Surely the matter in hand is one of fit to be entrusted rather than nonsense opinions from ignorant politicians about ballistics?I have asked the firearms team for an explanation on this from what stems from firearms legislation for that terminology - but logically bullets fired from a rifle are capable of being lethal at longer distances than pellets from a shotgun. However, I will come back on that one.
Subterfuge by whom?I still think thats subterfuge, leak a terrible potential outcome, so we're happy with the intended one, much like the replies on here with regards to the 150% fee increase.
I will update on the origination of such terminology.Surely the matter in hand is one of fit to be entrusted rather than nonsense opinions from ignorant politicians about ballistics?
The shooting organisations work together as one voice in representations to the Home Office via British Shooting Sports Council (BSSC).Surely this needs a coordinated response from all of the various organisations that represent our community without any infighting.
Maybe it would be better if they all merged into one group but i guess this will never happen.
I assume this government (plus the civil service) view voters who shoot in a similar manner to how a couple of suspended Labour MP’s viewed their constituents.Funny isn't it, this democracy we have. We all get a vote, and have to put up with the results even if it goes against what we personally voted for, that is after all democracy.
However, our elected officials are meant to represent our wishes, this is the reason we elected them, again this is how democracy is supposed to work, however, when they ask us a question they can do what they want with the answers even if +80% of respondents say thay wanted something else.
What a time to be alive.
Common Law: If you are faced with an invasion of your property by anyone, the police, local council workers, process servers without proper lawful authority issued by a lawfully constituted court, then they are trespassing.The government has today responded to the 2023 firearms licensing consultation which received 91,385 responses.
Click the link below to read the government's response in full
BASC has criticised the government’s decision to grant police automatic powers of entry into the homes of firearm certificate holders as unnecessary and an erosion of civil liberties. The police already have powers of entry to prevent crime and if life is in danger. They can also get a warrant from a magistrate and they can revoke a person’s shotgun or firearm certificate, making their possession of guns illegal. This power of entry was opposed by 80.7 per cent of respondents to the consultation.
Also announced was the government’s intention to launch a new consultation later this year on whether controls on higher-powered firearm should be applied to lower powered shotguns. The government has refused to make the placing of a marker on the medical notes of certificate holders mandatory for general practitioners; despite 83 per cent of respondents supporting this proposal.
Click the link below for more reaction from BASC
![]()
Government’s decision unnecessary and an erosion of civil liberties, says BASC
BASC has strongly condemned the government’s decision to grant police automatic powers of entry into firearms certificate holders' homes.basc.org.uk
Common Law: If you are faced with an invasion of your property by anyone, the police, local council workers, process servers without proper lawful authority issued by a lawfully constituted court, then they are.
Yes. One of documents associated with this uses words about local mayors being able to see which citizens "loyal to the government" held "stands of arms".S.1 Introduced in the immediate aftermath of WW1 to prevent an armed uprising against George V after similar uprisings against cousins Billy & Nicky.
Historically, yes, this may have been the reason why shotguns were exempt from controls when such were introduced in 1920. That armed with a mere shotgun a discontented civil population could still be outranged and shot down from distance by government forces armed with rifles.I have asked the firearms team for an explanation on this from what stems from firearms legislation for that terminology - but logically bullets fired from a rifle are capable of being lethal at longer distances than pellets from a shotgun. However, I will come back on that one.
Who benefits from our compliance and acceptance? No different to releasing a tax increase the same day as a plane crashSubterfuge by whom?
Nah matey. They've already taken that hit to their value when BASC initiated their "let's give up lead" agenda in February 2020 with no consultation of its members' views.I really do question if it’s worth me doing my DSC1 and pursuing a FAC because at this point I’m tempted to just sell of my shotguns before they become grossly devalued.
Here is the article that started the £400 firearms fees rise rumour:Who benefits from our compliance and acceptance? No different to releasing a tax increase the same day as a plane crash
That's not true. I wish you would not keep spreading misinformation like this.Nah matey. They've already taken that hit to their value when BASC initiated their "let's give up lead" agenda in February 2020 with no consultation of its members' views.