There was an interesting article in The Guardian last week where the ‘UK gun lobby’ (BASC and Countryside Alliance) are accused of attempting to ‘skew’ a Government consultation on the tightening of gun legislation after fatal shootings in Plymouth and on the Isle of Skye.
The article can be read here.
The Westminster Government launched an eight week consultation in late June to ask for the public’s views on a number of recommendations made to the Home Office after licensed shotgun owner Jake Davison went on the rampage in Plymouth and shot and killed five people in 2021, and after licensed shotgun owner Finlay MacDonald, allegedly shot and killed one and attempted to murder others on the Isle of Skye in 2022. His trial begins next year.
The recommendations on which the Home Office is consulting all seem to be fair and proportionate, e.g. that the person applying for a shotgun certificate should provide two referees instead of one, and that at least one of the referees should be of certain standing in the community (e.g. of a professional background).
However, BASC has argued that the recommendations are ‘harmful proposals’ and has urged its members and supporters to respond to the consultation to challenge the proposals.
According to the Guardian article, ‘Peter Squires, a professor of criminology and public policy at the University of Brighton, said: “It is not unlike the way the NRA [National Rifle Association] operates in the USA, with a narrow and single-minded approach to swamping the ballots.
“Virtually every independent-minded expert agrees on what needs to be done and then the Home Office conducts one of these farcical consultations and allows the self-interested single-issue shooting lobby to school its members through the process of rejecting the proposals.
“The farce is complete when the Home Office takes the results of this skewed survey and cites public opposition to the necessary reforms as a reason for inaction.”’
The article continues: Luke Pollard, the MP for Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport, said: “The gun lobby are arguing for no changes to Britain’s broken gun laws, meaning they are deliberately failing to learn the lessons from the Plymouth shooting.
“We need ordinary people who want changes to gun laws to make a stand and send in their views to the Home Office consultation. If we don’t learn the lessons of the tragedy in Keyham, we will be doomed to repeat them.”
Given how many wildlife crimes, and especially crimes against birds of prey, are committed by licensed shotgun holders, I think readers of this blog might have a view on whether licensing laws need to be tightened.
The public consultation closes on Wednesday 23 August 2023. If you’d like to contribute to the public consultation you can do that here.
Detailed background reading is available here.
Raptor Persecution UK 
I’ve been tracking this whole process for a while. I sense that it was all a done deal from very early on, that any ideas for root and branch reform were snuffed out before they got going, and that what followed later was just window dressing. The size and scope of the consultation was made deliberately small and narrow. It would just be laughable, except it is actually going to be tragic (again) in losses of human lives.
Then there is another subject matter that is rarely discussed in context of regulating correct use of (shotguns especially) firearms – i.e. their incompetent legal use even when in the correct setting, such as the seemingly socially acceptable maiming and suffering caused to various hundreds of thousands of legal quarry, such as released pheasants and ducks on commercial shoots, where the paying Guns are often too uncaring (and / or just plain crap at shooting) but can’t admit the fact and show restraint or desist altogether.
Done!
Birdlife in North Wales had dramatically reduced thanks to anyone being allowed a gun licence! It needs to stop now!
Thanks for the pointer Ruth, I had missed this completely.
Think this para in the Guardian was quite telling from the BASC. Note the word ‘opposing’.
‘It’s director of firearms, Bill Harriman, said: “Giving people the information they need to participate in a public consultation does not oblige them to follow the advice but helps them participate. We note that others from opposing quarters – such as the Gun Control Network – have also recommended answers.”’
So that would be opposing common sense and decency then?
You are not obliged to follow this advice but the Gun Control Network are recommending ticking yes to each question except 2, 12 and 20.
In the comments box at the end, I did suggest that making an officer of a gun club a referral would be open to vested interest. (Question 5)
I also noted that the dedicated phone line should be wholly funded by the license cost and that the whole cost of the license be borne by the license holder, not the taxpayer as now. I have no wish to help fund murders!!
Me too, just found out about it here. ACW.
The landowning/sporting community object to absolutely everything – even when it’s really in their own interest as is the case here – murderous use of firearms against people doesn’t represent the firearm owning community as a whole and if they stopped and thought for just a moment they’d realise that any measure that ensures against misuse of firearms is in their interest. But just like so much else that appears on this blog they just object.
Done. It seems that the Police are taking some positive action in Cumbria. Perhaps they should also include game keepers in their intelligence led Operation Crosshair? I’m sure there are many who don’t keep their guns correctly.
https://www.lancasterguardian.co.uk/news/national/police-seize-shotguns-and-ammunition-in-kendal-during-firearms-safety-operation-4263332
I filled in the consultation. One point I made is that the applicant should pay the full cost of the entire licensing process, including all background checking, reviewing, reapplication and policing. Currently this is subsidised by the taxpayer.
Thank you Ruth and blog reader Cal Deeley for pointing out this consultation.
I added this comment at the end.
21. If you have any comments on the subject matter of this consultation, please enter below.
“I have for quite some time been very concerned that CONVICTIONS involving weapons (mostly shotguns) in committing WILDLIFE, DOMESTIC and FARMED ANIMAL CRIMES are not RECORDED by the Police for entry into the Firearm Crime Statistics (England and Wales) or Recorded Crimes and Offences Involving Firearms, Scotland.
I am incredulous at this. These are violent crimes involving dangerous, licensed weapons, yet NO STATISTICS are gathered, either regionally or nationally. Police Forces are blindsided by this official lack of oversight. Resources cannot be sought when trends may appear. Violence against animals is far too close to violence against people for this to be officially overlooked.”