UK: Applying for a gun licence? you will soon need your wife's permission - Polidicks

[B]People applying for gun licences could be asked to prove that their current or recent partners have consented to the application, Theresa May has suggested. [/B]The home secretary said it was [B]"not appropriate" for people with a history of domestic violence to own guns[/B]. Ministers are examining if the extra check could "reduce the risk to domestic violence victims", she said. Her comments came in a [URL="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmhaff/854/85404.htm"]letter[/URL] to MPs which was sent soon after the Newtown massacre, but published on Wednesday. The massacre took place on 14 December at Sandy Hook Elementary School, near Newtown in Connecticut, leaving 20 children and six adult staff members dead and re-opening debate in the US on gun controls. Mrs May wrote to the Home Affairs Committee, advising MPs that the government was working with the Association of Chief Police Officers on how to strengthen "guidance on how reports of domestic violence should be treated by police considering firearms applications". She told the committee: "Although each case is considered on its merits, we will discuss with ACPO [the Association of Chief Police Officers] amendment of the guidance to [B]make it clear that it is not appropriate to issue a firearm or shotgun certificate where there is a history or successive reports of domestic abuse[/B]. "The proposal that the Canadian practice of consulting the partners of firearms applicants should be introduced here needs greater scrutiny and analysis of the evidence base, to establish whether such a measure would reduce the risk to domestic violence victims as intended." [B]In Canada, spouses or recent ex-spouses are required to sign gun licence application forms.[/B] If they decline, additional checks are carried out on the applicant. Mrs May's letter constituted a "supplementary" response to the committee's 2010 report into firearms control, which was prompted by the murder of 12 people in Cumbria by gunman Derrick Bird. The home secretary also said that the government [B]was considering ways to tighten medical background checks on applicants [/B]for gun licences. [B] Under the current gun-licensing regime, criminals who are sentenced to three months or more in prison face a temporary ban on firearm possession; those who are sentenced to three years or more are banned permanently from possessing a gun.[/B] [URL]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21051062[/URL]

I can see where they're coming from, it's still dumb

Does it require their consent IF you have a history of domestic abuse, or does it require their consent even if you do not? If the latter, this feels pretty bullshit. Not everyone is best friends with their ex, it could be rejected for petty personal reasons rather than because the person wanting the license is actually unsuitable. If the former, then I don't see anything wrong with it.

[quote]The home secretary said it was "not appropriate" for people with a history of domestic violence to own guns.[/quote] Right, the problem is that unless they've been caught (have a criminal history of it), chances are if the wife says no she'll just get the shit beat out of her when they get home.

why is theresa may such a retard

Isn't domestic abuse done without guns anyways? When I hear domestic abuse I think of a guy beating his wife with his fists and not shooting her with a gun.

[QUOTE=Desuh;39254903]Isn't domestic abuse done without guns anyways? When I hear domestic abuse I think of a guy beating his wife with his fists and not shooting her with a gun.[/QUOTE] Yeah, but I could still imagine someone with a history of domestic abuse to not be very worth trusting that they'll only use the gun for defensive use.

Well, domestic abusers are usually rage filled fuckheads. Do you really want a gun around someone with horrible anger management issues?

This is retarded. If you're in an abusive relationship and say "no they can't have a gun" you'll get beaten to death when you're back in your house. Besides, how often does someone shoot their spouse to death with a legal firearm in Britain? It's a non issue.

I take it this applies to women as well.

[QUOTE=Desuh;39254903]Isn't domestic abuse done without guns anyways? When I hear domestic abuse I think of a guy beating his wife with his fists and not shooting her with a gun.[/QUOTE] I think it's more of using it to threaten

I sort of feel like any woman who's married to an abusive husband would be too afraid of her husband to disagree.

[QUOTE=matt.ant;39254832] Under the current gun-licensing regime, criminals who are sentenced to three months or more in prison face a temporary ban on firearm possession; those who are sentenced to three years or more are banned permanently from possessing a gun.[/B] [/QUOTE] What, even from crimes completely unrelated like fraud or something? [editline]17th January 2013[/editline] Also, why would this only apply to spouses? Obviously any member of a household is prone to domestic abuse Might as well ask the neighbours for permission as well

[QUOTE=RobbL;39254981]What, even from crimes completely unrelated like fraud or something?[/QUOTE] In the US, if you're a felon, you aren't legally allowed to purchase firearms any more. iirc, if you haggle with the court, you can get some of your stuff back, but it depends on the judge and the jurisdiction.

I'm OK with this. Although this wouldn't have stopped Raoul Moat from shooting his ex and her new partner people who abuse woman shouldn't own guns.

I find it bullshit that here in Canada you need your ex's permission too, that's just a load of shit.

It would be better if it was just a criminal record check If a wife is being abused she's not going to want to go against her husband's will and say he can't have any guns or something

It's already hard enough to get a gun (legally) over here if you ask me, but if you're going to add something like this, why not just make it a compulsory trip to a psychoanalyst or something?

[QUOTE=Rents;39255172]It's already hard enough to get a gun (legally) over here if you ask me, but if you're going to add something like this, why not just make it a compulsory trip to a psychoanalyst or something?[/QUOTE] I think the current system is pretty good in terms of shotgun licenses, to my understanding all you need to do are: - Have a valid reason for each gun (e.g. target practise as a member of a range or for a job e.g. farmer) - Have 2 people vouch for you - Doctor's approval - FLO interview and house check - A weapons safe - Be over 17 - Have a clean criminal record They really have to find a reason not to give you the license, as opposed to why to give it to you, if you make a proper application. It's a bit strict in that it needs renewing every 5 years, but I think it's pretty good as is, though the other certificates (like a firearms licence or the FAC) are way too hard to get if you want them.

You have to have a legit reason to have one though, I'm pretty sure they don't even accept self defense as one anymore.

[QUOTE=Mellowbloom;39255341]You have to have a legit reason to have one though, I'm pretty sure they don't even accept self defense as one anymore.[/QUOTE] Self defence isn't considered valid unless you're in Northern Ireland, but joining a target range for clay pidgeons or whatever is. I really don't know how I feel about self defence as a reason or not, so I won't open that can of worms myself.

This is both dumb and sensible, I read on a forum a few months back of a guy who had all of his guns seized (in dramatic fashion) because his wife that he was divorcing happened to mention the fact he had guns in the house to her divorce lawyer.

[QUOTE=Forumaster;39254926]Well, domestic abusers are usually rage filled fuckheads. Do you really want a gun around someone with horrible anger management issues?[/QUOTE] Oh holy crap lol, I failed grammar. I meant to say he WOULDN'T be worth trusting... Sorry, I've fixed it.