Repeal the Firearms Act 1968 and amendments


My proposal is to seek the repeal of the 1968 Fierarms Act and its ammendments. A new Firearms Act is long overdue. Not simply to tinker and ammend but to look for the best legislation. They have proved outdated and not fit for purpose. The current legislation and its 2002 guidance are both draconian and lax, but not logical. It is my role, for a Constabulary to use this Act to licence certificate holders. The ammendments especially are without doubt pure reactive legislation, which as can be seen by recent events have failed to adequatley protect the public in general or the shooting community.

Proposals for a new Act could include such matters as;

  1. A single certificate rather than the current two
  2. Provision to licence people not the firearms
  3. Introduction of statutory  accredited training courses in order to support applications
  4. Statutory reporting by GP's of illnesses, injuries or medications which might affect continued holding of a certificate
  5. Introduction of review panels to deal with appeals against revocation or refusal by Chief Constables. Rather than the current use of Crown Courts.
  6. Formalise to a national standard for training and operation of Firearms Licensing Officers/Management.
  7. To provide a time limited certificate suspension, rather than revocation of a certificate as the only option in circumstances that require investigation.
  8. Provide fixed penalties for minor offences and or formal cautions.
  9. To revisit Lord Cullen's report to review the return of handguns for target shooting.
  10. The provision of a national body to oversea Firearms Licensing.
  11. Statutory self reporting by certificate holders of certain life changing events which might affect short or long term gun ownership
  12. To provide a debate on new legislation by a body, having specialised knowledge and for that body to be the only forum to provide future legislation to the Home Secretary. 
  13. To provide a better understanding of how implementation can be achieved calling on the input of the practitioners not just the representative bodies. Shooting is a practical issue and should not be legislated upon for political capitol or furtherance of organisational standing.

Whilst this is only a flavour of a Future Firearms Act much could be achieved. 

Why does this matter?

The current act and guidance does not provide safety for anyone, from the Constabulary's who are damned if they do and dammed if they don't. Through to the member of the public who might be threatened by an out of control neighbour. The shooting community in all its guises are viewed in a jaundice manner, due to lack of understanding and ill informed, sensationalised press coverage.

In order to implement the Act in its current form is inefficient and costly to certificate holders, Constabulary's and the Home Office.

A new Act would provide much greater safeguards for the public.

Increase revenues through Change.

Integrate the knowledge of the Law abiding firearm holders into the fight against gun crime and illegal guns by not making them feel criminalised.

 

Suggested by and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . 2 Comments.

2 Responses to Repeal the Firearms Act 1968 and amendments

  1. Paul Case says:

    I do believe this will encourage the public to respond to the safety and responsibility of using firearms in responsibly; to prevent crime, and having an armed population will play a part in the security of the national state and the protection(s) of free people(s) certain provisions will need to be followed on this and pay a attention of reducing terrorism on home soil with civilian and alertness training instead of outsourcing to private security company(s) i.e. the prevention of terrorism act with further enactments of public and amendment/ing to the security policy. Solid engagements with border protections, with the practice of target shooting and encourage responsibility for People who do not follow the rules of Gun/Firearm(s) Procedures will lead to criminal prosecutions is not used correctly with statutory instruments/recommendation by the apropiate(d) authorities. This will direction of the Home Office and Justice Department delegation in accordance with codes of past reference….

  2. Paul Case says:

    I do believe this will encourage the public to respond to the safety and responsibility of using firearms in responsibly; to prevent gun crime, and having an armed population will play a part in the security of the national state and the protection(s) of free people(s) certain provisions will need to be followed on this and pay a attention of reducing terrorism on home soil with civilian and alertness training instead of outsourcing to private security company(s) i.e. the prevention of terrorism act with further enactments of public and amendment/ing to the security policy. Solid engagements with border protections, with the practice of target shooting and encourage responsibility for People who do not follow the rules of Gun/Firearm(s) Procedures will lead to criminal prosecutions is not used correctly with statutory instruments/recommendation by the apropiate(d) authorities. This will direction of the Home Office and Justice Department delegation in accordance with codes of past reference….

Comment on this idea

Good idea? Bad idea? Totally insane? Let us know your thoughts on this idea.