The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

The following has just come through from the FCSA (of which I am a Member).

When it became clear that Chris was only intent on defending High Energy rifles, I did point out to him that the number of 50 cal rifles on the FCSA line out was relatively small... and easily outnumbered by any other rifle let alone Lever Release of which there are many.

Hot on the heals of Christels Topic regarding a ban on Pheasant Shooting over certain land in Wales, it just goes to show the division and self interest within shooting - shotgun v rifle, 50 cal v Lever Release.

Instead of just asking for the exemption in respect of 50 cal, can I urge members to do likewise in respect of BOTH types of Firearm (as I am not about to place one over another)!

I can just about understand why the FCSA has followed through in respect of its own somewhat misplaced interests, but just what have the other Shooting organisations been doing in respect of the same and LR?!?



Dear member,

Apologies for the very short notice, and the absolute urgency of this email.

You need to contact your MP in the morning (Tuesday 9th October).

You need to ask them to support an amendment to the Offensive Weapons Bill that is due to be submitted by Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown on Wednesday 10th October.

Please see below the amendment for enhanced security that will be tabled by Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown by close of play on Wednesday evening. This needs as many MPs signatures as possible. However, your MP does not need to personally sign a copy. If they let Sir Geoffrey’s office in the Commons know they would like their names added that is sufficient.

Sir Geoffrey’s office number in the Commons is 0207 219 1294 and his assistants are Matthew and Judith.

Please pass these details onto your MP, don’t rely entirely on email, try a phone call.

We will NEVER get another chance at this, it’s now or never.

As a reminder, the shooter friendly MPs that spoke up in our defence at the 2nd reading are as follows, however if you MP has been non-committal then it’s still worth a shot.


Sir Geoffry Clifton-Brown (no need to contact)
Mr Johnathan Djanogly (no need to contact)
Mr Iain Duncan-Smith
Vicky Ford
Alistair Jack
Robert Courts
Dr David Drew
Jim Shannon
Dr Caroline Johnson
Mark Tami
Stuart McDonald
Bill Wiggin
Sir Edward Davey
Dr Mathew Offord
Kwasi Kwarteng
Simon Hart
Chris Davis
Ben Lake
Alex Chalk
Mark Garner
Tim Loughton
Gavin Robinson
Craig Mackinlay
Will Quince
Jeremy Lefroy



These amendments remove the proposed prohibition of high energy rifles such as .50cal from the Bill. They introduce a requirement for a certificate holder to install higher security measures i.e. the Level 3 security standard from Home Office guidance. Level 3 is the standard typically required for registered firearms dealers, museums and those who possess prohibited weapons. It includes a provision for an alarm with signalling.

Prohibition of certain firearms etc: England and Wales and Scotland

Delete clause 30 (ag) of the Bill to remove the ban on rifles over 13,600J muzzle energy and insert the following new clause:

Special security provisions for firearms

(NC ) A chief officer shall grant a certificate for a high energy rifle where the applicant has installed security measures equivalent to Level 3 of the Home Office Security Handbook.

For the purposes of this section “High Energy Firearm” means any rifle from which a shot, bullet or other missile, with kinetic energy of more than 13,600 joules at the muzzle of the weapon, can be discharged.

Prohibition of certain firearms etc: Northern Ireland

Delete clause 31 (ea) of the Bill to remove the ban on rifles over 13,600J muzzle energy and insert:

Special security provisions for firearms

(NC ) A chief officer shall grant a certificate for a high energy rifle where the applicant has installed security measures equivalent to Level 3 of the Home Office Security Handbook.

For the purposes of this section “High Energy Firearm” means any rifle from which a shot, bullet or other missile, with kinetic energy of more than 13,600 joules at the muzzle of the weapon, can be discharged.



Christopher Graffius
Executive Director of Communications & Public Affairs

The British Association for Shooting and Conservation
Marford Mill
Rossett
Wrexham
LL12 0HL

I received the same email this evening.

Dear member,



Apologies for the very short notice, and the absolute urgency of this email.



You need to contact your MP in the morning (Tuesday 9th October).



You need to ask them to support an amendment to the Offensive Weapons Bill that is due to be submitted by Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown on Wednesday 10th October.



Please see below the amendment for enhanced security that will be tabled by Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown by close of play on Wednesday evening. This needs as many MPs signatures as possible. However, your MP does not need to personally sign a copy. If they let Sir Geoffrey’s office in the Commons know they would like their names added that is sufficient.



Sir Geoffrey’s office number in the Commons is 0207 219 1294 and his assistants are Matthew and Judith.



Please pass these details onto your MP, don’t rely entirely on email, try a phone call.



