Firearms saftey consultation - inculdes airguns & minature rifle ranges

[angrybear]

Just submitted my reply online, simple & an hour well spent.

[Rutty]

One is enough though . The other incident at the Full Metal Jacket Range with bullets flying over the heads of truckers may have been the straw that broke the camels back.

It only takes one incident to get the ball rolling sadly.

Unfortunately there have also been a number of other cases over the years involving individuals who have been deemed unsuitable to possess firearms; some having had their certificates revoked; who have (mis)used S11(4) to acquire or reacquire them. These cases have attracted little media interest as they are usually thought of as too “technical” by the press and action was taken by the licensing authorities before any serious criminality occurred. Indeed some have gone unreported altogether. The cases have usually resulted in suspended sentences sufficient to invoke the provisions of S21 and thus making it unlikely that the individual will ever be granted a S1 certificate again.

I accept that reform of S11(4) is necessary and for a properly constituted and managed rifle club still employing it there should be no substantial difficulty in becoming a Home Office approved club. Those who it will impact most are the outlier groups such as Scouts who would have practical difficulties in complying with the HO criteria. Cadet units wishing to acquire rifles to augment the MoD issued equipment, or purchase better quality ammunition, will also be disadvantaged. A one size solution will definitely not fit all.

The question in the consultation that I find most interesting is this one:

Q12. To what extent do you agree that self-loading .22 rimfire rifles should not be considered miniature rifles for the purposes of the provision?

In other words, should Pay to Play Miniature Rifle Ranges be permitted to offer the public “look alike” military weapons? There are many potential ramifications in that question.

Rutty

[ConorG]

BASC update below:

The British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC) are gearing up to respond to the Government’s firearms safety consultation to ensure the future of sustainable shooting and firearms ownership.

The Home Office consultation, launched today (24th November), deals with several areas of interest including miniature rifle ranges, large calibre rifles, air guns and ammunition.

In detail the consultation asks for responses on:

What level of enhanced security would sufficiently reduce the risk of high muzzle energy rifles (.50 calibre rifles) being stolen and misused.
The possession of air guns by under-18s, secure storage and safe-keeping
Proposals that miniature rifle range operator to apply for a firearm certificate and undergo necessary police checks.
The controls required for the possession of ammunition propellants and primers.
The consultation will run until 16th February 2021.

Leading BASC’s response and workload will be director of firearms Bill Harriman. He said: “The topics considered in the government’s consultation have been known about for several months. BASC has been using the delay to start working on a credible and robust response. The issues raised have already been analysed, with our conclusions drawn.

“BASC’s response will challenge the government to put up evidence-led and proportionate measures in any proposal that sees to regulate legitimate firearms ownership.”

Discussing the air guns proposals, Bill said: “On first glance it would appear that the government has listened to BASC’s concerns on licensing air guns and are considering other options.

“We will now work with government during the consultation period to ensure the legitimate shooting community are not left disadvantaged.”

BASC will be publishing an advice note in due course and urge members to respond to this consultation.

See: https://basc.org.uk/government-launc...-consultation/

[Powderfinger]

My local NSRA club had to run under the miniature range rules recently when there was a delay in renewing it's permission to run as an approved FAC range. AFAIK our club is still a miniature range as well as an approved range. It's not like it's a new club run by greenhorns; our club is decades old.
The miniature rifle rules are not leading to crime any more than the FAC or SGC system is. The three worst shooting icrimes in British history had nothing to do with the miniature ranges exemption.
My guess is there are moves afoot to ban semi auto 22s especially black rifles and removing the miniature range exemption is just part of that process.
Shooters who support these changes need to think what will be the long term effects.

[Jesim1]

My local NSRA club had to run under the miniature range rules recently when there was a delay in renewing it's permission to run as an approved FAC range. AFAIK our club is still a miniature range as well as an approved range. It's not like it's a new club run by greenhorns; our club is decades old.
The miniature rifle rules are not leading to crime any more than the FAC or SGC system is. The three worst shooting icrimes in British history had nothing to do with the miniature ranges exemption.
My guess is there are moves afoot to ban semi auto 22s especially black rifles and removing the miniature range exemption is just part of that process.
Shooters who support these changes need to think what will be the long term effects.

I understand your concern, and from what you have said you and your club are an example of "what good looks like" and the way a minirange clause can be useful.

The big issue with this loophole though is that anyone wanting to start a minirange does not have to have any training, experience, or even an FAC certificate themselves, they can just start a range, buy multiple live ammo guns, and then hand them to the public - and that surely has to be wrong?

This is a chance to acknowledge stuff like this is dangerous and unwanted by sensible shooters, and that simple changes like making sure the proprietor of the range has an FAC and suitable training to run a range could be a solution which is reasonable and proportional without them getting a blanket ban?

All I'm saying is that it's better to get involved if we want to protect our sport rather than try to defend things like this, which in all honesty, don't make sense?

[angrybear]

There is no excuse for every member of this forum not to reply to this consultation.
Give the Govt your view & Your reasons for that view.

Those who don't may as well quit the BBS & keep your opinions to yourself.

[RobF]

The big issue with this loophole though is that anyone wanting to start a minirange does not have to have any training, experience, or even an FAC certificate themselves, they can just start a range, buy multiple live ammo guns, and then hand them to the public - and that surely has to be wrong?

They don't need an FAC to run a FAC range even if it's not a mini. I took an indoor range through HO Approval and certification for up to .45 and 600ft-lb, air, rim and centre fire. I didn't have an FAC then.

