Labours plan for gun licensing

[Mr.T]

Just heard on GMTV interview with Alex Norris , Shadow Minister for Policing of United Kingdom, when asked about how Labour would pay for all of their manifesto commitments the reply was “VAT on private schools and PROPER PRICING FOR GUN LICENCES”,  never heard that before 

[Poor Shot]

They cannot in any possible way raise any sort of money from increasing the cost of gun licensing. They may just about get to a point where the cost of a certificate breaks even for the more competent and efficient police forces. 

It's a just soundbite thrown into that statement to ensure that anyone listening knows that Labor will be going after guns and shooting should they win at the next general election. These interviews are usually quite short and politicians are well versed in getting as much in to as little time and vice versa if the interview isn't going well for them.  

Make no mistake, the conservatives have been bad for shooting during their tenure but should Labor get even a sniff of power then you can wave goodbye to shooting as you know it. They aren't the labor of the Blair era and times have changed regarding the hate for anything shooting related. 

Any competent presenter would have picked up on that and dug further into it. Even a lay person could figure out quite quickly that unless they propose a charge of over £25k per certificate then there is no way that paying for Labor's dreamworld can be done via the less than 100k firearms and shotgun holders that currently exist in the UK. A layperson would likely number the amount of certificates in the whole of the UK at less than 30k total.   

[oldypigeonpopper]

hello, perhaps Mr Norris thinks that all licences are bought by Tory Voters

[rbrowning2]

came to the conclusion a long time back not one politician is worth voting for.

this made me laught this morning

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68086302

quote “Politicians need to be honest” 

When has a politician ever been honest ?

 

 

[Vince Green]

58 minutes ago, Poor Shot said:

They cannot in any possible way raise any sort of money from increasing the cost of gun licensing. They may just about get to a point where the cost of a certificate breaks even for the more competent and efficient police forces. 

It's a just soundbite thrown into that statement to ensure that anyone listening knows that Labor will be going after guns and shooting should they win at the next general election. These interviews are usually quite short and politicians are well versed in getting as much in to as little time and vice versa if the interview isn't going well for them.  

Make no mistake, the conservatives have been bad for shooting during their tenure but should Labor get even a sniff of power then you can wave goodbye to shooting as you know it. They aren't the labor of the Blair era and times have changed regarding the hate for anything shooting related. 

Any competent presenter would have picked up on that and dug further into it. Even a lay person could figure out quite quickly that unless they propose a charge of over £25k per certificate then there is no way that paying for Labor's dreamworld can be done via the less than 100k firearms and shotgun holders that currently exist in the UK. A layperson would likely number the amount of certificates in the whole of the UK at less than 30k total.   

It's a good way of making a lot of Sunday morning clay shooters think "I'm not going to pay that and jack it in.

Isn't disarming the population one of the tenants of the communist manifesto?

[JohnfromUK]

41 minutes ago, oldypigeonpopper said:

perhaps Mr Norris thinks that all most licences are bought by Tory Voters

He would probably be right if the text is corrected as above.

The fact is that most people who would dislike the idea that licenses will cost more probably don't vote Labour.  Also, most people who do vote Labour probably would like to see the licenses at least 'cost neutral' with many probably wanting a high cost to discourage gun ownership.

Sadly police forces have bandied about high figures (I have heard £500 mentioned) for licensing.  Either they haven't really got a clue what it actually costs, or they are very inefficient of it does cost that much.

Realistically - a new application that does require some 'research' may take a little time and a visit to chat/inspect site, facilities etc.  However renewal (in most circumstances) should be a fairly straightforward matter unless some major change has occurred.

Edited January 25 by JohnfromUK

[Poor Shot]

7 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Sadly police forces have bandied about high figures (I have heard £500 mentioned) for licensing.  Either they haven't really got a clue what it actually costs, or they are very inefficient of it does cost that much.

If you've ever worked with or for the government, civil service or one of their bodies then you'd know just how quickly costs can spiral out of control for even the simplest of tasks. 

