Met Police release names and addresses of 30,000 firearm owners to mar

[Gordon R]

Perhaps someone could state whether the letters originated from the Met Police, but were returned to a private company or has the company concerned sent out the letters?

 

Metropolitan Police and Scotland Yard logos? Without all the paperwork and more detail - hard to be definitive, but I did wonder whether this could constitute fraud.

Edited April 20, 2017 by Gordon R

[Bazooka Joe]

Is all FAC/SG holders getting these or is it just Metropolitan based.?

[Flyboy1950]

Disgraceful that the Met Police have released all the names and addresses to a marketing company in direct contravention of the Data protection laws. As has been suggested, whats in it for them?

This is certainly not covered by the "Guidance to Police Forces" from the Home Office.

Personally (though I was targeted for my Airgun collection a few years ago) I cant see the crims wanting single shot sporting rifles that are far to cumbersome to be much use when they can buy/hire Scorpion fully auto pistols from the major gangs in the Met area anyway. (Operation Trident is supposed to stop this happening).

If I get one of these leaflets I shall be straight on to my Local MP, the IPCC and the Home Office demanding to know why my details are now Public Knowledge.

Who is to say that all the employees of the marketing company (and /or your Doctors surgery, (where we are all now flagged)) are all 100 % trust worthy and wont pass them on?

 

Mr Very Angry

Tunbridge Wells

Nr Bristol.

Edited April 21, 2017 by Flyboy1950

[Brodie]

Reading up on Smartwater it would appear to be of limited benefit for firearms and shotguns. It seems it is destroyed by solvents, like gun cleaners, so a gun owner would surely need to reapply regularly.

[HDAV]

I spoke to a friend who is a met copper about this they were flabbergasted and in total agreement that this was bonkers! In their opinion should never have happened.

[Davyo]

Absolute disgrace!!!,a year back they where advising us to remove BASC stickrs and the likes from our vehicles.Also not to advertise that fact that you hold firearms.Now they give (more likely sell) your information over to a 3rd party without your consent.A marketing company at that who's data security will be practicaly pants.Sound to me like a dodgy backhander has gone off somewhere.

[Lloyd90]

Who's going to be the first to start a court case then? (If they even can?)

 

I imagine IPCC complaint is the first step?

[Flashman]

I will be interested to read how BASC will follow up on this matter, as it needs a large-scale complaint rather than dribs and drabs from FAC/SGC holders. I would be demanding a response within twenty four hours as the security of firearms is at stake.

 

Giving the police time to concoct a response is not the same as giving them time to investigate the matter.

[Davyo]

I for one have ZERO confidance in the licencing authority to ever get their house in order.Cock up after cock up!Wonder what the general public would make of it.Ive said it time and time again there needs to be a total shake up with these Muppets.

A couple of years ago they bullied us into removing any shooting related stickers from our cars & to sneak our guns in and out of our cars.Started doing unannounced security checks,using an excuse of 'Gun owners may become the channel for terrorists to acquire firearms'.Then they give out names and addresses to a marketing company!

I don't shoot anymore but,even when I did I never had any confidence in the licencing authority in my area Durham.And from the recent posts on PW over the months,it appears to be the same issue all over the Country.As a now member of the general public I feel that the licencing authority are not doing their job.That job according to my FEO (because he kept promoting it) was to keep the general public safe!What a joke!

Let's hope no gun owner gets intercepted on their way shooting and their guns forcibly stolen!

Edited April 21, 2017 by Davyo

[DaveyTed]

According to Met police website the marketing for this was placed with Corporate Document Services Ltd.

They quote a director of Smartwater who happens to hold the Queens Police Medal!

The website also names the senior officers responsible for the campaign.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Can you post a link please, I can't find what you are referring to

Edited April 21, 2017 by TIGHTCHOKE

[wymberley]

According to Met police website the marketing for this was placed with Corporate Document Services Ltd.

They quote a director of Smartwater who happens to hold the Queens Police Medal!

The website also names the senior officers responsible for the campaign.

Yer 'tis:

http://news.met.police.uk/news/crime-prevention-initiative-for-licensed-firearms-236571

[Davyo]

Stinks,as I said earlier a back hander! Smart water pack at reduced price of around £9.And the Director is linked to the police.What next?

