PPC122 | OPINION
Bill Harriman of BASC argues proposed changes to align shotgun licensing with other firearms would create unnecessary bureaucracy, restrict lawful use and significantly reduce shotgun ownership.
In 2023, the Conservative government launched a consultation on various firearms licensing issues.
This had been considerably watered down after the Home Office called a meeting to ask shooting association representatives their views about the Plymouth Coroner’s recommendation that firearms licensing legislation for shotguns should be brought into line with that for other firearms, such as sporting rifles.
There was opposition to it and the matter dropped. Fast forward to February 2025, when the new Labour government made its formal response to the consultation, saying that it would resurrect the whole business.
The reason given was “disappointment” amongst law enforcement respondents. None of the advocates for change have put up any empirical evidence to sustain their positions so this whole issue is not evidence-led.
Rather, it comes from a long-standing police wish list. One reason I have heard is that as shotguns and other firearms are both lethal, then they should have a common standard for licensing.
That is not comparing like with like. It is clear from the Firearms Act 1920 (the basis for all subsequent firearms legislation) that Parliament understood the clear difference in performance and legislated accordingly by excluding shotguns from any controls. Shotgun certification only dates from 1968.
In terms of the EU Weapons Directive, shotguns are firearms controlled by “notification”, ie you have to tell the police when you acquire or dispose of one. Other firearms are controlled by “prior authorisation” from the police.
In my opinion, the GB shotgun licensing regime is the only efficient part of the licensing system, as it licenses suitable people to possess a class of firearms.
That is reinforced by checks and balances which requires them to be secured when not in use and creates an audit trail of acquisition and disposal.
In contradistinction, the Section 1 regime is bureaucratic in the extreme, in that it licenses individual guns rather than licensing people. It also limits the purpose for possessing every firearm, where it can be used, who may use it and what it may be used for.
If Section 2 shotguns were to be licensed in the same way as Section 1 firearms, the consequences would be drastic and far reaching for everyone.
Fundamental to this regime is the requirement to satisfy the “good reason” test for each and every shotgun possessed.
You would have to prove - to the satisfaction of the police - your reason for acquiring every gun, what you wanted it for, what you wanted to shoot with it and where you wanted to use it.
On the face of things, that sounds uncontroversial; but dig down and you immediately run into problems particularly when it comes down to numbers. I can hear it now “You’ve already got one 12 bore why do you need another”.
The fact that you have a pump-action for flocks of corvids and an over-and-under for general use will not cut any ice with people who are trained to apply a binary analysis.
Every gun would have a restrictive condition applied to it specifying what it may be used for and where it may be used.
The police love conditions: I’m told that the National Firearms Licensing Management System is littered with hundreds of them, the legacy of thirty-eight licensing authorities each doing their own thing.
You can’t appeal against conditions, and it is a criminal offence not to abide by their terms.
Your shotgun cartridges would be restricted in number and probably even down to their shot size; and you would have to lock them away in a steel cabinet. The facility for people to borrow shotguns from another certificate holder would vanish.
We have yet to see the terms and scope of this consultation; however we should expect the worst. When it comes, everyone who owns a shotgun - whether for work or leisure - needs to respond otherwise your voice won’t be heard.
The last time the shotgun regime was altered was in 1988. Since then the number of shotgun certificates has fallen by 45%.
Based on that, I confidently predict that if Section 1 controls were to be applied to shotguns, then we would see a loss of 30% in five years.
Bill Harriman
BASC Director of Firearms
Tell us how the proposed licensing changes might affect you
BPCA is working closely with BASC to ensure that the professional use of shotguns in pest management is properly understood and represented.
Fill out our survey to ensure we have the data we need to protect your tools. bpca.org.uk/firearms-survey
If you are particularly affected by or interested in these potential changes, please contact the Policy team at [email protected]
Source: