National Firearms Register for the UK?

Status
Not open for further replies.

iapetus

Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2003
Messages
614
Location
UK
Currently, all (legally owned) firearms and firearms licencees in the UK are registered, but locally; there is no national register that would quickly and easily allow a police force in one part of the country to check up on the records for someone in another part of the country.

There is a desire by some to create a national register.

Would this be bad for the RKBA (or rather - would this make the RKBA in the UK even less existant than it already is)?

Or would it be no big deal, given that we already do have registration?

And could it be of any use, or would it just be a waste of time and resources?



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/4766458.stm

Dunblane parents still await gun register

By Becky Milligan
BBC Newsnight


For parents and teachers of a primary school in Dunblane it is as though it happened yesterday.




Watch the report
But on 13 March it will be 10 years since the gun obsessed loner, Thomas Hamilton, walked into their school and shot dead 16 small children and one of their teachers, before turning the gun on himself.

He was dressed in combat gear and carried an arsenal of licensed weapons.

The question following the massacre was how to stop such an atrocity ever happening again. Local and national politicians from all parties, the police and the victims' parents supported, among other measures, the creation of a National Firearms Register.

It would keep track of everyone who had a gun licence and those who'd been judged unfit to be granted one.

It would be accessible to the police across the country. At the moment, records are only held locally by forces and are not available to their colleagues in other areas.

Problems and failed pilots

The national register became the central plank of the 1997 National Firearms (Amendment) Act and became law. Nine years have passed and, to the astonishment of those who backed the firearms register, it is still not up and running.


The least we could have done to honour the children who are no longer here is to do this

Eileen Harrild
The new system has been dogged by one problem after another. I was told that the Home Office didn't approve a budget for the register until 2000. It was given a "priority three" rating which gave the impression it wasn't a priority. And so far pilots of the new database have all failed.

Eileen Harrild was one of the teachers who witnessed the killings and was shot herself, several times.

I met her in Dunblane. She has rarely spoken about the events 10 years ago but felt compelled to do so because the register is not yet in place.

"The least we could have done to honour the children who are no longer here is to do this," she said, "and 10 years on, for me to still be talking about it to you... is absolutely incredible."

Scraps of information

Like Eileen, Dr Mick North was directly caught up in that terrible day. He'd lost his wife a few years before and his only child Sophie was killed by Hamilton.


A lot of the information on Thomas Hamilton was on scraps of paper, in people's heads

Dr Mick North
He too cannot understand the delay and believes that if a register had been up and running before the massacre it could have been prevented.

"A lot of the information on Thomas Hamilton was on scraps of paper, in people's heads," he told me. "If all the information was in place and could have been printed at one time and seen by more than one police officer one would hope that someone would have thought this guy really shouldn't have a gun licence."

As far back as 2000 the Home Affairs Select Committee looked into the delay and reported that:

"We are appalled that the national database of certificate holders and applications is not yet in immediate prospect, over two years after the implementation of the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1997. We regard this system, which will allow the swift and effective exchange of information on applications made for certificates between all police forces, as absolutely central to the safe and effective operation of the firearms licensing system."

'Time to end the excuses'

The Chairman of the committee was Robin Corbett, now Lord Corbett, and over the years he has continued to demand to know what is going on.


There is no appetite in Dunblane to hold an anniversary event
I met Lord Corbett on a visit to PITO - the Police IT Organisation which is funded by the Home office and is managing the project. After his meeting he told me that PITO was optimistic the database would be up and running soon. But he said he had heard all that before:

"We're now into year nine since Parliament decided that we should have a national firearms database and it's time that all the excuses and explanations stopped. Let's have this up and delivered as Parliament intended."

He is not going to give up, neither are the parents who campaigned to change the gun laws.

Anne Cryer is a Labour MP on the home affairs select committee and was also flabbergasted that the database had not been introduced.

"Next time it could be your children, my grandchildren," she said. "No one knows. Until it is possible for police forces to do a check before giving a license there's always the potential for another Dunblane."

