Here it is:
Thank you for your further feedback about the article “Gun No 6: The untold story of Britain's deadliest illegal firearm”
I note your concerns and can assure you that accuracy and impartiality are at the heart of the BBC’s values and Editorial Guidelines, to which all our content must adhere.
Regarding your disagreement with the reasons suggested by Helen Poole for how illegal guns may end up on the streets of the UK, I acknowledge that there have been further amendments to the acts regarding gun deactivation in the UK in 2016 and 2017, but clearly there will always be some criminals who circumvent these laws.
You state that “"Gun 6" isn't a stolen gun...licensed ownership of handguns such as "Gun 6" has been unlawful in Great Britain since 1998”; while this is true, the gun’s use was first recorded by Police in 2003, so it is possible it was in the UK in the preceding years, and dates back earlier than 1998.
Having said that, I do take your point that the gun may in all likelihood be a smuggled gun, but I think for thoroughness it is right that all the possible scenarios are set out for the readers’ consideration. In so doing, I do not agree that mentioning a possibility effectively “scapegoats that community that legitimately enjoy collecting de-activated weapons”.
You question a quote from NABIS “that say ‘they have managed to bring a de-activated gun back to life in thirty seconds’." This claim is not currently in the piece, it may have been edited out since publication but I do not have any further information regarding when or why that happened, I’m sorry I can’t assist further with that part of your query.
I understand that not everyone will agree with the way in which we present issues, but I am content that the article does not breach the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines, and I hope my reply goes some way to reassure you that editorial decisions are not made lightly.