Address
Address
Address
City
Postcode
27th October 2017
Re: Consultation on new legislation on “offensive and dangerous weapons”
Dear Sir or Madam
I am writing in respect of the above named consultation, specifically in relation to banning legally owned firearms from public use. I am deeply concerned that that whilst the proposed legislation stated ambition is to protect the public, the consultations own impact assessment states that it will in fact have no appreciable effect on terrorism or criminal behaviour and itself acknowledges that there have been no recorded incidences of these firearms being used in crime since their introduction to the UK (7 years ago),
My grave concern is that the government is willing to spend £Millions of UK tax payers money in order to make a political statement that it is “tackling terrorism” but in fact knows that this legislation will have no impact on terrorism at all.
Flawed premise.
The issue at hand is this proposed ban of UK legal firearms is justified by the statement: - “if terrorists or criminals obtained these firearms, then they would be a danger to the public”.
This rationale can clearly and without any modification be applied to all firearms in the UK, including hunting rifles and double barrelled shotguns.
The rationale can of course be equally applied to numerous household items, motor vehicles HGV’s and hand tools.
The reality.
The firearms in question are subject to rigorous control, requiring background check, medical checks, face to face interviews, secure cabinet storage, monitored alarms and strict limitations on ammunition storage and capacity.
The “MARS Action” and .50 Calibre target rifles have never been used in crime, primarily thanks to the stringent requirements for ownership and careful diligence of licensed firearms owners.
The firearms are very heavy, slow firing and designed for accuracy in target shooting.
Another reason they have never been used in crime or terrorist activities is quite possibly because there are other more readily available illegal options available to criminals for example black market handguns, rifles and machine guns that are frequently being intercepted from the continent.
The line of least resistance is by no means the licensed firearms owner.
Lack of evidence.
There is no evidence whatsoever that any of these civilian held firearms (not weapons) having been used against any members of the public, nor their police counterparts at any point in history.
.50 cal rifles have been available to the UK public for 40 years and there have been no incidents with them what so ever.
The MARS action has been available in the UK for 3 years, again no incidents.
Furthermore, there is no record of any legitimate civilian firearms being used against police property, such as helicopters or armoured vehicles. The possibility that these firearms could be stolen is EXTREMELY low.
As the CPS confirms, the most commonly used firearms by criminals are illegally obtained pistols (banned in 1997) and stolen double barrelled shotguns.
Spiralling financial cost & unintended consequences.
The stated intention is to compensate individuals for their loss of property, however the goalpost have not been set on the legislation nor even in the consultation phase, 1. .50 calibre are not the only long range rifles in the frame as “any firearms with muzzle energy over 10,000flbs” are being targeted the home office themselves do not know how many of these firearms are in private hands. The long range target firearms in question are £10,000+ each, added costs of the loading equipment and ancillaries, will likely be in the £2-3Million minimum.
2. MARS action is just “an example” of the type of firearm the Govt. wish to ban, other “similar type actions” are being looked at and again the firearms in question are £2-3,000 each (but far more prolific) so as we stand now the true cost of the direct compensation package is unknown, could range from £2M - £5M? The home office doesn’t know.
The indirect costs will be even greater, although harder to monitor
Shooting in the UK is worth £2bn to the UK economy* with over 300,000 people owning firearms throughout England & Wales. Supporting 74,000 individuals in the firearms trade and shooting industry.
In the UK we have many historical manufacturers, clay grounds, rifle clubs and clothing companies supporting the shooting community.
People regularly travel to competitions throughout the UK, often in remote locations supporting local B&B’s restaurants and hotels.
Banning firearms without good reason and evidence calls into question the government’s intention towards ALL firearms, this will have a knock on effect of harming confidence in the UK firearms industry from importers, UK manufacturers and rifle/clay grounds
*BASC figures 2017
Unacceptable cost vs benefit.
If we accept the government’s own evidence that impact of the legislation will be minimal, and the monetary costs are still unknown the government proceeding with a proposal that directly will cost £2.8M+ and indirectly affect jobs, and profits within the UK firearms and hospitality industries
I would urge you to consider your role as Member of Parliemant and to ensure that the UK Government does not disenfranchise legitimate shooters by giving members of the public the impression that the UK would be any safer.
Yours sincerely
Your name here
Technical observations on MARS action rifles
I wish to outline in detail my thoughts on the proposed move of 50 cal firearms and the MARS rifle to section 5 classification. Note I do not use the term offensive weapons (as you have) in that when used in accordance with the terms of the firearm certificate – their sole use is for target shooting on home office or ministry of defence approved ranges. The mechanism of action of the so-called “MARS” rifle is one that allows its user to fire consecutive rounds without the need to adjust their body position, leading to enhanced accuracy the end goal of competitive target shooting.
Technical observations on .50 Cal target rifles
For .50 calibre rifles, the terminology used in the consultation is vague and may lead to confusion as many antique firearms, often a part of British heritage, use .50 or greater diameter projectiles, and these significant pieces of British history could be equally effected by any proposed legislative changes, and potentially lost forever.
Ranges which do allow modern .50 calibre rifles are typically military ranges – as few local clubs are authorised due to the high muzzle energy associated with this cartridge. These firearms are used to engage targets up to 5 Km and test the ability of the shooter to focus and calculate advanced environmental and ballistic variables such as wind speed, barometric pressure necessary to accurately engage targets. Conventional munitions in these rifles primarily use copper and lead based projectiles incapable of penetrating hardened steel armour, and with the inability of civilians to access armour penetrating munitions commonly employed for military purposes, this renders their designation as “anti- materiel” rifles invalid in a civilian setting.
The skills required of the marksman are considerable – focus, knowledge of ballistics and care and attention in every aspect of preparation are required in this highly competitive sport, with many members going abroad to shoot against American and European competitors, the impact of these legislative changes will reduce the ability of the UK to compete in target rifles disciplines at the highest levels.
3