New laws coming?

[dromia]

HO reasons for firearms legislation is the ultimate in fake news.

[breacher]

HO reasons for firearms legislation is the ultimate in fake news.

Have to agree.

To prohibit something because "if it got stolen, it could be used in crime or terrorism" is crazy. Are they going to prohibit the things that HAVE been stolen and used in crime / terrorism ? Such as jet airliners, trucks and cars ?

I think THAT is what should be focused on in our push back. The fact that legislation is being considered based on prohibiting something so that it cannot be stolen, is madness.

That compared to ANY other item - theft of firearms is a negligible percentage.

[Strangely Brown]

I've checked the home office and ACPO do not get to vote on laws

Joe,
ACPO haven't existed since 2015, they were replaced by NPCC (National Police Chiefs Council).

[Sim G]

Hence “Continuity ACPO” which I penned several years ago.... like other organisations that have changed names, they ostensibly remain the same.

[Triffid]

I got an update email from the NRA this morning.

Apparently the Home Office proposals have been extended to include other similar high-power long-range rifles as well as the .50 cal, possibly using a 10,000ft/lb limit.
AND the MARS proposals have been extended to include any other 'rapid firing rifles'.

No surprise there.

Triffid

[TattooedGun]

I got an update email from the NRA this morning.

Apparently the Home Office proposals have been extended to include other similar high-power long-range rifles as well as the .50 cal, possibly using a 10,000ft/lb limit.
AND the MARS proposals have been extended to include any other 'rapid firing rifles'.

No surprise there.

Triffid

Its worrying that the NRA are just finding this out, or just publishing it to the members of their mailing list.

Those of us following this consultation, or even this thread alone, have known the impact of this is greater reaching than originally expected from the FCSA since the 9th November. Nearly 2 weeks ago.

[shugie]

If the real reason is the one being given, namely that these firearms are to be banned in case they get into the hands of terrorists, this is shameful. The powers that be are allowing the threat, and in this case a very faint threat, of terrorism to restrict the freedom of Her Majesty's loyal subjects. The Tory party at least should be receptive to this point.

[artiglio]

Unfortunately very little if any real reasoning involved, more a case of box ticking, something along the lines of,

Underling in civil service tasked,

Q- do legally held firearms present significant danger to the public. A - No
Q- given that "no" is not deemed acceptable, what can we flag up as possible issue?
( bit of blue sky thinking and few phonecalls)
A- high muzzle energy firearms and rapid rates of fire , have a possible but unlikely "high risk"

Good man knock up a proposal, that looks tough, makes for good soundbites, upsets relatively few owners / won't cost too much to recompense.

Job done, general public as a whole will neither care or understand the issue, but will like the notion of such firarms being banned, many mp's will jump on bandwagon as there is little political capital in going against a proposed ban ( assuming its the outcome of the consultation).

Best chance of swaying things is at consultation stage , so those who have not responded to the consultation and contacted their mp should do so.

[JSC]

As there is contradictory information in the public domain regarding what types of firearms this consultation is supposed to be covering, I suggest everyone writes to their MP in the first instance requesting clarification on this particular point.

All the responses to the consultation will be null and void if it transpires the Home Office are changing the scope of this as and when they please without communicating those changes to the public first.

It's a shambolic document obviously rushed through so they could tack it on to the knife/acid legislation. If we pick enough holes in it and get enough questions asked about it by our MPs, they will have to re-draft it at the very least which will delay everything and it may just end up being abandoned.

[Brian838]

MOD have also suspended .50 cal shooting - The following is from the NRA -

" The MoD have suspended .50cal shooting on their field firing ranges until
the results of the consultation are known - note to clubs to be posted later
today below. This action is singularly unhelpful; we are keeping a careful
watch to see how the MoD's regions interpret the new rules.

Civilian Shooting on MoD Owned Field Firing Ranges

Owing to a Home Office review of civilian gun club members owning and firing
12.7 mm weapon systems, DIO have suspended the surveying of fixed ranges
within a Live Firing Tactical Training Area. As such the risk of DIO staff
being involved in the planning process cannot be assessed as ALARP.
Therefore with immediate effect DIO staff are unable to provide any Weapon
Danger Area (WDA) traces for civilian gun clubs, in line with similar
direction which prohibits DIO staff producing WDA traces for military units.

Ranges likely to be affected are Salisbury Plain (Javelin), Sennybridge (F),
Warcop (C-10 and H-12), Lydd (Ser 45), and Lulworth.

Civilian shooting on MoD Gallery ranges and Electric Target Ranges where a
Range Danger Area based on surveyed fixed firing points and fixed targets
has been defined and published, will be unaffected; this accounts for the
majority of civilian shooting by NRA affiliated clubs on MoD ranges.


Andrew Mercer
Group Chief Executive & Secretary General"