Y calibre.
5. Five year renewals.
and probably more.
Further problems include forgery of paper certificates, sometimes people failing to update police in time of purchases/sales, and the departments running the system being overworked, undertrained and generally low-grade.
The solution is then obvious. Take administration of the system away from the groups who caused the problems and instead give them oversight.
1. Introduce an online system, with either cards or use of an app - as per everyone's banking system which has worked pretty flawlessly for decades.
2. Get rid of paper certificates which are wildly out of date and a security risk to the holder. Replace with a card or app based system which does not display to everyone what your home address is. This solves completely the problem of forged certificates.
3. Since we have continuous monitoring of holders, there is no need for a renewal process and certificates can last until the holder is 75 at which point a renewal seems reasonable.
4. Take the administration of licensing out of police control and have a body co-operatively owned by the certificate holders own and administer it. The role of the police is then freed up for monitoring and investigating cases of concern properly, and they can enforce action against the licensing body if it doesn't do its job properly. The co-operative could also administer a comprehensive insurance scheme wrapped into the same fee so all shooters are covered.
5. Get rid of most of the work that licensing departments do, which is ludicrous, pointless and useless work - approving land as being suitable for X calibre or Y calibre. Making judgments about medical conditions which they are unqualified and incapable of doing properly, variations and approvals for specific calibres - these can be grouped into broad bands - rimfire or centrefire. Beyond that there is no major real difference in risk. All the rest is a waste of time and effort. Abolish the need for 1for1 variations to be approved beforehand.
6. Tighten up the time requirement for informing the police. Seven days was appropriate when it was done by mail. Nowadays there is no reason why it should not be done at the time of transaction in an RFD, or at the least within 24 hours. Private sales, I'd think perhaps would be better done on an RFD's premises anyway.
7. Explore whether the same or a parallel system ought to administer and vet police officers' access to and use of firearms, given the slew of recent scandals involving armed officers, and the fact that the majority of firearms discharged at people in the UK are fired by the Police. This fact is usually obscured by the Police and Home office by the sneaky practice of the word "firearm" being very differently defined for use by the police and by the public.
Public safety isn't first, the law is. Second is making sure it is effectively implemented. Public safety is important, but it's just one factor. The most important thing is that you have a functional system which adheres to the law, doesn't create arbitrary nonsense and that this is done by dealing with the problems with the current system:
1. Inaccurate record keeping by police forces, and a possibly .
2. Arbitrary and unnecessary rules creating unnecessary work and choking up the system.
3. Pointless, slow, expensive and dysfunctional medical requirements.
4. Some forces having bizarre system of "approving" land suitable for shooting on.
5. Unnecessarily pedantic approvals for specific calibres.
6. 1 for 1 variations.
7. Moderators.
8. Ignorant pretence that X calibre is more dangerous than Y calibre.
5. Five year renewals.
and probably more.
Further problems include forgery of paper certificates, sometimes people failing to update police in time of purchases/sales, and the departments running the system being overworked, undertrained and generally low-grade.
The solution is then obvious. Take administration of the system away from the groups who caused the problems and instead give them oversight.
1. Introduce an online system, with either cards or use of an app - as per everyone's banking system which has worked pretty flawlessly for decades.
2. Get rid of paper certificates which are wildly out of date and a security risk to the holder. Replace with a card or app based system which does not display to everyone what your home address is. This solves completely the problem of forged certificates.
3. Since we have continuous monitoring of holders, there is no need for a renewal process and certificates can last until the holder is 75 at which point a renewal seems reasonable.
4. Take the administration of licensing out of police control and have a body co-operatively owned by the certificate holders own and administer it. The role of the police is then freed up for monitoring and investigating cases of concern properly, and they can enforce action against the licensing body if it doesn't do its job properly. The co-operative could also administer a comprehensive insurance scheme wrapped into the same fee so all shooters are covered.