'Not fit for purpose'

But judging from a letter Newsnight obtained from Lancashire police, to chief constable Adrian Whiting who takes the lead on firearms policy for ACPO, the pilots are going no better. The letter states:

"The whole two weeks were marked with constant bugs, fixes and patches. No sooner was one issue resolved than another cropped up."

At the end of the letter it is clear the database is still not ready for use:

"In all, the application is fundamentally flawed and not fit for purpose."

There is no appetite in Dunblane to have an organised event on 13 March. But one parent who lost a child and decided not to take part in the film told me, "make no mistake it will happen again and we will wonder why we didn't do more post Dunblane".

Becky Milligan's report was shown on Newsnight on Wednesday, 1 March, 2006.
 
Waste of money.

Since gun laws vary across the UK (for example handguns are still legal in Northern Ireland) it should just remain local.

A national register would be effective in doing what?

Making people feel good?

It's one thing if the local constables want to know the gun owners in their jurisdiction but why should they care about shotgun owners in another?
 
Tell me how a national register would have stopped Hamilton?

The local police didn't and they are the ones charged with issuing the licenses and permits.

Blame the Dunblane police not the lack of a register
 
From the numbers I've seen, the vast majority of guns that might be used in crimes in the UK are already illegal and therefore wouldn't be registered.

This is just another way to waste tax money and an additional nuisance for law-abiding gun owners.

The only caveat would be if they eliminated the authority that the local constabulatory has over deciding who can own guns. If it's a "background check" type system, and the local cops no longer decide who can have a gun, then it might be an improvement.
 
You mean a national shall issue system that automatically gives you a permit if you meet all criteria and laws?

No local decisions on who gets a shotgun license, say for example?
 
Exactly.

The current system, as I understand it, runs contrary to the principles of the Rule of Law.
 
I'm not too familiar with the current system and how it relies on local versus national police.
 
Firearms registration doesn't—simply can't—prevent crime.

It may keep cops in pay checks. It certainly has made it easier for governments to confiscate firearms. It may be good for paper mills and/or computer makers.

Firearms registration has nothing to do with crime.
 
If the entire cost and difficulty of the scheme were borne by UK government I would say it would be a good thing, as it would be something that would keep your public servants out of even worse mischief, by tying up their time in tilting at windmills, and might even cost enough billions that conservative taxpayers in the UK threw their hands up and said "enough already!" as they apparently recently have in Canada.

Unfortunately it will probably be joe good citizen gunowner who winds up losing his money and rights over it rather than taxpayers at large in the UK (Who, let's face it, don't deserve a break, as they keep electing facist anti freedom dirtbags - and before you get too mad at me for saying that keep in mind that I think a good 35% + (at least) American politicians are facist anti freedom dirtbags).

If only we could arrange a 'citizen swap' where we exchanged American nanny state a-holes for British gunnies we'd both be so much better off. Imagine the cultural improvement at our gun ranges if we had a few guys in tweed jackets stopping for tea, and the fun the British 'football' hooligans would have thumping heads 'down the pub' if they had a few more Michael Moore's spouting the propaganda of the IRA.
 
Adrian Whiting is (or was, no sure how current) a leading member of http://www.thediehards.co.uk/ a 19th c. reenactment group whose members are, in large proportion, police officers.
No surprise the register still doesn't work, it's implementation has been repeatedly put back. See http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=111367&page=2&highlight=national+register
At most, it will save the cost of a phone call from one police department to another. It was written into the Bill against the Home Office's wishes in the first place and evidence suggests that neither they nor the police think it will be of any value.
 
The investment in gun control means they banned and limited guns to the point where they now have a crime problem.

Few good people can get them, many bad guys are armed to the teeth or commit crimes unchallenged, and no ones hired enough police and security systems to fix anything.

So the obvious answer is... drumroll please... MORE gun control!
Seeing as the criminals unregisterd guns are a problem, they now need a new and more efficient system for looking up registerd gun owners that submit to the law.
 
Another thing...

Even assuming -- however absurd this might be -- that guns used in crimes would be registered, what, exactly, would this accomplish?

Is someone who has been run over by a car any less dead if the car has current license plates and registration? How are guns any different?

People seem to speak/write as if their dead relative's death would somehow be different if the inanimate object involved in their demise were accompanied by the proper paperwork. While this notion may seem comically British, it exists here in the US as well.
 