Where there is even the slightest of administration to be done you can almost guarantee that there's a modestly paid admin person to do the 8 hours worth of work in 40 hours (possibly two for when the one goes on long term sick), a supervisor to look after them, a manager to manage them and a director to direct them. Possibly even a very high paid consultant for them to consult with. 

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, Poor Shot said:

If you've ever worked with or for the government, civil service or one of their bodies then you'd know just how quickly costs can spiral out of control for even the simplest of tasks. 

Where there is even the slightest of administration to be done you can almost guarantee that there's a modestly paid admin person to do the 8 hours worth of work in 40 hours (possibly two for when the one goes on long term sick), a supervisor to look after them, a manager to manage them and a director to direct them. Possibly even a very high paid consultant for them to consult with. 

Agreed - but that's where the "very inefficient" comes in ......... and the customer should not be made to pay for the suppliers inefficiency.  But we don't have any freedom of choice on this one.

[PeterHenry]

49 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

Isn't disarming the population one of the tenants of the communist manifesto?

As its largely about the working class rising up to overthrow the bourgeoisie, it doesn’t really touch on gun control as a book. Also, one of its authors was incredibly keen on fox hunting....

[Gordon R]

Quote

Possibly even a very high paid consultant for them to consult with. 

Sadly, fairly accurate. The Civil Service, in common with the NHS and other bodies throw money at consultants as if it were going out of fashion.

[Fargo]

To be honest I’d happily pay £50-100 year for a gun license but I would expect much better service from licensing departments. 

It would however kill off a lot of Sunday once a month shooters which we don’t need but it’s going happen as so many clay shoots  and gun shops closing

 

[Scully]

I can’t figure out ( medical checks not withstanding ) why it should take any longer nor be more expensive than issuing a passport. 
 

[wymberley]

3 hours ago, Vince Green said:

It's a good way of making a lot of Sunday morning clay shooters think "I'm not going to pay that and jack it in.

Isn't disarming the population one of the tenants of the communist manifesto?

This was one of the 10 points detailed on a propaganda poster issued as a warning during the cold war and which detailed the requirements to render a country ripe for rebellion and thus a takeover by a communist regime.

Devon and Cornwall Constabulary aided and abetted by the Police Crime Commissioner have a different system. They just take so long to process applications that you just quietly give up and go away.

[HantsRob]

2 hours ago, Scully said:

I can’t figure out ( medical checks not withstanding ) why it should take any longer nor be more expensive than issuing a passport. 
 

A passport is validating identity only. A SGC/FAC is to ensure suitability. The time taken for the first can mostly if not solely be done online now. The latter requires a band of civvi's with management, with governance, with overheads etc.

[Boristhedog]

‘kill off a lot of Sunday once a month shooters which we don’t need’

Why don’t we need them? What’s wrong with shooting once a month, be it clays or live quarry? Some people have very busy lives, work, family other hobbies  etc and can only find time once a month. How does it harm other shooters who can spend more time shooting?  

[Poor Shot]

I think that for firearms licensing to be truly efficient, it needs to privatised with the Police being asked to supplement criminal records in some shape or form. A private company would have a financial and contractual obligation to adhere to agreed SLAs. It would cost a bit more but I'm sure many would prefer to pay an additional fee to ensure they are provided with a reasonable level of service with actual timescales for grants, renewals and variations. It's also more likely that a private company would not be politically motivated and can be consistent in their approach across the UK.

There are three separate police force areas within South Wales. All have a differing approach (as well as timescales) to how new grants are approved, what calibres are permitted and each are at odds with each other. Depending on post code you could get an initial grant for a .22LR and .223 centrefire, a grant for .17 HMR only or a grant for .17 HMR and .223 but with a mentor condition. If you live in one force area but have permission to shoot in another and have a closed ticket, you have 0% chance of any force area granting a certificate on land outside of their area that hasn't been previously surveyed and approved by that particular force. My particular force did not have access to the records of the other forces, had not surveyed any land since prior to 2019 and had a 2 year wait list before they'll even consider checking it out via OS maps much less actually visit in person and provide any sort of approval. 

