Shooting community prepares to fight “existential threat”

[Conor O'Gorman]

I am posting this as a new thread as it contains new information from BASC and GTA.

Shooting community prepares to fight shotgun licensing changes - Shooting UK

The Government will consult on merging the shotgun and firearms licensing systems, sparking fears of an exodus from shooting.

www.shootinguk.co.uk

 

[User00056]

The 'government' can't even ensure existing legislation is consistently followed across nationwide police forces as it is. But why let incompetency interfere with implementing yet more unwarranted and ill-advised idiocy?

 

[Klenchblaize]

I hope the campaign is successful.

The biggest challenge will be convincing the non shotgun/firearm-interested Public that the requirement for demonstrating "good reason" for owning each shotgun is unjustified.

K

 

[long_range_rob]

Enacting new highly publicised legislation that doesn’t solve any problems is governments go to. Does anyone actually think that gangs, drug dealers, robbers, etc are going to get their sawn offs re-registered.

All governments promise to keep you safe and when they fail to do that tell you that they have to remove more of your freedoms so they can keep you safe.

BASC needs to ask proper questions of politicians in public rather than cosying up to them on jaunts paid for by we members.

 

[Klenchblaize]

I'm sure BASC will be working hard to air their concerns on:


K

 

[cjm1066]

We all need to act, the Police can't administer the current legislation in a timely manner.

Remember this is based on the Keyham shooting when the Police return a shotgun to a unstable individual, that was the issue. That he may not have had a “good reason” at the time is irrelevant.

 

[andyk]

We certainly need to push back on this and make clear that the issue at Keyham could have been avoided with the correct use of the existing rules, this wasn’t (as much as D&C might try to say otherwise) a case of them not being able to act under the current system, but one of them failing to investigate properly so they could.

That said, is that article correct? It says the consultation will be about whether to merge s1 and s2, has that been stated as what is being consulted on? I thought it was about greater similarity, which could mean many things (including merging but not only that).

 

[VSS]

My expectation is that we'll end up with a compromise whereby "good reason" will be required for the owning of shotguns, rather than "good reason" for each individual shotgun.

 

[User00056]

My expectation is that we'll end up with a compromise whereby "good reason" will be required for the owning of shotguns

That already exists though, doesn't it? You need to justify your need for a shotgun on initial application. Clays being the most obvious justification

 

[timbrayford]

My expectation is that we'll end up with a compromise whereby "good reason" will be required for the owning of shotguns, rather than "good reason" for each individual shotgun.

Actually that would be reasonable for all S1 but I can't see Hants FLD embracing that one, they do love a good argument and I never disappoint them!

 

[muddy42]

google tells me there are 600,000 legally held firearms and 1.4m legally held shotguns. If on average a firearm requires say double (?) the admin time (variations, 1for1s, calibre knowledge, good reason, clearing land in england etc.) surely/hopefully the logistical challenge for the police makes this plan completely unfeasible?

 

[Essexsussex]

google tells me there are 600,000 legally held firearms and 1.4m legally held shotguns. If on average a firearm requires say double (?) the admin time (variations, 1for1s, calibre knowledge, good reason, clearing land in england etc.) surely/hopefully the logistical challenge for the police makes this plan completely unfeasible?

It probably does so the answer? Charge us more I expect.

 

[VSS]

That already exists though, doesn't it? You need to justify your need for a shotgun on initial application. Clays being the most obvious justification

No, I don't think so.

 

[andyk]

That already exists though, doesn't it? You need to justify your need for a shotgun on initial application. Clays being the most obvious justification

You don’t, I think a lot of FLDs make a policy of asking, and try to make out that if you don’t have a good reason then you’ll be refused but they can’t refuse for lack of reason. If they did it would be a slam dunk appeal.

Even my FEO acknowledged some do this (his point being that’s wrong, and a license must be granted unless the applicant is unsuitable).

 

[weblyish]

No, I don't think so.

Nope, just went through with my son's first grant application and no reason needed at all

 

[VSS]

Nope, just went through with my son's first grant application and no reason needed at all

As I thought

 

[charlie222]

Shaking head - when will we just ask for some data to support the argument that certified guns are of such a risk to the public that it requires expensive new legislation and administration? Ask your friends the question- when their loved ones leave the house in the morning and they are asked to list what might cause them to not come home that evening, where on that list is ' They'll likely get shot by someone with a legally held and certified gun'?

 

[andyk]

Shaking head - when will we just ask for some data to support the argument that certified guns are of such a risk to the public that it requires expensive new legislation and administration? Ask your friends the question- when their loved ones leave the house in the morning and they are asked to list what might cause them to not come home that evening, where on that list is ' They'll likely get shot by someone with a legally held and certified gun'?

Ironically, this may be the problem. It’s so rare that when it happens it’s ‘man bites dog’ for the press. Whereas when 5 people a day die on the roads, that’s normal so nobody worries .

 

[Greenmist]

That already exists though, doesn't it? You need to justify your need for a shotgun on initial application. Clays being the most obvious justification

Legally you don't, the police have to give a reason for you not to have one

 

[Malxwal]

Unfortunately governments don't seem to observe data, facts, science or statistics when it comes to enacting policies that they think will garner votes. I don't think it's any secret this government, and our own in Jockistan, would happily just outlaw all public firearm ownership at the drop of a hat, regardless of the lip service they pay out to the benefits of field sports etc.