Wonder where B.A.S.C. are on this, albeit in the back office quietly? And without demeaning the sad happenings, This will have very much more and wider implications for many differing situations.
Changes to Firearms Licensing. What would you do?
- Thread starter User00035
- Start date
nun_hunter
Well-Known Member
"An allegation of assault" isn't the same as a conviction for assault or even charged with assault, innocent until proven guilty.
There are often threads on here decreeing the police for seizing guns and certificates after allegations of a domestic nature and how unfair it is as there has been no proof or conviction. If it is the case with the male form Plymouth that nothing was proved then it is very difficult to keep the certificate and guns or you're saying that you trust the police to stop people having an SGC or FAC just because they feel like it or have a gut instinct that the person shouldn't have one.
The blame lies solely with the male who pulled the trigger and no one else, however, some responsibility should be shouldered by the people who knew him and knew he had a shotgun and had concerns over his behaviour but did nothing. That can include the police if they did not do all they could (which I doubt they would have due to the reputational risk associated) but also friends and family.
As has been said above MH issues aren't always obvious and not always constant, especially if they are caused by a specific event or series of events so its very difficult to say someone is safe or sane and will be for the next 5 years.
There are often threads on here decreeing the police for seizing guns and certificates after allegations of a domestic nature and how unfair it is as there has been no proof or conviction. If it is the case with the male form Plymouth that nothing was proved then it is very difficult to keep the certificate and guns or you're saying that you trust the police to stop people having an SGC or FAC just because they feel like it or have a gut instinct that the person shouldn't have one.
The blame lies solely with the male who pulled the trigger and no one else, however, some responsibility should be shouldered by the people who knew him and knew he had a shotgun and had concerns over his behaviour but did nothing. That can include the police if they did not do all they could (which I doubt they would have due to the reputational risk associated) but also friends and family.
As has been said above MH issues aren't always obvious and not always constant, especially if they are caused by a specific event or series of events so its very difficult to say someone is safe or sane and will be for the next 5 years.
You're are probably right. Although we know that unless you're talking about automatic weapons, the type of shotgun used is completely irrelevant to the outcome, but it will come under scrutiny because it's a more saleable story angle than talking about licensing procedure.
Much more relevant is, when an individual has his license revoked on behavioural or mental health grounds, who decides when it can be reinstated? The police certainly aren't qualified to do that and they shouldn't be expected to. If they were making that call in this latest case, it's all too easy to harangue them with hindsight for getting it so wrong when the more salient fact remains that they shouldn't have been in that position to start with.
As @Pete1774 says, in most cases GPs aren't able to make such assessments either. If you're going to assess mental health and behavioural tendencies in relation to license approvals, revocations and reinstatements, such assessments should be made by some agency qualified and resourced to do it.
Nothing can be changed to make it further effective against such events. It would be a waste of time, money and legislation against one-off events. Anyone can flip if life sends them that way and not everyone goes to doctors about every single issue they have. Airgo, nothing can be done. It is the human condition... nobody is perfect but some have more tolerance then others. Same as some are smarter than others and some are more sly than others.
At the same time, there are some very well centred people out there who sometimes just need a helping help and in all honesty, there is nothing wrong with that. But as mental health is still so taboo, specifically when it comes to Firearms ownership, people have to be "persecuted' for lack of a better word and tarred with the same brush. Mainly because the police are otherwise liable and have to overreact rather than undereact, in their opinion.
Changing the legislation to be further restrictive because of the actions of 1 and thinking it would be fair or effective, is the equivalent of blaming a whole religion for the actions of 1 follower...I believe there is a descriptive word for those that that belief..
Nun Hunter hit a good point, that those around him should have noticed... however not everyone wears their emotions on their sleeve for all to see. If it was noticed, then things should have been said.
However on a more positive comment ... I would like to see the back of one for one variations..buy, sell, buy, send notifications. Easy. And end the need for stipulations for specific calibres, change it to bullet diameter or simply a centrefire category and rimfire category...
So I see it the opposite way. Open it up more. Shotgun certificates are that way inclined and it doesn't matter how many you have, you can only use one at a time..
Would make us happier and cause much less paperwork for the departments.
At the same time, there are some very well centred people out there who sometimes just need a helping help and in all honesty, there is nothing wrong with that. But as mental health is still so taboo, specifically when it comes to Firearms ownership, people have to be "persecuted' for lack of a better word and tarred with the same brush. Mainly because the police are otherwise liable and have to overreact rather than undereact, in their opinion.
Changing the legislation to be further restrictive because of the actions of 1 and thinking it would be fair or effective, is the equivalent of blaming a whole religion for the actions of 1 follower...I believe there is a descriptive word for those that that belief..
Nun Hunter hit a good point, that those around him should have noticed... however not everyone wears their emotions on their sleeve for all to see. If it was noticed, then things should have been said.
However on a more positive comment ... I would like to see the back of one for one variations..buy, sell, buy, send notifications. Easy. And end the need for stipulations for specific calibres, change it to bullet diameter or simply a centrefire category and rimfire category...
So I see it the opposite way. Open it up more. Shotgun certificates are that way inclined and it doesn't matter how many you have, you can only use one at a time..
