The Home Affairs Committee inquiry into Firearms Control 2010

[Christopher Graffius]

Bump

 

I am new to the world of firearms as only started clay shooting last October and I thoroughly enjoy it. I am not sure what to put into my submission but wish to do it anyway so will try to add something of meaning.

 

I just wish they would target the right areas, illegal firearms and knife crimes!

 

Check out the BASC online kit to putting a submission together. I would suggest you start with describing the shooting you do and why it's important to you. Emphaisie safety and abiding by the law. Then say what you think about the areas the Committee is looking into. You can take facts from the BASC brief. Makes sure you number the paragraphs and say it in your own words. Imagining you have the Home Affairs Committee in front of you and you're explaining it all to them sometimes helps!

 

Christopher Graffius

[MC]

I have just done mine.

 

Come on guys, shooting needs you

[Highlander]

I would have expected you to be a bit better than that statement.

I post on here as a member 99% of the time and have no axe to grind in this matter, except to say it as I see it.

It would be interesting to have a Poll with honest replies to see just how many members of this Forum have submitted, or intend to submit, comprehensive responses.

Alternatively, lets wait until the Inquiry reports and see how many of the 574,946 SGC holders and 138,728 FAC holders submitted responses.

 

Cranfield that wasn’t a dig at you personally but more a comment on the likelyhood of the average PW’er or for that matter the average shooting enthusiast actually doing something for their sport.

 

I doubt that many of the 574,946 SGC holders and 138,728 FAC holders will make any submissions, some because they haven’t heard about it, some because they don’t know what/how to write such a submission and others who simply can’t be a*****!

 

A sad reflection on the sport but not totally unexpected and not confined to our sport. People will moan and groan all day long about the unfairness of life but ask them what they’re going to do about it and...silence!

 

BTW I did make a submission and have received a (standard) reply. Lets hope that the committee are fair minded, unbiased and forward thinking enough to leave law abiding gun owners alone.

 

Support your sport or do not grieve if you lose it! You have until Friday.

[Paul223]

bumpy bump

 

last chance folks

[Breastman]

Back to the top!

 

Remember, not sending in a submission officially waives your right to whinge if anything does happen!

 

Mark

[Beardo]

finally got round to doing mine - make sure YOU do today!

[rascal_2005]

mines done, not the best but atleast i have given it a try

[Beardo]

it doesn't matter if you're not the best at writing - what does matter is that you've done it.

[Breastman]

Just noticed you can send hardcopies to;

 

Home Affairs Committee

House of Commons

7 Millbank

London

SW18 3JA

 

D'oh! Sending mine by 1st class aswell just to make sure they can't use any techno-problems as an excuse! :(

 

Mark

[David BASC]

Firstly a BIG THANK YOU to everyone who sent in a response -there have been more submissions to this than any other consultation we have ever been involved in. We honestly think ALL your help really has made a big impact.

 

For your info, here is a very brief summary of BASC’s response:

 

BASC believes the inquiry could be critical to the future of shooting sports in the UK and called on all who shoot to submit their own views to the committee.

 

The main points of BASC’s evidence are:

 

• The number of licensed firearms used in crime is insignificant.

• There is no significant relationship between armed crime and legally owned guns.

• Between 1999 – 2003/04 armed crime rose steadily whilst the number of firearm and shotgun certificates fell by nine per cent.

• The Firearms Acts 1997 have had no impact on armed crime and have destroyed the sport of pistol shooting with no benefit to public safety.

• Handguns remain the weapon of choice for armed criminals.

• The current regime for licensing shotguns is the most efficient part of the administration of the Firearms Acts because it concentrates on the applicant.

• The proposal to tag certificate holders’ medical records is disproportionate and requires further consideration if it is to make any contribution to public safety.

• The current requirement to allow the police to ask for factual details from a certificate holder’s GP is proportionate and effective.

• Airguns are already heavily regulated by law, particularly where young people are concerned.

• Airgun offences of violence against the person have fallen steadily over the last 38 years.

• If airguns were licensed, the police service would not be able to cope with the additional workload.

 

BASC’s recommendations are:

 

• The Firearms Acts 1968 – 1997 should be consolidated into a single Act.

• Any new firearms legislation should be divided into two acts; criminal justice matter and licensing administration.

• Appeals against police licensing decisions should be dealt with by a tribunal.

• Airgun control laws should not be devolved to Scotland.

• The current regime for licensing shotguns should be extended to sporting rifles.

 

BASC is seeking permission from the Home Affairs Select Committee to publish the evidence and to appear before the committee to give oral evidence.

 

We hope the committee is going to make recommendations based on the evidence rather than on the emotion surrounding the recent incidents in Cumbria and Northumbria. We are heartened that so many people have made submissions, it is important that individual voices are heard as well as those of the shooting organisations.

 

Regards

 

 

David

Edited August 26, 2010 by David BASC

[Highlander]

David • The current regime for licensing shotguns should be extended to sporting rifles. Would you care to elaborate on this item please?

[mossy835]

 

yes i have to read that bit twice,

[BlaserF3]

Does anybody know the views of The British Shooting Sports Council of these proposals from BASC?

[Paul223]

*** ******

*********

Best regards Paul********

Edited August 31, 2010 by Paul223

[Paul223]

Last chance folks, I bet a few on here could do better than I have, come on get them in

[scolopax]

What time is the deadline?

[Paul223]

today i think???

Edited August 27, 2010 by Paul223

[PAULT]

just done mine

[Beardo]

today is the last chance - get your letters in - it doesn't matter how badly you think you write, just do it.

if you don't, then you really can't moan if we lose our sport.