[wymberley]

Devil's advocate.

Our problem with our argument that the information regarding any details of gun ownership being in the public domain is countered by the nature of the Government contract with CDS. I would suggest that the Met would be in the clear regarding contravention of the DPA and if there is any 'leakage', the blame would be laid at CDS' door. Or Smartwater themselves if CDS is up to scratch.

Edited April 21, 2017 by wymberley

[Gordon R]

wymberley - the Government does pass data to outside contractors, such as ATOS, but that is purely to assist in the administration of the medical side of the benefits system. This appears to step outside that which is necessary to run Government business into promotion of a commercial product, albeit with good intentions. I would seriously question whether this complied with the Data Protection Act.

 

 

It will give firearms licencees greater peace of mind that their firearms are forensically protected and will help to make communities both within and outside the capital safer.”

 

 

 

I would have thought that a serial number would give greater peace of mind, rather than a removable liquid.

 

 

They hold appropriate information security accreditations and no personal information is to be retained.

 

 

Not sure how the company could deal with a complaint of non-delivery, if they do not hold personal information. Perhaps they meant that it would not be retained for longer than necessary.

 

I sincerely hope that the data is more secure than when the Government had the contract with 3m Security Printing and Systems, formerly Her Majesty's Stationery Office Chadderton.

Edited April 21, 2017 by Gordon R

[wymberley]

wymberley - the Government does pass data to outside contractors, such as ATOS, but that is purely to assist in the administration of the medical side of the benefits system. This appears to step outside that which is necessary to run Government business into promotion of a commercial product, albeit with good intentions. I would seriously question whether this complied with the Data Protection Act.

 

 

 

 

I would have thought that a serial number would give greater peace of mind, rather than a removable liquid.

 

 

 

Not sure how the company could deal with a complaint of non-delivery, if they do not hold personal information. Perhaps they meant that it would not be retained for longer than necessary.

 

I sincerely hope that the data is more secure than when the Government had the contract with 3m Security Printing and Systems, formerly Her Majesty's Stationery Office Chadderton.

Gordon,

 

I know not. In theory the only members of the public who would be aware of this specific action with regard to names/addresses/guns held would be the certificate holders contacted. If no one took up the option, then no one else would be any the wiser. This assumes that the DPA was not contravened.

 

End of Devil's advocate.

 

A similar theory to this would be that if for whatever reason (elimination, possible suspect) one had one's fingerprints and DNA taken during a police investigation, then at the end of it and assuming a successful prosecution and one wasn't the guilty party, the theory is that these sample would be destroyed. And if you believe that...............

[Scully]

What I don't understand is how 'forensically marking' an object will make it safer for the license holder, nor how it will make people within London or outside, safer. Do they explain how ?

[wymberley]

What I don't understand is how 'forensically marking' an object will make it safer for the license holder, nor how it will make people within London or outside, safer. Do they explain how ?

Don't think it's supposed to. The underlying reason is an 'also ran' - "whilst also acting as a deterrent" (to keep the guns out of the hands of criminals/terrorists - as if that's from where they acquire them). How does it work? Simple, you put a sticker in your window. I bet you can't tell me of any Neighbourhood Watch areas that have been burgled. Really!?

[saddler]

Snake oil.....now available in a range of handy containers.

 

Send your cheques payable to Cressida ****, to New Scotland Yard, London.

 

Guaranteed to prevent attack by space bats or double your money back!

Edited April 21, 2017 by saddler

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Don't think it's supposed to. The underlying reason is an 'also ran' - "whilst also acting as a deterrent" (to keep the guns out of the hands of criminals/terrorists - as if that's from where they acquire them). How does it work? Simple, you put a sticker in your window. I bet you can't tell me of any Neighbourhood Watch areas that have been burgled. Really!?

 

I wonder when those stickers will be sent out?

 

Something like "All My Firearms are marked with Smartwater"!

Edited April 21, 2017 by TIGHTCHOKE

[Scully]

I don't get the 'deterrent 'part though. I'm not being deliberately awkward; I simply don't get it. If it were an all awakening brain numbing siren alarm, guaranteed to alert the entire county it may be different.