The structure of many ranges is that they aren't run by one person. They are often clubs run by committees and it's the Secretary who is legally responsible, but they don't need an FAC either.

The FEO will review members of clubs that have HO approval and want to use firearms but there's no training. It's really down to the fact that the liability will fall onto the Sec if proper processes aren't followed, even if they're insured.

[angrybear]

They don't need an FAC to run a FAC range even if it's not a mini. I took an indoor range through HO Approval and certification for up to .45 and 600ft-lb, air, rim and centre fire. I didn't have an FAC then.

The structure of many ranges is that they aren't run by one person. They are often clubs run by committees and it's the Secretary who is legally responsible, but they don't need an FAC either.

The FEO will review members of clubs that have HO approval and want to use firearms but there's no training. It's really down to the fact that the liability will fall onto the Sec if proper processes aren't followed, even if they're insured.

But could you buy guns & ammo for that range ?

That is the loophole for mini-rifle ranges, set up as a mini range business & buy semi auto .22's & ammo with no FAC, to potentially lend to your mate in the local drug gang .

[RobF]

But could you buy guns & ammo for that range ?

That is the loophole for mini-rifle ranges, set up as a mini range business & buy semi auto .22's & ammo with no FAC, to potentially lend to your mate in the local drug gang .

No I couldn’t. But that wasn’t the point of my reply. Jesim was saying the issue was that anyone could run a range and they still can.

There are other loopholes which effectively allow you to be in possession of larger calibre rifles and ammunition without an FAC but as you point out you’d need the club armourer to purchase them first under their FAC.

[Jesim1]

Jesim was saying the issue was that anyone could run a range and they still can.

Sorry, perhaps my example of the loop hole was not clear as I meant it.

My feelings are that a non FAC holder who has had no kind of checks on his behaviour/character can buy, use, hire out FAC guns under the minirange clause to members of the public or for themselves, effectively sidestepping any kind of gun control. The actual running of the range was not the issue as such, but obviously in conjunction with the above it makes sense for us to ensure a range is run by law abiding responsible and trained individuals where guns and ammo are sold to someone who has been checked and deemed fit to do so.

We have to jump through hoops to get an FAC for just one gun, yet as it stands, a person using the above loophole can buy a dozen guns with almost no checks and use them with little in the way of control.

I hope that makes it clearer as I would like to see more ranges not less, but I'd like them to be safe and a positive reflection on the sport.

James

[RobF]

Sorry, perhaps my example of the loop hole was not clear as I meant it.

My feelings are that a non FAC holder who has had no kind of checks on his behaviour/character can buy, use, hire out FAC guns under the minirange clause to members of the public or for themselves, effectively sidestepping any kind of gun control. The actual running of the range was not the issue as such, but obviously in conjunction with the above it makes sense for us to ensure a range is run by law abiding responsible and trained individuals where guns and ammo are sold to someone who has been checked and deemed fit to do so.

We have to jump through hoops to get an FAC for just one gun, yet as it stands, a person using the above loophole can buy a dozen guns with almost no checks and use them with little in the way of control.

I hope that makes it clearer as I would like to see more ranges not less, but I'd like them to be safe and a positive reflection on the sport.

James

It does, and I agree.

[SuffolkRifle]

As for the mini-range for .22 rimfire and the mini-range for airguns being under the same ruling, sounds a bit daft - a fairground airgun 'range' (knock the 5 fingers down) the same rules as a live-fire?

[RobF]

As for the mini-range for .22 rimfire and the mini-range for airguns being under the same ruling, sounds a bit daft - a fairground airgun 'range' (knock the 5 fingers down) the same rules as a live-fire?

I'm not sure how they even can be. I think it's a widow from the definition of a mini range which mentions the shooting of airguns, but airguns can't be put on FAC (unless s1), and you can't get an FAC for them (because of that, and I have tried). You'd still be able to shoot airguns like you can at an HO approved FAC club, but shooting them on an non FAC range doesn't demand you need an FAC either. If you catch my drift.

It does point again to people who don't understand the act are the ones making proposals on the consultation. I'm not sure there's a way around that but hopefully the organisations who are consulted will explain that to the relevant committee.

[SuffolkRifle]

I'm not sure how they even can be. I think it's a widow from the definition of a mini range which mentions the shooting of airguns, but airguns can't be put on FAC (unless s1), and you can't get an FAC for them (because of that, and I have tried). You'd still be able to shoot airguns like you can at an HO approved FAC club, but shooting them on an non FAC range doesn't demand you need an FAC either. If you catch my drift.

It does point again to people who don't understand the act are the ones making proposals on the consultation. I'm not sure there's a way around that but hopefully the organisations who are consulted will explain that to the relevant committee.

That's the thing, but when I read the section on miniature ranges, it reads as though a 'fairground range' operates under the same rules as a 'live fire' miniature range, though private ownership of the two 'weapons' are under different conditions.

[angrybear]

That's the thing, but when I read the section on miniature ranges, it reads as though a 'fairground range' operates under the same rules as a 'live fire' miniature range, though private ownership of the two 'weapons' are under different conditions.

Yes you're correct they do both operate under the same rule, because members of the public are allowed to shoot on the mini-range,
private ownership conditions are neither here nor there for that purpose because the range operates under it's own rules,
Presumably in the past fairs did use .22 rimfire.

The points are;
1/ at the moment anyone can set up as a mini range & go out & buy S1 firearms & ammo "for that mini range" without need for a Firearms Certificate.
2/ at the moment the term mini rifle is not adequately defined to only mean .22 rimfire