Would this be bad for the RKBA (or rather - would this make the RKBA in the UK even less existant than it already is)?
This really does not apply; since permission - a license - can not be required to exercize a right.
Or would it be no big deal, given that we already do have registration?
It is a big deal; British subjects have not always been so strangled by the Crown and it's agents. Look what happened to Tony Martin in recent years; I can not imagine that being perpetrated on such a person in 1905 Britain - even the 1950s.
And could it be of any use, or would it just be a waste of time and resources?
It is all based on fraudulent pretenses and is therefore flat wrong.

Hamilton had been a psychiatric patient and a police informant among other things. He was groomed and carefully handled to do this IMO.

The British media, in particular the BBC and ITV, launched what could only be described as a carefully crafted piece of marketing promoting a product called "pass a new law prohibiting as many people as possible from owning handguns".

The finished advertizing campaign aired as "news" of the incident would have put Saatchi & Saatchi to shame. Teary-eyed moms - in slow motion - the same footage snippets repeated over and over again on the morning, daytime, evening and late night news, was just one of the many highlights of this propaganda campaign than ran into weeks, then months.

Had I had any kind of personal involvement, say a family member lost in the incident, I would have found it extremely offensive. Betraying it's purpose, it was laid on so thick it was disgusting.

------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.com
http://ssunitedstates.org
 
LAK

Would this be bad for the RKBA (or rather - would this make the RKBA in the UK even less existant than it already is)?

This really does not apply; since permission - a license - can not be required to exercize a right.

I agree with that sentiment. What I meant was "would this make it harder to exercise this right, or easier for future infringements to be made".

I know (just about) everyone here views RKBA as a fundamental right that should not be infringed (or require a licence), and that the general opinion is that registration is bad because it opens the way to future confiscation and/or restrictions on owners/ownership.

What I was wanting to determine was: given as we in the UK already have both registration and strict licensing, would merging local registers into a national database make these infringements (or potential infringements) worse/more likely, or would it have no additional effect (other than to waste money and make it look as if "something is being done")?
 
it's not 'merging' anyway; it would still be run by Force firearms licencing managers.
There's less to this than meets the eye. Still doesn't work of course, just like the CSA and CAFCASS and the other long lists of public service IT projects that don't work
 
iapetus
What I was wanting to determine was: given as we in the UK already have both registration and strict licensing, would merging local registers into a national database make these infringements (or potential infringements) worse/more likely, or would it have no additional effect (other than to waste money and make it look as if "something is being done")?
While it is easy for some to say it would be "no worse" and point out the "ineffectiveness" of other programs and controls, it is worse because it moves the firearms issue closer to total centralization.

Bear in mind I lived in the UK for many years and had both a shotgun certificate in the early 1970s and a firearms certificate in the late 80s, so am familiar with the issues pre and post Hungerford and Dunblain.

We have a similar situation here in the USA where there is an almost constant pressure edging us closer to contralization in the form of taking regulation and control away from States and handing them over to the Federal government. Of course the UK does not have "states", but historically at least the local jurisdiction in these matters by chiefs of police is preferable to the pen stroke yay or nay of a single bureaucrat in the Home Office. There is still hope too that entities like the Scottish parliament might be able to enact it own preferences in matters like these as opposed to London. Wishful thinking to some perhaps, but down the road Wales and Northern Ireland (interesting subjects in themselves) might follow.
-----------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org
 
It might keep a few more useless government drones occupied for a few minutes during the day.

That is the only up-side that I can see.
 
given the power the Scottish Parliament would be inclined to ban guns altogether - they make the present lot look like moderates.
 
A Brief explanation of UK Firearm Laws and causes

Hi everybody, I have just joined this forum today whilst crusing the web, looking for firearm legislation, in other countries. I will explain what types of firearms are available in the UK and what prompted the UK government-in Westminister-to enact fairly severe firearm bans on its population.