As it stands the police have no desire to handle firearms licensing and most would rather see the population disarmed completely. They simply don't have the inclination to improve as the faster they work through the backlog then the more license holders they have on file and more work involved with renewals, variations etc. There no penalties for poor performance and no comeback on chief constables who preside over forces that are the lowest ranked. As we saw with D&C it takes a death before anyone outside even notices there is an issue. Even then it just caused the complete shutdown of all licensing activities in that force. 

[JohnfromUK]

2 minutes ago, Poor Shot said:

There no penalties for poor performance and no comeback

Sadly applies to virtually all of the 'public sector' including the massive civil service, HMRC, Post Office etc.

[HantsRob]

1 hour ago, Boristhedog said:

‘kill off a lot of Sunday once a month shooters which we don’t need’

Why don’t we need them? What’s wrong with shooting once a month, be it clays or live quarry? Some people have very busy lives, work, family other hobbies  etc and can only find time once a month. How does it harm other shooters who can spend more time shooting?  

I think you have misinterpreted.

"we don't need it killing off a lot of once a month shooters" is the meaning behind what was written. So they agree with you. 

[Vince Green]

57 minutes ago, Boristhedog said:

‘kill off a lot of Sunday once a month shooters which we don’t need’

Why don’t we need them? What’s wrong with shooting once a month, be it clays or live quarry? Some people have very busy lives, work, family other hobbies  etc and can only find time once a month. How does it harm other shooters who can spend more time shooting?  

We absolutely do need them, we need the money they generate within the sport. The money they pay out to clubs and in the shops. The money they spend on magazines and the friends they introduce to come and have a go.

[Scully]

1 hour ago, HantsRob said:

A passport is validating identity only. A SGC/FAC is to ensure suitability. The time taken for the first can mostly if not solely be done online now. The latter requires a band of civvi's with management, with governance, with overheads etc.

It is, but that doesn’t explain why a renewal/variation can take months even though suitability was established at initial application up to five years ago, and even less so given that it isn’t unknown for licensing to STILL get it wrong. 🤷‍♂️

Passport applications aren’t always straightforward, but renewals are, and speedily sorted. 

[HantsRob]

27 minutes ago, Scully said:

It is, but that doesn’t explain why a renewal/variation can take months even though suitability was established at initial application up to five years ago, and even less so given that it isn’t unknown for licensing to STILL get it wrong. 🤷‍♂️

Passport applications aren’t always straightforward, but renewals are, and speedily sorted. 

A revalidation of a passport would use existing datastreams. 

A persons life can massively change in 5 years. Consider domestic abuse, mental ill health, losing a job and becoming insolvent, or just having lots of issue with the neighbours. I do understand that if literally nothing has changed it should be a quick check, but the full checks will still be required to adhere to a standard of safety. 

[Boristhedog]

50 minutes ago, HantsRob said:

I think you have misinterpreted.

"we don't need it killing off a lot of once a month shooters" is the meaning behind what was written. So they agree with you. 

Thanks, I had!  

[Genghis]

The future of shooting looks really grim under Labour. Not enough attention is being paid to Luke Pollard, who still is pushing for a ban on pump actions and has floated the idea of guns being banned from being stored at home.

 

The same argument is presented by him and his supporters all the time - ‘only farmers need guns’. If any notable shooting incident happens while Labour are in power, I genuinely believe we’ll see the end of shooting for the majority of the country.

 

No shooting man should vote Labour.

[London Best]

5 minutes ago, Genghis said:

No shooting man should vote Labour.

I have been saying this for years, and have previously posted those exact words on this forum........somewhere.

[Windswept]

31 minutes ago, HantsRob said:

A persons life can massively change in 5 years. Consider domestic abuse, mental ill health, losing a job and becoming insolvent, or just having lots of issue with the neighbours. I do understand that if literally nothing has changed it should be a quick check, but the full checks will still be required to adhere to a standard of safety. 

Most, if not all of that, is notified to your licencing authority already and, if serious enough to prevent renewal, it would mean revocation of your current licence.

I thought that was one of the main benefits of moving to a 10 year licence, give the police more time to monitor existing licence holders and revoke licences if necessary.