We will NEVER get another chance at this, it’s now or never.



As a reminder, the shooter friendly MPs that spoke up in our defence at the 2nd reading are as follows, however if you MP has been non-committal then it’s still worth a shot.





Sir Geoffry Clifton-Brown (no need to contact)

Mr Johnathan Djanogly (no need to contact)

Mr Iain Duncan-Smith

Vicky Ford

Alistair Jack

Robert Courts

Dr David Drew

Jim Shannon

Dr Caroline Johnson

Mark Tami

Stuart McDonald

Bill Wiggin

Sir Edward Davey

Dr Mathew Offord

Kwasi Kwarteng

Simon Hart

Chris Davis

Ben Lake

Alex Chalk

Mark Garner

Tim Loughton

Gavin Robinson

Craig Mackinlay

Will Quince

Jeremy Lefroy



Chris Stevenson

Chairman, FCSA (UK)

www.fcsa.co.uk



_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________





These amendments remove the proposed prohibition of high energy rifles such as .50cal from the Bill. They introduce a requirement for a certificate holder to install higher security measures i.e. the Level 3 security standard from Home Office guidance. Level 3 is the standard typically required for registered firearms dealers, museums and those who possess prohibited weapons. It includes a provision for an alarm with signalling.



Prohibition of certain firearms etc: England and Wales and Scotland



Delete clause 30 (ag) of the Bill to remove the ban on rifles over 13,600J muzzle energy and insert the following new clause:



Special security provisions for firearms



(NC ) A chief officer shall grant a certificate for a high energy rifle where the applicant has installed security measures equivalent to Level 3 of the Home Office Security Handbook.



For the purposes of this section “High Energy Firearm” means any rifle from which a shot, bullet or other missile, with kinetic energy of more than 13,600 joules at the muzzle of the weapon, can be discharged.



Prohibition of certain firearms etc: Northern Ireland



Delete clause 31 (ea) of the Bill to remove the ban on rifles over 13,600J muzzle energy and insert:



Special security provisions for firearms



(NC ) A chief officer shall grant a certificate for a high energy rifle where the applicant has installed security measures equivalent to Level 3 of the Home Office Security Handbook.



For the purposes of this section “High Energy Firearm” means any rifle from which a shot, bullet or other missile, with kinetic energy of more than 13,600 joules at the muzzle of the weapon, can be discharged.







Christopher Graffius

Executive Director of Communications & Public Affairs



The British Association for Shooting and Conservation

Marford Mill

Rossett

Wrexham

LL12 0HL

Anyone really surprised?

The shooting community is it's own worse enemy and will continue to shrink whilst its members seek to preserve only what is pertinent to them only.

So long as we divide ourselves by discipline, as structured by our "national" organisations, rather than coming together around the thing that binds us all, the ability to legally own and use firearms, then we are in deed doomed.

Gun ownership is the point of attack by the antis and we need a unified body to represent all legal gun owners if we have any hope of surviving.

The discipline approach not only divides shooters by its very nature but it is being used by the antis to pick our divided interests off piece meal, but still we plod along with the same redundant structures lacking in focus and leadership.

The general council is elected.

https://nra.org.uk/general-council-elections-2018/

I’d join to vote for you John.


Sent from my boing using "An application"

Whats he ever done to you??

I know. Sorry John. I’m sure you are busy enough. I would really join to vote if someone like John did stand though. I think if an articulate and knowledgeable person stood on an agenda of uniting the shooting community and making a more active defence of our rights it would be a popular ticket.


Sent from my boing using "An application"

Chris has stood up and put in a huge amount of effort....AS A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL...... in trying to prevent this ban.

Yes his focus has been on the 50 cal issue but ffs has anyone else come to the fore to help or to focus on MARS etc?
Not bloody likely as far as I am aware... if i need to stand corrected then I will 'eat' my assertion.
Rather than criticise Chris by calling his efforts divisive perhaps the keyboard warriors should consider shooter apathy as our biggest failure alongside not having a single/ united shooting organisation with 'teeth'.
Chris deserves our support and admiration not the whinging about focus. on 50 cal

I believe there is a separate amendment that will surface soon that covers MARS/Lever release.

Imo our biggest weakness is that we treat our position as hobbyists (which of course we are), we are doomed.

Only way to represent ourselves is the same way that other unpopular activities do - spend money on providing proper research to back our position and then spend even more money on professional lobbyists to present our case over and over again.

None of the current shooting organisations are willing to do either. Either by choice, lack of budget or both.

It would be interesting to see how much income (in subs) all of our shooting organisations receive in total and how much they spend on lobbying govt. I bet its bugger all.