If I were in the market for stealing someones firearms, the fact it had been marked with 'smart water' or had a serial number wouldn't deter me. I simply don't understand why it should.

It's not as if it will be returned to it's rightful owner should it be recovered, especially if it is thought to have been involved in a crime. As a criminal, I'd be totally indifferent as to its fate. Puzzled.

[Christopher Graffius]

Just released this afternoon:

 

Met Police data breach compromises firearms security, says BASC

 

BASC has asked the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police to clarify the legal basis for passing on addresses of its 30,000 firearm and shotgun certificate holders to external contractors.

 

The Met has confirmed it used Leeds-based company Corporate Document Services (CDS) to print leaflets advising certificate holders of a scheme to buy a product called Smartwater to forensically mark their guns.

 

BASC, the UK’s largest shooting organisation, understands CDS in turn sub-contracted distribution of these leaflets to Yes Direct Mail, who are also based in Leeds.

 

In its letter to Met Commissioner Cressida ****, BASC has outlined concerns that the home security of certificate holders in London has been compromised by out-sourcing distribution of the leaflets.

 

The association has also asked the Met to clarify the legal authority to support an apparent breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 and wider guidelines surrounding privacy and marketing.

 

The data protection statement that both police and certificate holders agree to when an application is made only appears to give police permission to share personal details with GPs, other government departments, regulatory bodies or enforcement agencies. It does not cover commercial companies, even if they are approved by the police and hold security accreditation.

 

In addition, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) - the UK’s independent authority for promoting data privacy - says prior consent must be obtained for direct marketing and this process places a number of obligations on organisations and companies.

 

The ICO says individuals should be allowed to opt in or out of direct marketing, while companies and organisations should specify methods of communication, ask for consent to pass details to third parties or clearly name and describe those third parties and also record when and how consent was received and exactly what it covers.

 

The ICO guidance also places the onus on companies to check whether an individual has subscribed to a preference service before it contacts them with marketing information.

 

Bill Harriman, BASC’s director of firearms, said: “BASC will always work with the authorities on initiatives we consider will improve firearms security.

 

“In this instance, however, we are seeking assurances from the Metropolitan Police that the manner in which this scheme has been rolled out has not actually put at risk the home security of firearms and shotgun certificate holders. We are concerned that each time that information is passed on, it heightens the risk that sensitive, personal data will be compromised.

 

“Further, we can see no legal authority which allows the Met to breach the Data Protection Act by passing on sensitive, confidential information to as many as three external companies.

 

“The Met appears to have struck at the heart of a key tenet of firearms security, that which comes from obscurity. Those who shoot are told at every turn by the police to take every precaution against strangers discovering where firearms may be stored. Such information is currency for criminals.

 

“BASC is treating this as a potentially serious breach of trust by the Met. We do not believe certificate holders have given their permission for their sensitive, personal information to be passed to third parties.

 

“BASC remains pleased to be a member of and a significant contributor to the Metropolitan Police Firearms Licensing Independent Advisory Group and we note the force has made significant strides forward in recent years in so far as improving its service to certificate holders. We are sorry that the manner in which the force has tried to implement their Smartwater initiative risks undermining the Met’s reputation in the shooting community.”

 

ENDS

[Scully]

Good response from BASC, I must admit.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Yes, good to see they (BASC) are on the ball when the Met so obviously are NOT!

[Davyo]

I don't get the 'deterrent 'part though. I'm not being deliberately awkward; I simply don't get it. If it were an all awakening brain numbing siren alarm, guaranteed to alert the entire county it may be different.

If I were in the market for stealing someones firearms, the fact it had been marked with 'smart water' or had a serial number wouldn't deter me. I simply don't understand why it should.

It's not as if it will be returned to it's rightful owner should it be recovered, especially if it is thought to have been involved in a crime. As a criminal, I'd be totally indifferent as to its fate. Puzzled.

Maybe they want us to put big signs up outside our houses that say "I am a reg firearms holder but all my shotguns and rifles are 'smart watered".Yeh lets go the whole hog and tell everyone we hold firearms!