The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

Proposal for the replacement of existing Firearms Legislation:

1. Establish a National Database and a proper effective Monitoring System to monitor the Applicants/Grantee using one agency to administer licensing. Provide proper funding and resourcing at Public expense to satisfy the Public Safety requirements.

2. Published detailed specific Home Office guidance on the boundaries, protocols and application of same.

3. The Grant and renewal of SGC and FAC to include a Medical Examination requiring discretionary reporting powers by Doctors. Renewal period to remain at 5 years.

4. One application form with three sections. 1, General and Background Information. 2, Application for SGC. 3, Application for FAC. Only complete the relevant parts applicable to your requirements. Retain the requirement for a Referee.

5. Mandatory introductory Safety and Awareness Course from accredited providers with fixed pricing. Existing license holders exempt.

6. Existing physical Firearm Security measures are adequate.

7. Automatic Firearms and Silencers classified as Section 5.

8. All other Firearms with the exception of Shotguns (Excluding Multi-shot 3+ Shotguns) and Air Guns limited to 12ft/lbs, 6ft/lbs, to be classified as Section 1.

9. Retain the existing law on acquisition and ownership of Air Guns limited to 12ft/lbs, 6ft/lbs.

10. Retain existing classifications for Shotguns (Excluding Multi-shot 3+ Shotguns).

11. Remove licensing restrictions on the acquisition and ownership of all Section 1 Firearms to include moderators but retain the existing notifications system at Purchase or Transfer.

12. Remove existing licensing restrictions and set maximum limit realistic levels for retention of Ammunition by calibre and retain the existing notifications system at Purchase or Transfer.

13. The illegal and unlicensed ownership and or acquisition of any firearm and ammunition to carry a minimum 5 year, mandatory sentence, no remission.

14. Use of un-registered or illegal firearms for criminal purposes means mandatory 5 years added automatically to any other sentence, no remission.

I guess the medical bit will be contentious but I have no issue with it. I had to have one for Railways and my HGV/PSV license so one more is not big deal. Discretionary on the Doctor if they believe reporting is relevant having discussed it with the Applicant.

Tin hat on, over to you!

Have you been at the cooking sherry this early in the day?!!

I don't even know where to begin with the flaws in your "proposals".....

Sim G wrote:Have you been at the cooking sherry this early in the day?!!

I don't even know where to begin with the flaws in your "proposals".....

I pick up from here that you are not without knowledge and experience in such things so please explain why?

Sendit wrote:

Sim G wrote:Have you been at the cooking sherry this early in the day?!!

I don't even know where to begin with the flaws in your "proposals".....

I pick up from here that you are not without knowledge and experience in such things so please explain why?

:lol:

Dear me, i'm not looking for a fight, and Sims post might have been blunt but can we please not have a handbag fight this early in the week? :cool2:

7 & 11 are at direct odds with each other for a start, whats the difference between a moderator and a 'silencer' except ones an accurate term and the other comes from Hollywood?

Do you have any reasoning behind the prejudice against multi-shot shotguns 8 & 10? Up until 1988 there was no such thing as a restricted semi-auto or pump action shotgun, they all came with the standard 4+1/5+1 capacity. Then after Hungerford Douglas Turd*, took the opportunity to restrict them onto FAC's because he personally disliked them, not because they were especially dangerous, or one had been used in the Hungerford shootings.

*

Dear oh dear if thats what shooters think then we are truly goosed.

FAC's should be issued along the lines of the way that SGC's are currently. With no restrictions on moderator purchases ammunition limits, number or calibre of firearms held. Plus there should be no administration costs to the applicant, and just one reference.

If you're a fit and proper person to hold one firearm, you should be able choose how many you require.

But hey, If you want to put hurdles in place, then it may be best to keep some of the more restrictive ideas quiet.

How long before one of the big organisations takes over the training course you suggested? The government contracts everything they can out these days, and the private sector can be uncompetative when there's a mandatory qualification to be sold/a monopoly to be had.

There's some strange 'anti' style ideas being voiced on this forum I've noticed.

Anyway. I'm alright Jack, Pull up the ladder.

DL. wrote:FAC's should be issued along the lines of the way that SGC's are currently. With no restrictions on moderator purchases ammunition limits, number or calibre of firearms held. Plus there should be no administration costs to the applicant, and just one reference.

If you're a fit and proper person to hold one firearm, you should be able choose how many you require.

Sadly I'll expect to see legislation like that just after a defence review that leads to an increase in defence spending and the budget that reduces the tax on alcohol.... Firearms legislation can only ever get tougher; that's how politics works. It may not make sense to us shooters but we are a very very small and insignificant minority and there are votes to be had in stricter gun laws.

There will never be a reversal in the firearms legislation we have so the best we can hope for is to iron out its more absurd inconsistencies. The one that might fly is the removal of restriction to particular calibres. When I got my first FAC it was for six 'full bore' pistols.

DL. wrote:FAC's should be issued along the lines of the way that SGC's are currently. With no restrictions on moderator purchases ammunition limits, number or calibre of firearms held. Plus there should be no administration costs to the applicant, and just one reference.

If you're a fit and proper person to hold one firearm, you should be able choose how many you require.

But hey, If you want to put hurdles in place, then it may be best to keep some of the more restrictive ideas quiet.

How long before one of the big organisations takes over the training course you suggested? The government contracts everything they can out these days, and the private sector can be uncompetative when there's a mandatory qualification to be sold/a monopoly to be had.

There's some strange 'anti' style ideas being voiced on this forum I've noticed.

Anyway. I'm alright Jack, Pull up the ladder.

Totally agree with all of that..except I don't mind paying for it, or even paying a bit more if the admin was much quicker!

If you're a target shooter and a member of a club, why would you need a training course? You get this every time you shoot!

Still prefer my idea...........



That's all I have to say on this subject, until we get a sensible government and an enlightened public, nothing will improve anyway. So that's never.

LeighC wrote:an enlightened public

Something went wrong at some point in the history of this country regarding the attitude towards firearms and I doubt it can be reversed.