Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

UK: Gun licenses at highest level in 30 years

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • UK: Gun licenses at highest level in 30 years

    Firearm certificates at highest level in 30 years

    Latest figures released by the Home Office show that the number of firearms certificates on issue are at the highest level since 1988.

    The report, outlining the number of firearm and shotgun certificates in England and Wales, says there were 157,581 firearm certificates on issue as at 31st March 2018, an increase of two per cent (2,623) compared with the previous year (154,958).

    This is the highest number of firearm certificates on issue since “comparable” records began following the introduction of the National Firearms Licensing Management System (NFLMS) (138,728 as at 31st March 2009).

    Paul Dale, BASC’s head of firearms, said analysis of wider Home Office figures showed that the number of firearm certificates on issue is the highest since 1988.

    “The number of firearm certificates on issue started to decrease between 1988 and 2002 but has been steadily rising ever since to give us the figure we see today,” he said.

    “The more people who take part in shooting sports, the louder our voice and better our position for promoting the sport becomes.”

    The Home Office figures also show an increase of one per cent in the number of shotgun certificates on issue, bringing the total to 567,047 as of 31st March 2018.
    ENDS
    http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent/new...4/#commentsBox

    Legal gun licences surge in Kent over 10 years
    The number of legally-held guns in Kent has increased significantly over the last decade.

    There were 23,360 licensed firearms in the county in March this year, up from 14,888 in 2009, a rise of 56%.

    The newly released figures from the Home Office exclude shotguns, which are licensed separately.

    It means there are 1,283 firearms for every 100,000 people in Kent, an increase of 45% from March 2009, when local records were first collated.
    It is the highest rate at any point over the last decade.

    In total, 5,799 valid firearm licences in Kent covered an average of four guns each.

    There were a further 52,556 licenced shotguns in the area - also an increase on a decade ago.

    Gill Marshall-Andrews, chairwoman of the Gun Control Network, said that society should be working towards fewer guns, and that the rise in legal firearms was difficult to explain.

    She said: "We campaign strongly for tighter licensing laws and those have been introduced, by and large.

    "It is becoming more difficult to get a gun licence, so I have no idea why it has gone up.

    "Unless we are going to say that nobody should have a gun - and we have never said that - you should have a good reason to own a gun, and you should be a proper person.

    "The guidance is stricter and the licencing regulations, if properly applied, should mean that fewer people have a gun.


    "For years and years, the shooting lobby has said that gun crime is just a matter of illegal weapons, but it is not true to say that gun deaths are related to illegal weapons alone."

    Between April 2017 and March this year, there were 418 new applications for firearm licences in Kent.

    Of those, 99% were granted, and just five were refused.

    A further 1,072 licences were renewed. Just four licences were revoked.

    The firearm rate in Kent was higher than that across England and Wales, where 578,000 firearms - 989 for every 100,000 people - were licensed.
    In 2016-17, the most recent year for which numbers are available, there were 31 fatal shootings in England and Wales.

    Altogether, there were nearly 10,000 offences in which firearms were reported to have been used.

    Of those, 64 took place in Kent.

    Many gun crimes involve the use of illegal firearms either weapons converted to fire live ammunition, or restored antiques.

    But some high-profile cases, including the murder of MP Jo Cox in 2016 - which was carried out with a stolen gun - and mass killings in Cumbria, Dunblane and Hungerford, have involved licensed weapons.

    A spokesman for the National Police Chiefs' Council said: "It is the responsibility of individual forces to issue firearms certificates, and there are several reasons why the number of legally-held firearms may have risen in the last decade, such as changes in legislation.

    "Therefore, the increase in the number of legally-held firearms is not necessarily a cause for concern.

    "The Home Office are constantly monitoring the types of weapons that are held on and off certificate and consult on changes to legislation when required.
    "Only a tiny percentage, something in the region of 0.025%, of legally-held firearms goes missing each year, and that is when they become a significant concern for police.

    "The Home Office and local police forces provide guidance on the appropriate storage of firearms and ammunition to certificate holders and are continuing to work to ensure that this already small number of missing weapons is reduced further."
    http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent/new...4/#commentsBox

    Happy for the gun nuts across the pond, remember to keep buying and practicing.

    Bolded: I love how the gun grabber is just so baffled that despite decades of propaganda and vilification, more people want to get into shooting.

  • bfc1001
    replied
    A good friend of mine has just taken his kid shooting at a gun club . He said they enjoyed it and eventually you can get to fire an AK-47 should you so please . Seems a bit expensive though for what it is , £32 for an hour with 50 bullets (don't really know what the going rate is). Not a massive fan of gun ownership , but in a controlled environment it can work for me .

    Leave a comment:


  • HisRoyalHighness
    replied
    Originally posted by Mordoror View Post

    Idea is not bad though. Implementation is another thing. Yet people are accepting physical evaluation to keep their driver licence. Some people are not suited or suited anymore to drive, some people are not suited to have guns. Controls are supposed to be done to protect the society from this risk.
    Thing is we do have controls but they are not being enforced as well as they could be.

    Also like Kiwi said it’s subjective to the bias of the psychologist who may be anti-gun at the moment as the APA threw their lot in with Hogg. Where as normal background checks are far more objective, provable, and can be done without straining our mental health care: You got charged and convicted for beating your wife in a court of law? No gun. You got thrown in the loony bin for cutting yourself and making suicide threats over FaceBook? No gun. You have a provable drug addiction? No gun.

