History Of GCN

Gun control consists of all the laws passed to regulate the production, distribution, sale, ownership and use of firearms. It also comprises the regulations pertaining to firearm licensing and the process of applying to become a gun owner. Firearms, being potentially lethal items, are necessarily subject to tight controls on their ownership and use, including where they can be used. The broad framework of firearm regulation in Great Britain stems from the 1968 Firearms Act, as amended. Although there is now a body of opinion suggesting that this legislation, having been so much amended and become so complex, and not forgetting significant changes in firearm technologies since the 1960s, is now in need of clarification, updating and coordination.

Nevertheless, the broad success of British gun control might be demonstrated by the internationally low rates of gun crime experienced in Great Britain, representing less than 0.2% of recorded crime. The international evidence is fairly clear; countries investing most in gun control tend to have the lowest rates of gun crime. In the USA too, the states with the strictest gun regulations experience the lowest rates of gun violence.

However, at the end of the day, gun control is essentially made up of laws and the willingness to enforce them effectively. Yet having laws alone will not simply banish crime, just as gun controls are ignored by offenders keen to obtain firearms. The key lies in maintaining vigilance in the face of new firearm threats (such as 3D printed firearms and convertible blank firers) and revising, tightening and amending laws as the need arises. Gun control is not an end, but a process looking to keep the country safe by preventing the proliferation of firearms.

It is a myth that only illegal guns are used in crime. Gun crimes are committed with both legal and illegally-held weapons. Almost every mass shooting in Britain (including Hungerford, Dunblane, Cumbria, Keyham) was carried out by a man who had been allowed to own his weapons legally. This is also true for a majority of the domestic shootings in which women are the victims. A significant proportion of all gun offences is carried out with weapons (airguns, airsoft) which are legal as no licence is required for them.

Gun ownership in the UK is a privilege, not a right. The guiding principle behind the requirement to have a ‘good reason’ to possess, purchase or acquire firearms or ammunition, is that firearms are dangerous weapons and the state has a duty to protect the public from their misuse. In general, applicants should be able to demonstrate that they use their firearm on a regular, legitimate basis for work, sport or leisure (including collections or research).

Apart from having a ‘good reason’ in principle, an applicant’s reasons for owning firearms should be genuine. Chief officers of police should exercise caution in dealing with cases where the applicant presents a nominal reason for possessing firearms but may have ulterior motives.

The police will be expected to make reasonable inquiries to verify the applicant’s ‘good reason’ for the possession of firearms. This may include:
• a request for written authorities where relevant (and possible)
• verification of the likelihood of the quarry species being present
• the suitability of land for the firearms requested commensurate with the applicant’s experience
• their authority to shoot on the land
• in the case of target shooters, verification of club membership and shooting activities
• In the case of collectors, activity, including academic research, membership of recognised bodies etc.

‘Good reason’ should be neither confined to need nor equated with desire.

The real cost of issuing a robust gun licence, one which covers the full cost of thoroughly investigating and monitoring an applicant, is estimated to be £500. The current fee is around £80 for a licence that lasts for five years, i.e. £16 a year. Because of this ongoing discrepancy, the provision of an adequate service has a significant impact on the police budget. This affects policing in every community in the country.

Failure to apply government policy of ‘full cost recovery’ means the system is effectively being subsidised by the taxpayer. With 500,000 licences this amounts to an annual subsidy of approximately £40 million.

No, though we believe there are few justifications for keeping a gun on a farm beyond needing a weapon to kill rats, other vermin and very occasionally sheep-worrying dogs. Certainly, self-defence is no more of a good reason for a farmer to own a gun than it is for anyone else. However, even if all 200,000 farmers in the UK wanted a gun it would not explain why we have over half a million shotgun licences covering around 1.5 million weapons.

The correlation between the number of guns in any society and the level of gun violence is clear and a compelling reason to permit as few guns as possible.

This industry has been in decline for many years. Today, it is estimated that there are 3000 full time gamekeepers in the UK compared to over 25,000 at the turn of the 20th century. An estimated 12,000 birds and mammals are shot and killed every day — that’s around 4.5 million annually. A ban on this wholesale slaughter would immeasurably improve the natural world. More and more understanding is being attached to the importance of nature to mental health and wellbeing, and investment in nature is growing in contrast to the declining shooting industry.

As we pursue a less violent society, a lot of things that were cruel or a threat to public safety have been banned, e.g. cock fighting, bear baiting, dog fighting, duelling…. Diversion of labour and resources from these industries into productive, sustainable work is the mark of a civilised society and has been ongoing for many years.

Gamekeepers are skilled in managing habitats, e.g. forest, moors, waterways, farmland etc., and they claim that they already manage nine times more of the countryside than exists in National Parks and Nature reserves. This work will always be required if we wish to protect our valuable wildlife rather than use it for target practice.

Moors don’t need conserving or managing — they are wild environments that existed for thousands of years before anyone started killing the birds for fun. Grouse moors are commercial enterprises, businesses operating for profit, mostly focused on ensuring that they have plenty of birds for customers to enjoy killing. Any species that directly interferes with game birds is killed.

Moorland management includes a number of activities which impoverish the overall moorland environment: laying poison and traps to kill mammals such as mice and stoats; burning heather; building butts to shoot from, and the roads and paths to service them; stocking the moors with non-native pheasants that out-compete native birds; shooting millions of lead pellets across the moors, poisoning both the environment and wildlife, and leading to dangerously contaminated game meat being consumed by humans.

Parents, care providers and teachers are always making decisions about what toys are appropriate for young children in their care. The law does not allow young children to become familiar with other potentially dangerous and harmful activities, such as smoking cigarettes or drinking alcohol, and many adults prefer that young children do not simulate gun violence by playing with toy guns. We agree with those who feel that playing at shooting is not a good sort of play and prefer to encourage toys that foster co-operation and kindness.

Brightly coloured toy guns, which are obviously not real guns, may be okay as part of fantasy activities that children can distinguish from reality. However, imitation guns should never be treated as toys. A toy gun becomes an imitation when it looks like the real thing. It can then induce fear and be used to threaten and intimidate, and falls under the Violent Crime Reduction Act of 2006. The latter defines an imitation gun as ‘anything which has the appearance of being a firearm, whether or not it is capable of discharging any shot, bullet or other missile’. The Act makes it an offence to buy, sell, carry or manufacture an imitation firearm so defined, although there is a regrettable exemption clause covering airsoft weapons.

Calls to police about guns are always treated as if the gun is real. Calling out an armed police response is expensive and potentially dangerous. Those involved, children or adults, could find themselves surrounded by firearms officers with real guns and in grave danger of being shot. The inappropriate and criminal use of imitation guns has negative consequences on the whole of society. It results in financial costs to the taxpayer in terms of policing and the justice system, and causes distress and harm to individuals.