At least they'd have to get out of Marford a lot more!
GP reports update
- Thread starter David63
- Start date
So true buddy
Please all see
www.gov.uk
We have until September 17th September 2019 to respond do not leave it to the shooting organisations.
Their are obvious problems in the process as written.
Interesting how they use words like “can” and “may” to justify the process suggesting very little evidence based facts just gut assumptions that the suggested process would reduce legally gun owned homicides and suicides.
They also are significantly underestimating the doctors fees.
No update to the Kent complaint yet.
Statutory guidance to police on firearms licensing
We are seeking views on draft statutory guidance for the police on firearms licensing, including proposed new arrangements for medical checks for firearms certificates.
We have until September 17th September 2019 to respond do not leave it to the shooting organisations.
Their are obvious problems in the process as written.
Interesting how they use words like “can” and “may” to justify the process suggesting very little evidence based facts just gut assumptions that the suggested process would reduce legally gun owned homicides and suicides.
They also are significantly underestimating the doctors fees.
No update to the Kent complaint yet.
Please all see
Statutory guidance to police on firearms licensing
We are seeking views on draft statutory guidance for the police on firearms licensing, including proposed new arrangements for medical checks for firearms certificates.
We have until September 17th September 2019 to respond do not leave it to the shooting organisations.
Their are obvious problems in the process as written.
Interesting how they use words like “can” and “may” to justify the process suggesting very little evidence based facts just gut assumptions that the suggested process would reduce legally gun owned homicides and suicides.
They also are significantly underestimating the doctors fees.
No update to the Kent complaint yet.
Now then. Is it the intention that "statutory" means legally binding? Surely statutory guidance is an oxy-moron, the same as police intelligence.
Orion
Well-Known Member
I doubt it. My take on it is that theoretically they’ll be able to ignore it in the same way as the HOG after having ‘regard’ for it.
Practically though they’ll enforce it to the hilt simply because it has been compiled jointly by the HO and Police - so why wouldn’t they?
Nevertheless, speak your mind and give good reasons why we should be trusted and not continually more constrained.
I note the consultation is being carried out by the serious crime unit - this has nothing to do with serious crime its simply licensing the most-law abiding people in Britain.
I hope one or all of the ORGs go in strong and make sure we are 'hogtied' further - but very sadly, I doubt it.
I note the consultation is being carried out by the serious crime unit - this has nothing to do with serious crime its simply licensing the most-law abiding people in Britain.
I hope one or all of the ORGs go in strong and make sure we are 'hogtied' further - but very sadly, I doubt it.
Mick Miller
Well-Known Member
Personally, I think the whole 'firearms marker' suggestion or any involvement of a GP is pointless. There is no merit in the claim that to do so would 'improve public safety'. Let's all look at some facts, shall we? I'll use the year 2016-2017 as an example to highlight how badly we're being shafted here and suggest a line of rebuttal for any demands for increased scrutiny or GP involvement.
Bear in mind that offences involving firearms constitute a tiny percentage of all recorded crime in England & Wales. Also keep in mind that offences involving imitiation firearms, air weapons, cs gas are all lumped in under the banner of 'firearms offences'.
In the year ending 31 March 2017, there were a total of 6,375 firearm offences recorded in the England & Wales. Out of this total, almost half were air weapons offences. causing criminal damage or violence against the person.
Out of the remaining 3,200 or so offences involving 'actual' firearms 42% were committed with handguns, correct me if I'm wrong, but we've have been all but banned from ownership of handguns for several years, so I would say that it is safe to assume that these weren't offences committed by firearms certifcate holders. That leaves 1,900 or so crimes involving actual firearms that are not committed using handguns. Out of this 1,900 offences the vast majority were committed with imitiation firerams, other firearms or unidentified firearms (whatever that means) with shotguns representing 9-10% of the total (190 offences). It would be safe to assume that the majority of those were also committed with illegally held or stolen shotguns.
Rifles, of course, the main tool of choice for most of us, represented 'around' 1% of all firearms offences that were not air weapons. That's a massive number, that means that in the entire year there were 19 offences involving rifles throughout England & Wales. Sadly I don't have numbers for how many of these were legally held, or of a threatening type rather than simply error in recording, transit or any number of other 'offences' that can be committed without threat to life or property. But I would imagine again the proportion of offences involving legitimately held firearms of a threatening type are small. But, lets for the sake of argument say that 20% were (they probably weren't though).
That means that there were around 4 or maybe 5 offences committed in 2016-2017 that involved legally held firearms of the type we all use. Wow. That's really worth all the extra effort, extra bureaucracy, extra resource on already hard-pressed medical resources in order to protect the public from the terrible consequences of 5 offences, none of which were likely fatal or threatened the wider public.
As I said in my response to the proposals, the perceived benefit in public safety that this whole, sorry debate brings is so inconsequential as to be not worth the effort at all. Why hasn't this been made clear?
researchbriefings.parliament.uk
Bear in mind that offences involving firearms constitute a tiny percentage of all recorded crime in England & Wales. Also keep in mind that offences involving imitiation firearms, air weapons, cs gas are all lumped in under the banner of 'firearms offences'.
In the year ending 31 March 2017, there were a total of 6,375 firearm offences recorded in the England & Wales. Out of this total, almost half were air weapons offences. causing criminal damage or violence against the person.
Out of the remaining 3,200 or so offences involving 'actual' firearms 42% were committed with handguns, correct me if I'm wrong, but we've have been all but banned from ownership of handguns for several years, so I would say that it is safe to assume that these weren't offences committed by firearms certifcate holders. That leaves 1,900 or so crimes involving actual firearms that are not committed using handguns. Out of this 1,900 offences the vast majority were committed with imitiation firerams, other firearms or unidentified firearms (whatever that means) with shotguns representing 9-10% of the total (190 offences). It would be safe to assume that the majority of those were also committed with illegally held or stolen shotguns.
Rifles, of course, the main tool of choice for most of us, represented 'around' 1% of all firearms offences that were not air weapons. That's a massive number, that means that in the entire year there were 19 offences involving rifles throughout England & Wales. Sadly I don't have numbers for how many of these were legally held, or of a threatening type rather than simply error in recording, transit or any number of other 'offences' that can be committed without threat to life or property. But I would imagine again the proportion of offences involving legitimately held firearms of a threatening type are small. But, lets for the sake of argument say that 20% were (they probably weren't though).
That means that there were around 4 or maybe 5 offences committed in 2016-2017 that involved legally held firearms of the type we all use. Wow. That's really worth all the extra effort, extra bureaucracy, extra resource on already hard-pressed medical resources in order to protect the public from the terrible consequences of 5 offences, none of which were likely fatal or threatened the wider public.
As I said in my response to the proposals, the perceived benefit in public safety that this whole, sorry debate brings is so inconsequential as to be not worth the effort at all. Why hasn't this been made clear?
Firearm Crime Statistics: England & Wales - House of Commons Library
Statistics on the number of police recorded firearm offences are published by the ONS in the Crime in England & Wales bulletin. Gun related crime statistics are published by the ONS in the Offences involving the use of weapons: data tables.
researchbriefings.parliament.uk
Last edited:
Similar threads