Would make us happier and cause much less paperwork for the departments.
Last edited:
Cut+Squirt
Well-Known Member
I don't suppose this will be a popular opinion but I think shotguns should fall under the same grants process as firearms, ie, 'required to show good reason'.
It wouldn't make a blind bit of difference. Most people do anyway. Upon interview they are asked if they have experience and what shooting they do/will be doing. Although legally we aren't required to give a good reason, we all state we go claying at x club and or shooting on x land. The mere difference would be that we show them proof thereof.
Nothing else would change and it wouldn't have changed the outcome of this scenario.
nun_hunter
Well-Known Member
Pointless unless you then tighten up clay pigeon grounds and clubs too. There are so many pay and play clay pigeon clubs (which is a great thing) that anyone putting in for an SGC would just put down "clay pigeon" as you don't need to be a member and a lot of people only shoot shotguns a couple of times a year during specific game seasons.
I thought those around him did notice.
Generalising about anyone. But yes if they did notice, then they should have voiced their concerns to authorities.
Which is exactly what the likes of medcert do, a one day MOT.
I am sure if Devon and Cornwall require a GP medical report at application the Chief Constable will be letting all know.
Do what the American NRA would do, fight any changes to the current legislation.
nun_hunter
Well-Known Member
It is simply an arse covering exercise so the police can say "a medical professional said they were ok and nothing to indicate there was an issue".
In Surrey/Sussex this was directly as a recommendation from the Coroner's Office after a double murder where the police initially seized shotguns from a male after an allegation of domestic assault from his wife. She retracted and said it never happened and so with no supporting evidence they were forced to return his guns after he appealed and he then used them to shoot his wife and daughter. In the inquest the only negative thing about the Surrey/Sussex FLD was that they didn't have a GP letter to say he wasn't deemed a risk, hence why they now make it mandatory for the GP letter even though it wouldn't have made any difference as there was nothing in his medical history that would have prevented him from having the guns and SGC returned.
Numbnuts Starmer wants to know how the perpetrator ever got an certificate in the first place
www.bbc.co.uk
That'll be because he applied, went through the process and came out the other side being deemed "suitable" by the police - the man's a fe**in idiot.
Cheers
Bruce
Plymouth shooting: Starmer asks why gunman had licence
The police watchdog is investigating the decision to give back Jake Davison's shotgun and certificate.
www.bbc.co.uk
Cheers
Bruce
Swedish
Well-Known Member
I agree with this. I would add that he was quite active (filming himself ranting on various subjects and displaying some alarming behavioural traits bordering on delusional) on social media soon after his certs had been returned, surely it would be a good idea to have monitored that and perhaps been able to intervene before this appalling act.
Stalker62
Well-Known Member
spannulman
Well-Known Member
But how would the police monitor social media posts if a user has a pseudonym? Most of us on here are anonymous aren’t we. I don’t know how the police would be able to see anyone making unsuitable comments and know who it was.
Some things like Instagram might show your name but I doubt anyone ranting on an ‘alternative’ type website uses their real name. I’m getting out of my depth talking about social media and IT stuff but I think police ( or employers) could search for a FAC holder on Facebook by name or possibly email address aNd see if you are crossing any lines . But I imagine a website for unhappy young men who hate the world is probably anonymous, with user names chosen by themselves.
i guess this person did post in his name as the evening standard et al have found his posts, so the FEO could get lucky and catch some. But i could be completely wrong, I think anders brejvick posted his nonsense in his own name. so maybe it is possible to vet us all on social media but it would require far greater resources to do so successfully.
What I would like to see is the removal of forces adding things such as the .243 max caliber for beginner or mentor for stalking etc…
it should be as per the book for the most part and that’s it.
As mentioned the percentage of incidents is minute and so any changes would be for political reasons and virtue signalling in my opinion.
In this case it seems there was a drastic mistake made on the part of the police giving this guy his guns back - he was publishing videos saying he was fed up.
regards,
Gixer
it should be as per the book for the most part and that’s it.
As mentioned the percentage of incidents is minute and so any changes would be for political reasons and virtue signalling in my opinion.
In this case it seems there was a drastic mistake made on the part of the police giving this guy his guns back - he was publishing videos saying he was fed up.
regards,
Gixer
If he had undertaken the attacks with a knife, we might have got a useful enquiry focusing on the Incel movement and how to identify and perhaps help these people and others with similar conditions.
Let's hope that happens and we don't get political cheap shots with the licensing system.
Let's hope that happens and we don't get political cheap shots with the licensing system.
I suspect that the initial outcome of this will be that the medical profession will refuse to sign the FAC / SGC forms until they ramp up the fees for doing so.
Last edited:
kamyonsofor
Well-Known Member
A few years ago I bought some gunslips and other bits and pieces from a woman whose partner alledgely made threats to assault her while under the influence of drink, she had to call the Police , the partner left the property before the Police arrived and she said she had the knock on the door at 4-30 am several fire arms officers with vans and cleared all the firearms and items associated with them and he had his certificates revoked for good so she just sold off what was left.
Similar threads