5. Get rid of most of the work that licensing departments do, which is ludicrous, pointless and useless work - approving land as being suitable for X calibre or Y calibre. Making judgments about medical conditions which they are unqualified and incapable of doing properly, variations and approvals for specific calibres - these can be grouped into broad bands - rimfire or centrefire. Beyond that there is no major real difference in risk. All the rest is a waste of time and effort. Abolish the need for 1for1 variations to be approved beforehand.
6. Tighten up the time requirement for informing the police. Seven days was appropriate when it was done by mail. Nowadays there is no reason why it should not be done at the time of transaction in an RFD, or at the least within 24 hours. Private sales, I'd think perhaps would be better done on an RFD's premises anyway.
7. Explore whether the same or a parallel system ought to administer and vet police officers' access to and use of firearms, given the slew of recent scandals involving armed officers, and the fact that the majority of firearms discharged at people in the UK are fired by the Police. This fact is usually obscured by the Police and Home office by the sneaky practice of the word "firearm" being very differently defined for use by the police and by the public.
Back in the real word .... The Governments will carry on chipping away at all firearms till there is none left . deer etc will likely be killed is some horrible way , like poisons and things like mixy in Rabbits was developed specifically for .
This is true but equally I suspect most of the general public would support greater efficiency providing public safety is not compromised. Currently firearms licensing staff must get tied up wasting time on ridiculous bureaucracy like 1 for 1 variations that could be streamlined without any loss of safety. Time and time again it is shown that the principle concern is whether the person that is being licensed is suitable to possess a firearm without risk to the peace with the secondary question being if good reason has been satisfied.
The .22 pistol ban should be repealed, it is an absolute absurdity and it enrages me that we are the only nation in Europe with an absolute prohibition on handguns and for 25+ years we have just tolerated this.
The concept of a coathanger/LBP is ludicrous and a constant reminder of the embarassing state of shooting in GB.
The concept of a coathanger/LBP is ludicrous and a constant reminder of the embarassing state of shooting in GB.
Ronin
Distinguished Member
Licencing changes
1, let’s have pistols back (revolver and semi auto)
2, Firearms holder - zero limit on number a person may possess (as shotgun)
3, do away with sporting use (you have FAC therefore may use weapons possessed for target and sporting purposes)
4, introduce biannual or similar time spread shooting test for hunters to pass a theory and practical assessment
5, club shooters (target) would be covered within membership procedures of individual approved clubs
6, make all forces adhere to Firearms Manual of Guidance rather than make up their own working practices
7, introduce firearms training or teaching mandatory within schools developing an understanding of diversity of sporting use and target use from an early age
I’m sure there are other points I could raise
1, let’s have pistols back (revolver and semi auto)
2, Firearms holder - zero limit on number a person may possess (as shotgun)
3, do away with sporting use (you have FAC therefore may use weapons possessed for target and sporting purposes)
4, introduce biannual or similar time spread shooting test for hunters to pass a theory and practical assessment
5, club shooters (target) would be covered within membership procedures of individual approved clubs
6, make all forces adhere to Firearms Manual of Guidance rather than make up their own working practices
7, introduce firearms training or teaching mandatory within schools developing an understanding of diversity of sporting use and target use from an early age
I’m sure there are other points I could raise
The current guidance already bands cartridges according to quarry in terms of providing good reason.
Ammunition limits are also already stated in the guidance according to use with additional allowance suggested for reloaders.
Personally, for me the system as we have it works absolutely fine, one for ones are straight forward. Adding firearms provided I satisfy good reason is never an issue, with all my variations always completed in a week or in minutes if I email for an appointment then go to HQ, as they do it while I wait.
If Wiltshire can apply the rules sensibly, pragmatically with very good timescales then there is no reason the current rules can’t work flawlessly elsewhere, other than the actual department administering them.
Moderators coming off ticket would be a sensible thing but other than that I wouldn’t want to see any changes at all, as my suspicion is any changes whatsoever would result in further restrictions being imposed.
Similar threads
