Government responds to 2023 firearms licensing consultation

[Pete_Cambs]

News is saying it was a 9mm Handgun, so unlikely it was legally owned at least

I’ve not seen that, I heard last night that he was known to the victim who was a woman and it was reported he entered the pub and two shots were heard which to me suggested shotgun fired by a jilted lover.

Horrendous either way.

 

[Kane01]

I’ve not seen that, I heard last night that he was known to the victim who was a woman and it was reported he entered the pub and two shots were heard which to me suggested shotgun fired by a jilted lover.

Horrendous either way.

Kent Pub Shooting: Victim Shot with 9mm Semi-Automatic Handgun as Manhunt Intensifies

Picture on here has a pistol calibre round that was left at the scene as well, my guess would be a jilted lover who had access to an illegal gun, or a converted one

 

[Liveonce]

“One more upbeat note may be - generally all sorts of proposals are made by government departments (or the civil servants that run them)”

civil servants who must keep coming up with new ideas how ever stupid so they can justify their jobs.

“However, I can readily see good reason being required”

And how would that improve public safety? given how easy it would be to fulfil the criteria, unless they make clay grounds like Section 1 clubs, require Home office approval. Then conditions like on a FAC for live quarry shooting.

The current system is not broken, if the Police did the job properly Plymouth would not have happened, yet we could yet be further victims due to the Police failings.

 

[Martiniblack577]

The subject of non-lead shot isn’t central to this thread (although I could disagree, with justification, with the stance BASC has taken in this matter).

Back on topic - I’d be interested to learn how the Home Office arrived at its conclusions given the results of the consultation & prior discussions with relevant parties. Are the shooting organisations able to press the Home Office to reveal their ‘thought process’? Or will it remain as transparent as mud?

BSSC is the main body overarching shooting. The issue you have is it isn’t the best organisation at presenting its views or being recognised as the ‘voice’ of shooting in the UK.

 

[Kersnow]

This isn’t a criticism of BASC or any other shooting organisation for lack of effort - but it seems there are no receptive ears in the present government to any thoughts, proposals or recommendations that could be put forward by our sporting organisations - no matter how well reasoned or argued such points may be.

They listen to no one but their Trade Union paymasters and with Starmer being spineless, probably the Tit in a Tupee

 

[andyk]

“One more upbeat note may be - generally all sorts of proposals are made by government departments (or the civil servants that run them)”

civil servants who must keep coming up with new ideas how ever stupid so they can justify their jobs.

“However, I can readily see good reason being required”

And how would that improve public safety? given how easy it would be to fulfil the criteria, unless they make clay grounds like Section 1 clubs, require Home office approval. Then conditions like on a FAC for live quarry shooting.

The current system is not broken, if the Police did the job properly Plymouth would not have happened, yet we could yet be further victims due to the Police failings.

To be clear, I’m not saying I support requiring good reason for a SGC, only I can see it happening.

The primary thing that would have stopped Davison would have been revoking his certificate, there was ample evidence to do so (whether it had been looked at or not).

All that said, using the facts of Plymouth, you can make a more compelling argument for good reason than you can warrantless entry.

 

[Pete_Cambs]

To be clear, I’m not saying I support requiring good reason for a SGC, only I can see it happening.

The primary thing that would have stopped Davison would have been revoking his certificate, there was ample evidence to do so (whether it had been looked at or not).

All that said, using the facts of Plymouth, you can make a more compelling argument for good reason than you can warrantless entry.

I don’t disagree with you on that I can see there being a push for good reason but good reason with shotguns is far more complicated than with rifles…. I look in my cabinet

1 x 12b dedicated comp clay gun
1x 12b dedicated driven shooting field gun
1x 12b SxS non ejector for walked up days
1x 12b semi auto 26” barrel for pigeon roost and decoy shooting
1x 12b pump action synth stock for rough shooting and wildfowling

That leaves a 12b hammer gun I bought mainly because it was pretty that I could half argue is there for highly formal shoots I may go on one day where a quality side by side is required. Then there is my Greener GP, purely bought as it was a Martin action and in honesty not really bought, traded for my old 5 gun Bratton Sound cabinet when I upsized.

So justification per gun doesn’t make sense the same way it does with rifles, I doubt very much anyone would get away with even two .308 on their FAC unless they were running a business related to it but for shotguns I can easily justify multiple 12b…. In theory at least.

Fact is current laws are robust enough but it needs the police and FLDs to actually follow them….. 5 years ago when myself and the missus granted our SGCs we know for a fact neither of our referees were ever contacted…

 

[Smellydog]

two shots were heard which to me suggested shotgun fired by a jilted lover.

How does one come to that conclusion.
The assuming on here is symptomatic of what is generally wrong with society today.


Some here are talking themselves into more restrictions FFS.

