HantsRob Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 (edited) Firearms licensing in England and Wales There has been heightened public concern following the recent tragic shooting of five people in Plymouth by a man who then killed himself. The Home Office is currently reviewing arrangements for the licensing of guns and will shortly be introducing new statutory guidance to be followed by all police forces. At the end of last year (2020/21), more than 565,000 people in England and Wales held a firearms licence and/or a shotgun certificate. Licences and certificates are valid for five years, and then must be renewed if the licence holder wishes to retain their firearm(s). They can be revoked by the police at any time if the holder no longer meets the conditions of their licence. Police and Crime Commissioners want to understand the public's views and ensure they are heard by the Home Office when considering possible revisions to the current rules and processes around licensing of weapons in England and Wales. Thank you for taking the time to share your views on this important subject Survey link: https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/5J7PV2K The survey will close at 5pm on Wednesday 20th October. (FYI this covers all 43 Police constabularies) Edited September 30, 2021 by HantsRob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 Thanks for the link. Good chance for all to say their piece. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HantsRob Posted September 30, 2021 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 I'd strongly recommend every member here and other forums (of course happy for anyone to post it to other shooting forums!) to give our view. Everyone deserve a right to have a say. Some views carry a stronger weight due to knowledge, but I fear this could bring stronger changes. I do personally believe a medical report should be mandatory rather than "no news is good news" and I don't think there's anything too contentious in there. Gotta be in it to win it, or rather complete it to have your opinion counted Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkedUp Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 Completed for what it is worth. It is obvious what answers they are looking for! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 Having just completed it I’m sceptical as to how much of a ‘say’ they want an individual to have! No opportunity at the end to elaborate on any of the questions. The value of completing it is extremely limited. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkedUp Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 Agree with Scully. There is no qualitative aspect to it, purely quantitive. 99% of people would vote in favour of the banks giving them free money. Economists and others in the 1% of the population would advise against it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derbyduck Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 its the same old same old ,the police where in the wrong for giving him his licence back and the knee jerk reaction comes We must be seen to be doing something ! instead of looking at their failings and sorting those out they put the blame on law abiding gun owners, in my opinion it should be made more difficult to get a shotgun certificate in the offset and medical reports and background checks should be done then . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HantsRob Posted September 30, 2021 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 To be fair, a standardised national approach to applications is a good thing. Hampshire is leading the way as a gold standard, for ensuring medical forms are submitted or the application gets binned. I can't see how anyone things this is a bad idea. This should get forces aligned and maybe play from the same rulebook, for fairness and safety. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 It’s fine asking for medical reports and social media snooping, and while the point at which you seize firearms may be pretty straightforward, at what point do you decide to revoke licenses for good? It is quite possible to have your firearms seized because you have cancer, but you’re guilty of nothing more than being unwell. The point at which someone is deemed unsuitable isn’t always clear cut, and no system is perfect unfortunately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clangerman Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 with no place for tickets holders opinion they are just after the answers they want to hear waste of time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derbyduck Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 1 minute ago, clangerman said: with no place for tickets holders opinion they are just after the answers they want to hear waste of time This ^ , also any one can fill that in whether your a gun holder or anti shooting . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 It becomes obvious when reading the survey that the PCC's are backing the police and FELWG in their quest for full cost recovery. A very weighted survey which seeks to solicit draconian replies from Joe public who didn't even realise that people actually had a firearm for recreational purposes. A completely pointless exercise designed with one end in mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 It was a very short survey intended to confirm that all shooters wanted to provide medical evidence and were happy to pay, whatever the cost. I would be happier with a marker on NHS records just to show. Firearms licence was in place. In stating the number of licences and actual guns held, I was concerned that it was intended to shock non-shooters, into a negative stance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HantsRob Posted