In August 1987, An unemployed builder/general labourer Micheal Ryan woke up late one moring and for some strange reason decided to gather together some of his private arsenal of guns-which consisted of two semi-automatic full-bore rifles,a pistol plus two Israli fragmentation-type hand grenades - to go on a killing spree, because he was supposedly deppressed. He ended up killing 17 people and wounding several others (approx 30), before ending his life, with his pistol -whilst hiding in his former high-school- and beseiged by a heavily armed Tactical Firearm Unit (Thames Vally PD equivelent to a Swat teams.) and police chopper. Two of his victims included his own mother and a local policeman.

This caused a great stir in the UK and another incident occurred not long after, the Redfield District in Bristol, where a man called Kevin Weaver went mad and killed his former girlfriend and a few others with a pump-action shotgun, before being arrested by police. Kevin now is currently in Broadmoor mental hospital. The Conservative government examined the laws tecided to ban all full-bore semi-automatic rifles-including sporting models- and pump action full-bores aswell, because it was argued that these would be substituted for semi-autos, by psycotic individuals. Pump-action and semi-auto shotguns were banned if they had a barrel length of less than 24" or a telescopic stock-ike the Robert Hillberg stock design for the Remington 870 and slug ammunition was under wraps.These bans did not affect rimfire pump or self-loaders or indeed long barrelled-shotguns.

Micheal Ryans arsenal consisted of: 1 AK-47, 1 M1-Carbine, 1 Beretta m92f or 92 pistol; plus other firearms that were kept in his gunsafe.

However gunowners could keep their pistols and legally-permitted long-guns safe in the knowledge that they would be safe from further restriction-boy they were wrong.

Nine years later in Dunblane Scotland, Thomas Hamilton walks into Dunblane Primary School and kills 17 kids and their teacher, before killing himself y blowing his head off, with one of his magum pistols. At the end of the year the government enacted the 1997 amendment act, banning all handguns except .22 and .32. However the greaving parents were not happy with this new law and insisted that all pistols should be banned, irrespective of their calibre. So when Tony Blair came to power, he banned all of the pistols that were left, on the wishes of the newly-formed gun control network ,whose members included parents of murdered children who went to Dunblane Primary School. Carbines that are legally allowed and other rifles are still being targeted bt the GCN, as well as pump and semi-auto shotguns.

Thomas Hamiltons arsenal consisted of: 2 Browning Hi-power 9mm Practical pistols and two Smith and Wesson 586 .357 Magnum revolvers.He also had about 741 rounds of ammunition, to kill as many kids and other people in the school.

UP yours GUN CONTROL NETWORK. AS CHUCK HESTON WOULD SAY: FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS.
 
Last edited:
Ok, so over the course of 20 years, 2 people went crazy. That doesnt really seem like a rational basis for making public policy to affect the rest of society, which isnt crazy.
 
MK VII,

The Scottish Parliament may not want what we might prefer; but at least with decentralization the whole country isn't subject to one Home Office pen stroke.

Similarly, in the USA, one can always move from a "bad" state to a "very good one" in this context. If everything is decided in Washington DC, the whole country could be very bad indeed.
-------------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org
 
Scottish Parliement more anti-gun than the English

I find it really sad that the New-Socialist Labour Party, does not accept the UK shooters as bonefide sports-persons:cuss: :cuss: :fire: :banghead: , like say-Archery or dart-players.We shooters share one thing in common with these others-we are all participating in one kind of target-hitting, by means of a projectile.Unfortunately with shooters, because we use firearms or air-weapons, to hit out target-sheets with, many people-including liberal or younger polititions ,people, etc find that all guns are dangerous and shouldn't be held in private hands whatsoever, irrespective of what "good reasons" UK and Australian shooters put down on their certificate.

To some of these people Target Shooting is not even considered a good or good enough reason to own a rifle, shotgun or even standard pistols. Hunting and vermin control are viewed slightly differently; if you are a professional hunter/pest controller or farmer, then they think that you should be allowed to own a firearm only as part of your trade and should only use ranges to zero your weapons, prior to shooting in the field.

There was an incident in Scotland where some dumb-ass/loser called Mark Benini accidently shot and killed a 2-year old boy called Andrew Morton. His mother has called for both Scottish and the main UK Parliement, to ban all air-weapons. Isn't it similar to the past trajedies, during a period of 20 years.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top