If the police actually did their job like the father of the Plymouth pillock begging them to not issue him a licence after it was took off him there wouldn't of been an issue.
If the issuing chief constable signing off Hamiltons licence had listen to over 50 memos from his staff to revoke his license there would of been no issue.
This country is joke. Every one is a pawn for those in office to trample on and we swallow it every freaking time.
Wake up FFS.

 

[Pete_Cambs]

How does one come to that conclusion.

You’ve only quoted part of my post so let me explain in full…!

The reports said it was in a pub while the victim was having a meal, the assailant was apparently known to the victim….. add to that it’s believed the assailant entered the Thames at the Dartford crossing it did seem to add up to a jilted former lover or similar who then took his own life - this just didn’t strike me as someone who’d have readily available access to an illegal firearm…. Couple with that the reports of 2 shots heard and I don’t think it’s unreasonable to make an initial assumption that it was possibly a legally owned shotgun used….. reporting now seems to indicate a 9mm was used which most of us would now probably assume means an illegal handgun.

 

[jall55]

Mixed farms with Oak woods. Regarding steel, neither my gun shop, cartridge manufacturers nor ASI were prepared to warranty my barrels against damage by steel shot, nor I suspect will BASC if I ask them?

Probably not
So you have actually not used it then

We have shot close to 20,000 cartridges between us this year with no issue

 

[webley701]

BSSC is the main body overarching shooting. The issue you have is it isn’t the best organisation at presenting its views or being recognised as the ‘voice’ of shooting in the UK.

In what way do you think that it’s not doing as well as it might & given that the BSSC is an umbrella organisation for the majority of shooting organisations - are the wrong people being chosen to lead or do we just not have the right people? My question is not at all a dismissal of your comment - I’m asking as I’m interested in what you think isn’t ideal & how it could be better.

Related to your comment - very roughly around 2015 the representatives from various shooting organisations appeared before one of the parliamentary committees looking at legislation. I read the transcript & was rather shocked at how badly the evidence or advice from the shooting associations had been put forward. The representative from the NRA was particularly poor - not that the submission from BASC was that much better. I appreciate it’s far from easy to present verbally rather than in writing especially in strange surroundings & to a committee made up of people expert in that art (if no other) but I felt shooters were let down as regards what was said compared to what should have been said plus the quality of verbal presentation. A year or so after that, as a member of the NRA I raised issue of the poor presentation by the NRA with them at their stand at one of the game fairs. The chap I spoke to recalled the incident & basically said the person chosen was rather overawed by it all & didn’t come over at all well. I can sympathise with the plight of the person involved but it wasn’t good enough. I wondered & still do how effective our representatives generally are when it comes to the face to face stuff.

I once listened to a good barrister who had a deep interest in biblical history put forward an argument for an hypothesis concerning some event or other in the ancient holy land. He laid out a beautifully structured case walking us though all the key points, plus he had the right voice for it & was naturally well practiced at suitable delivery. It was a pleasure to listen to & certainly made his case even more compelling. Do we have people of that ability presenting the case for shooting?

 

[63]

There’s enough barristers and other professionals in shooting that you’d hope we can find people with the right skills for that kind of thing.

On a related note, it makes me laugh when people on here complain that BASC spends too much time ‘hob knobbing with MPs instead of defending shooting’. How do they think political lobbying works?

That said maybe the most effective solution would be for the NGO to start fund raising for Labour, and BASC for the Conservative Party. The NRA could take the Lib Dem’s because they’re both equally relevant.

 

[Liveonce]

Probably not
So you have actually not used it then

We have shot close to 20,000 cartridges between us this year with no issue

some going in 47 days how many is us?

 

[jall55]

some going in 47 days how many is us?

We do clays too

 

[Liveonce]

How do they think political lobbying works?

does it work? what has it actually achieved over the years?

 

[Liveonce]

We do clays too

if us is two, thats about 200 shots each every day this year.

 

[jall55]

if us is two, thats about 200 shots each every day this year.

Its not

We have a syndicate on our land - circa 15 days
i personally used perhaps 1000 cartidges on vermin control
We have 3/4 all day simulated game days with 40 guns shooting
Roost shoots
walked up days
and on it goes

 

[63]

does it work? what has it actually achieved over the years?

Political lobbying? Yes…most legislation is effected by lobbyists to some degree.

What is lobbying and how significant is it in the UK?

Lobbying takes its name from the Lobby of the House of Commons. Lobbying is the process of trying to persuade the government, or a political party, to change their policies. The term originates fro…

politicsteaching.com

 

[Greenmist]

Going off the governments form so far, I feel a tax per firearm may fit their agenda, need to fill that blackhole somehow

 

[webley701]

Going off the governments form so far, I feel a tax per firearm may fit their agenda, need to fill that blackhole somehow

Do you think that would be applied relative to bore size, cartridge powder capacity, barrel length or…..?