[David BASC]

With shotguns you in effect licence the person, once they have their SGC they can buy any shotgun they like- you have passed all the police checks to be a fit and propper person of good character etc to be trusted with a firearm.

 

There are still checks and balances in place, you have to tell the police about your new gun, you have to keep it safe and so on.

 

As you know with section 1 you have to go through hoops for each rifle you want, or even in some cases for what species you want to shoot with it!

 

If we have a fair licencing systme that licenced the PERSON for FAC, just like SGC it woudl make life much simpler and easier for all of us.

 

David

[al4x]

not sure thats a good idea David, so you're suggesting a system where a new license holder could go out and buy any caliber FAC gun?

 

As for tagging medical records personally this makes sense and for me is something we should be offering them to look like we are trying to prevent a repeat of cumbria etc

[MC]

I am not sure about buying any calibre but if you have a slot for a .22 then why can't you just chop and change as you see fit? after all as long as you own one .22 what difference does it make?

 

If you just had an FAC like you did a SGC you would get people apply for a FAC with a few acres of land and want a .22 and then they would be off buying a .338 lap mag.

[Canis]

With shotguns you in effect licence the person, once they have their SGC they can buy any shotgun they like- you have passed all the police checks to be a fit and propper person of good character etc to be trusted with a firearm.

 

There are still checks and balances in place, you have to tell the police about your new gun, you have to keep it safe and so on.

 

As you know with section 1 you have to go through hoops for each rifle you want, or even in some cases for what species you want to shoot with it!

 

If we have a fair licencing systme that licenced the PERSON for FAC, just like SGC it woudl make life much simpler and easier for all of us.

 

David

 

I would guess that in asking for a loosening of the law regarding a firearms certificate to be a BASC ploy to be on the offensive during this round of firearms legislation reviews to hope to maintain the status quo.

 

While as a SGC holder I look agast at the " fun " a FAC holder has to go through with variations but particularly with the range of different weapons that can be held on a fac certificate i think that some control on the class of weapon held is right and propper - someone who has a FAC for the purposes of holding a 18ft/lb air rifle or a Saxby & Palmer air cartridge pistol would otherwise be able to go strainght out and buy a "strainght pull assault rifle !

 

That said I have long thought that it would be sensible to cut beaurocracy for "lesser lethality" weapons like the the FAC air rifle or air cartridge pistol to be held on a SGC Perhaps the BASC could suggest this David ?

[Breastman]

As for tagging medical records personally this makes sense and for me is something we should be offering them to look like we are trying to prevent a repeat of cumbria etc

 

You're more trusting than me! At the moment who knows you have firearms at your house? Your GP (who's records for the vast majority of the time stay in the local surgery), the Police (who have secure records and only the FLD have detailed records) and anyone you've advertised the fact to. If a general marker is put on your NHS file, anyone in the NHS will be able to access it! And lets not forget the spectacular record the NHS has at 'losing' databases Personally i prefer only having people i know and trust to know i have guns in the house

 

On top of which there's been no evidence that having access to Derrick Birds (or Thomas Hamilton/Michael Ryans for that matter) medical records would have 'set alarm bells ringing'. All of them appeared to behave normally right up to the point they went beserk.

 

While as a SGC holder I look agast at the " fun " a FAC holder has to go through with variations but particularly with the range of different weapons that can be held on a fac certificate i think that some control on the class of weapon held is right and propper - someone who has a FAC for the purposes of holding a 18ft/lb air rifle or a Saxby & Palmer air cartridge pistol would otherwise be able to go strainght out and buy a "strainght pull assault rifle !

 

Why? Is there anything to indicate that if any of these three mass murders had been carried out with a different type of legally available firearm (or ANY weapon for that matter), that the result would have been different/worse?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_attack_o...ch_royal_family

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Chinese_school_attacks

 

 

Odd that you'd use that as an example of the 'deadliest weapon'. A straight pull rifle is no more dangerous than a bolt action rifle in the same calibre. In fact most are less accurate. Most are also chambered in .223Rem which isn't a particularly 'heavy' calibre anyway. A .338 Lapua or .50BMG bolt action rifle would be far, far more potent.

 

The indoctrination from the anti-gun lobby, mass media and government has taken a fast hold in this country, and has even successfully infiltrated the shooting community, always sad to see

 

Mark

[David BASC]

At the moment I may have a 22 say for rabbits on farmland for example now the farmer wants me to control fox as well, so now I have to go though a costly exercise getting say a 22.250 variation…

 

Now some deer come on the land, and the farmer says it’s OK for me to take them – so now I have another costly variation for say a 240…

 

And now the police may say ‘well yes you can have the 240 IF you give up the 22.250 as you don’t need so many rifles do you?…oh and by the way before we condition your FAC for deer with the 240, you will have to do a course or be mentored by a stalker for a year or so…but in the mean time you can still use the 243 on the same and to shot fox..’

 

Sounds daft yes, well that’s they situation we are now in!

 

As for your concerns Al4x, are you suggesting that we should lobby for the need for proven experience before people can get certain calibers of rifle? I am sure you are not as this would be a recipe for disaster.

 

Frankly if we can be trusted with a firearm then we should be trusted to use that firearm safely and appropriately whether it’s a 22 or a 303 or larger.

 

Of course there would need to be some checks and balances, and it may well be for example that simple land checks would remain, would that make sense?

 

Then what’s the issue regarding what caliber of rifle I use on a piece of land , 22, 240, 270, 30.06 etc?

 

From my point of view I would much rather see a licensing system for all firearms based around the current Sect 2 system than the current Sect 1 system, wouldn’t you?

 

Regards

Edited August 27, 2010 by David BASC