    Plus there’s also the logistical aspect of it: How many mental health professionals do you think are in the United States? Probably not that much given how shit our mental health care is. Now multiple the number of individuals the shrinks have to see by 1,000.

    Our mental health care would collapse and the people who really need it would have to wait months or even years.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mordoror
    replied
    Originally posted by TheKiwi View Post
    Perhaps because psych is a lot more subjective than a physical test such as eye-sight or co-ordination. Can you read the eye chart at the prescribed distance? Good, then you can drive. Easily done. (Yes I know there are other things looked for included whether you are on medication that might cause issues). But a psych test comes down to how gaga the shrink thinks you are. Much easier to make things up.
    That's true. That's a part that makes implementation difficult.

    Leave a comment:


  • TheKiwi
    replied
    Perhaps because psych is a lot more subjective than a physical test such as eye-sight or co-ordination. Can you read the eye chart at the prescribed distance? Good, then you can drive. Easily done. (Yes I know there are other things looked for included whether you are on medication that might cause issues). But a psych test comes down to how gaga the shrink thinks you are. Much easier to make things up.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mordoror
    replied
    I see it as grounds for discrimination, it adds another layer of unconstitutional infringement costs, and effectiveness is questionable to say the least:
    Idea is not bad though. Implementation is another thing. Yet people are accepting physical evaluation to keep their driver licence. Some people are not suited or suited anymore to drive, some people are not suited to have guns. Controls are supposed to be done to protect the society from this risk.

    Leave a comment:


  • HisRoyalHighness
    replied
    Originally posted by budgie View Post


    Probably because the UK doesn't have quite the same problem with guns as the US.
    Probably because the problem isn't with the guns or current gun laws but the inability to enforce them, lack of adequate mental health facilities especially in rural areas, and lacking the necessary resources to crush the murderous urban gangs through gentrification and broken window policing which crushed gangs in the former crime capital of New York City.

    Canada has relaxed gun laws, extremely easy to acquire non-restricted firearms like the SKS, high number of restricted firearms like AR-15 derivatives plus handguns that are reasonably available, and they've had only three mass shootings in the past 30 years as well as having a lower homicide per capita rate than the United States, France, Germany, and Italy.

    Originally posted by Mordoror View Post

    HisRoyalHighness
    I don't see why this is labelled as a retarded law proposal
    Especially after quite a few past examples of things turning hugly with the mix psy issues + guns
    I see it as grounds for discrimination, it adds another layer of unconstitutional infringement costs, and effectiveness is questionable to say the least:

    Reforms simplify gun permit applications in Finland

    Psychological checks "don't serve intended purpose"


    Also at the beginning of next year, gun permit applicants will no longer be required to undergo a psychological evaluation.

    Snellmann says the current evaluations are inadequate anyway.
    "It's true that [the police] have long considered that the tests don't serve their intended purpose," Snellmann says.
    "Very few applicants fail the test. People can go to a doctor and if the doctor decides that a permit can be granted, they get their permit," he says.
    Stricter laws on gun ownership were imposed following school shootings in Finland in 2007 and 2008 that left 20 people dead.
    https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/r...inland/9740331

    Plus tyrants in areas like New Jersey and California will use it to deny anyone a firearm if they for example have manageable OCD or social anxiety or even acute depression.
    Last edited by HisRoyalHighness; 10-07-2018, 07:15 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mordoror
    replied
    submitting to a psychological evaluation
    HisRoyalHighness
    I don't see why this is labelled as a retarded law proposal
    Especially after quite a few past examples of things turning hugly with the mix psy issues + guns

    Leave a comment:


  • budgie
    replied
    Originally posted by HisRoyalHighness View Post

    On the flip side, no where in the UK’s laws are there laws like raising the age to buy a firearm/shotgun from 18 to 21, banning all semi-auto firearms (rimfire), having mandatory insurance, submitting to a psychological evaluation, nor other retarded laws being proposed by the gun grabbers in the United States.

    Probably because the UK doesn't have quite the same problem with guns as the US.

    Leave a comment:


  • HisRoyalHighness
    replied
    Originally posted by budgie View Post
    Excellent news: it demonstrates how proper licensing is not an impediment to gun ownership. UK has sensible gun laws and ownership is going up.
    More like ownership is growing despite the attempt to stifle it which is what the gun grabber in Kent is complaining about.

    Looking at UK laws around firearms, the only thing reasonable is their smoothbore license where the onus is on the police to prove you shouldn’t have a shotgun and you don’t have to endlessly justify a reason for having it aside from saying shooting sports.

    That being said, you still have to inform the nanny state each time you buy a new shotgun and they have to inspect your safe.

    On the flip side, no where in the UK’s laws are there laws like raising the age to buy a firearm/shotgun from 18 to 21, banning all semi-auto firearms (rimfire), having mandatory insurance, submitting to a psychological evaluation, nor other retarded laws being proposed by the gun grabbers in the United States.
    Last edited by HisRoyalHighness; 09-07-2018, 05:07 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • budgie
    replied
    Excellent news: it demonstrates how proper licensing is not an impediment to gun ownership. UK has sensible gun laws and ownership is going up.

    Leave a comment:


  • primer
    replied
    BSA, Parkerhale. There are still tonnes of those kicking around in NZ. About time for a revival. If highly paid Germans can do it. Brexicaners can too.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X