Simply possessing a firearm in your own home does not make you a threat to society, needing jail time on par with a violent criminal. Seeing as how there is no victim involved, the current sentencing rules on firearm possession are disproportionate, hidiously draconian and make a mockery of the role of judges in sentencing.

Part. 5 of The Criminal Justice Act 2003 should be repealed immediately.

Why is this idea important?

This rushed in, tabloid fueled addition to The Criminal Justice Act 2003 requires courts to impose a mandatory minimum jail sentence of five years for anyone convicted of possession of an illegal firearm, no matter if any element of intent to harm was present. This has produced many notable injustices including the lengthy imprisonment of many otherwise law-abiding people who have come into possession or simply retained firearms after the various recent amendments restricting them. Although in some cases judges have been able to use the 'exceptional circumstances' exemption, this only applies in very rare cases and still usually reflects the otherwise mandatory sentence, remaing highly disproportionate (eg, three years instead of five).


71 year old licensed gun owner jailed for five years for owning a few technically illegal guns.

Grandmother jailed for five years for having father's 80 year old pistol

Man jailed for three years for having forgotten pistol in storage:

Collector jailed for five years for having a WWII Luger and antique revolver among many deactivated pieces of weaponry.

Five years for simply owning a pistol:

Man faced five years and dragged through court for handing in abandoned shotgun:

Music teacher jailed for giving his terminally ill father his WWII pistol to end his life

2 Replies to “Repeal the five year mandatory minimum sentence for firearms possession”

  1. Yes I do fully support if not least approve of this idea of our to restore our right to bare arms, I see it has a lot of ground to because it also say’s in Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights 1689, in one of the provisions of the document(s); states that, no royal interference in the freedom of the people to have arms for their own defense as suitable to their class and as allowed by law and was (simultaneously restoring rights previously taken from Protestants by James II). I would like people around who want to defend reasonably, I would everyone to start a vast but positive campaign by educating people on firearms, what they are, and how they should be used and bring a positive message eventually. The five year mandatory sentence is can be repealed because it’s a statute requiring the consent of the people or being it’s portrayed in the corporate who presstitute media disguising it legal, namely law. No they are wrong statute with consent is law not the other way wrong and namely contractual agreement 1215 and 1229. Also Edward Coke and Justice of the Common Pleas Sir William Blackstone
    conveyed that.

  2. Tony B,Liar the most awfule self serving spychotic traitor, war crimminal and compulisve liar spued out these laws like puss from a suppurating sore! its entire cabinet contrived to create the dystopian society that Britain has become, basicaly gift wrapped us and gave us the EU he changed our Police from big able largely well adjusted men who carried a truncheon out of site to armed neds who swagger about trying to hide their character deficiances behind flack jackets, gas spreys, yank batons, handcuffs, guns and bloody pony tails, they then crimminalized literaly thousands of things, many of which innocents would never believe had been made illegal, as for jailing eldery collectors for posessing a gun for personal interest for any time never mind 5 years,, its as obcene as blai himself! I have no wish to posess a gun, and couldnt see well enought to shoot if i did, many of my freands do, and the hoops they have to jump through just to continue to pursue the past time they have had for 50 or 60 years is disgraceful!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.