September 30, 2021 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 2 minutes ago, CharlieT said: It becomes obvious when reading the survey that the PCC's are backing the police and FELWG in their quest for full cost recovery. A very weighted survey which seeks to solicit draconian replies from Joe public who didn't even realise that people actually had a firearm for recreational purposes. A completely pointless exercise designed with one end in mind. To be fair if they said "the price is going from £85 to £200 for a licence, but you'll be processed in 4 calendar weeks" I'd sign on the dotted line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 5 minutes ago, HantsRob said: To be fair if they said "the price is going from £85 to £200 for a licence, but you'll be processed in 4 calendar weeks" I'd sign on the dotted line. Full cost recovery has nothing to do with ensuring as much as is practical, the safety of the general public, and that's what licensing is supposed to be about. No price hike of any amount will do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HantsRob Posted September 30, 2021 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 6 minutes ago, Scully said: Full cost recovery has nothing to do with ensuring as much as is practical, the safety of the general public, and that's what licensing is supposed to be about. No price hike of any amount will do that. Oh I am aware it's salacious to make the public demand gun owners pay for everything, and it won't change timescales. My point was that if they offered a 2 tier service, I would pay the extra for an accountable and timely delivery (assuming I submit doctors letter with my application). It just seems like the PCCs want to charge more money and get a tighter control. What is funny is no-one asks about recovery of costs for Police and associated services when someone has a car crash..... heaven forbid their wallet is touched. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 6 minutes ago, Scully said: Full cost recovery has nothing to do with ensuring as much as is practical, the safety of the general public, and that's what licensing is supposed to be about. No price hike of any amount will do that. Exactly. All that is required is for the police to actually follow the procedures that are currently in place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 27 minutes ago, CharlieT said: All that is required is for the police to actually follow the procedures that are currently in place. This. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave-G Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 Swapping the word 'guidance' to 'rules' would get my vote to stop do as they like commissioners, chiefs and FLO's doing what they prefer rather than what should be plain simple uniform RULES. Exceptions should be subject to greater investigation and culpability. Why should doctors basically have to question their personal morals about their patients suitability for shooting! A firearms holder Flag on a shooters medical with a legal requirement to notify FLO if a patient becomes a risk should be sufficient. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 9 minutes ago, Dave-G said: Swapping the word 'guidance' to 'rules' would get my vote to stop do as they like commissioners, chiefs and FLO's doing what they prefer rather than what should be plain simple uniform RULES. Exceptions should be subject to greater investigation and culpability. Why should doctors basically have to question their personal morals about their patients suitability for shooting! A firearms holder Flag on a shooters medical with a legal requirement to notify FLO if a patient becomes a risk should be sufficient. But then it becomes a necessity to determine ‘risk’. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 16 minutes ago, Dave-G said: Swapping the word 'guidance' to 'rules' would get my vote to stop do as they like commissioners, chiefs and FLO's doing what they prefer rather than what should be plain simple uniform RULES. Exceptions should be subject to greater investigation and culpability. Dave, I believe that is what is due happen soon when "the guidance" becomes statutory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derbyduck Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 12 minutes ago, Dave-G said: Why should doctors basically have to question their personal morals about their patients suitability for shooting! A firearms holder Flag on a shooters medical with a legal requirement to notify FLO if a patient becomes a risk should be sufficient. this^ in todays Blame and Claim culture where would this leave the doctor if he signed to say a patient was fit to hold a certificate and they turnout to be unfit and take lives ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 1 minute ago, derbyduck said: this^ in todays Blame and Claim culture where would this leave the doctor if he signed to say a patient was fit to hold a certificate and they turnout to be unfit and take lives ? To be fair, GP's are are only required to state that the applicant does not/has not suffered from specific conditions. They most certainly are not asked to give their opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derbyduck Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 4 minutes ago, CharlieT said: To be fair, GP's are are only required to state that the applicant does not/has not suffered from specific conditions. They most certainly are not asked to give their opinion. 👍 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stu64 Posted September 30, 2021 Report Share Posted September 30, 2021 Just to give some balance, and all the respondents aren't 55 year old white males, I signed in as a 40 year old jamaican/carribean female. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.