UK Shooters sign this if you agree.....

#4
138 for advice on what is being proposed:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2015-2016/0134/en/16134en.pdf
Statutory Guidance

138 HMIC published a report in September 2015 on the outcome of their inspection of police firearms licensing departments. Police licensing departments deal primarily with the licensing of shotguns and other civilian firearms, for use by farmers and in recreational shooting. The report, Targeting the risk: An inspection of the efficiency and effectiveness of firearms licensing in police forces in England and Wales, September 2015, HMIC, recommended strengthening the safeguards in the current licensing regime and improving consistency across forces in the procedures they follow. To this end, clause 81 introduces a power to issue statutory guidance to chief officers on the exercise of their firearms licensing functions, with a duty on chief officers to have regard to the guidance.
Can't see where it says only Police will have input into the guidance. It's talking about making the guidance statutory (Statutory Instrument or ACOP as with explosives) so that you get consistency across forces in licensing.

I'm all for consistency but not for plod only involvement (which I can't see)
 
#6
138 for advice on what is being proposed:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2015-2016/0134/en/16134en.pdf


Can't see where it says only Police will have input into the guidance. It's talking about making the guidance statutory (Statutory Instrument or ACOP as with explosives) so that you get consistency across forces in licensing.

I'm all for consistency but not for plod only involvement (which I can't see)
More about it here ...UK police will be able to write and enforce firearms law. We must stop this
 
#7
SB- on an aside did you know (I just found out myself) that Mr R Ash... we mentined in previos exchanges was involved in the famous Vickers Machine Gun test where they used up vitually all stock of .303 that was left?
 
#8
#9
SB- on an aside did you know (I just found out myself) that Mr R Ash... we mentined in previos exchanges was involved in the famous Vickers Machine Gun test where they used up vitually all stock of .303 that was left?
Was he? Not sure why as a he was Sussex not Surrey. His oppo in Surrey was but wasn't aware Rodders was. Do you have a source on that please?
 
#10
Thanks, I've seen some of the comments but I've yet to see where it says black and white only plod will be consulted. When I do, the petition gets my vote and also the PM and HS get a letter. Cheers
I picked the petition link up from a shooting site , I cant answer your question but I signed as I cant see the petition doing any harm! Cheers.
 
#11
I picked the petition link up from a shooting site , I cant answer your question but I signed as I cant see the petition doing any harm! Cheers.
Roger, understood. Personally I'd rather see the white paper laying out exactly what the legislation proposes and then (if applicable), fight that (and send my letters to PM and HS).

Is it on the BASC site yet? I'd have thought if there was any truth in it, they would be all over it like a tramp on chips :)
 
#12
Roger, understood. Personally I'd rather see the white paper laying out exactly what the legislation proposes and then (if applicable), fight that (and send my letters to PM and HS).

Is it on the BASC site yet? I'd have thought if there was any truth in it, they would be all over it like a tramp on chips :)
I cant see it on the BASC site bit its here Stop Clause 81 - Please Can You Sign - General Discussion

and here Police to be given power to make firearms law? - Page 3
 
#13
Roger, seen. Estudiente?

This is a petition to ask for a clause in a govt paper to be debated but the premise of the petition doesn't seem to be on the consultation paper ie nowhere does it say only plod will be consulted. If BASC thought that it would be all over their site and articles in Shooting Times.

Back to basics, this requires primary legislation so it will (irrespective of any petition), be debated, so the petition at a basic level is superfluous. I'm genuinely perplexed where the idea that there won't be cross party consultation has come from and as above its primary legislation anyway so will be debated. It's like the ACOPs for explosives. Wide consultation before publication and enforced by H&SaW Act

Cheers, Scaley
 
#14
This reads to me like putting home office guidance on a statutory footing, so that arseend constabulary can no longer make up rules for themselves.

In which case, surely this is a good thing?
 
#15
This reads to me like putting home office guidance on a statutory footing, so that arseend constabulary can no longer make up rules for themselves.

In which case, surely this is a good thing?
Indeed, albeit the petition suggests that no other outside parties eg BSSC would be engaged. There's no evidence that only plod would be involved, but the petition has been published. Even if it gets 100,000 signatures the most that can be hoped for is debate in Parliament. As it requires primary legislation there will already be a debate in Parliament
 
#18
Done
 
#19
Done
 
#20
Hi new to the forum but stumbled upon this whilst doing some research on this issue for an article that I am writing. clause 81 section 5 clearly states:

(5) 15Before issuing guidance under this section, the Secretary of State must
consult—

(a) the National Police Chiefs’ Council, and

(b) the chief constable of the Police Service of Scotland.”

there is no mention of any other body that the Home office will be duty bound to consult with, when making changes to the guide. This would clearly give the Home office and the police a free hand to make changes as and when they want without consultation with any other external bodies. Full document can be found here: Policing and Crime Bill (HC Bill 134)
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top