Ministers have been strongly criticised by anti-gun campaigners for rejecting calls from bereaved families, senior police officers and a coroner to put extra controls on shotguns in response to the Plymouth mass shooting.
The government was accused of putting the rights of shooters before public safety after deciding against strengthening the shotgun laws on the basis that doing so could affect country sports and farmers and claiming the UK already had some of the strictest laws in the world.
The campaign group the Gun Control Network said: “The government response would be shocking if it wasn’t so predictable. They have shown once again that they will always prioritise the interests of shooters over public safety. They have sent a message of business as usual to shooters and done as little as possible to upset them.”
Emma Ambler, whose twin sister Kelly Fitzgibbons was shot dead by her partner alongside her daughters Ava, four, and Lexi, two, in 2020, said she was shocked at the government’s response.
“It’s insulting to say to every family that has been impacted by guns to say it’s some of the toughest gun laws in the world,” she said. “How many more tragedies will it take for a minister to put their head above the parapet and start putting the safety of the public over the supposed right to take a deadly weapon home with you? It’s a pitiful response.”
Luke Pollard, the Labour MP for Plymouth Sutton and Devonport, said: “I believe strongly Britain’s gun laws are broken and outdated. Unless we learn the painful lessons of the Plymouth tragedy, we will be doomed to repeat them.”
Families whose loved ones died in the Plymouth shootings had called for shotguns to be licensed as stringently as rifles on the basis they can be as deadly.
But the Home Office minister Chris Philp said on Thursday: “Shotguns are already subject to significant controls and they are important in helping farmers control vermin on their land, as well as being used in a variety of rural pursuits. We will keep this under review but we are currently of the view that additional controls on shotguns are unnecessary and would have a negative impact on their legitimate use.
“While public safety is, of course, our chief concern, it is also right that our approach should reflect the fact that the vast majority of licensed firearms holders are law abiding and cause no concern. It is this balance that we are seeking to strike.”
Philp announced that the government will provide £500,000 in funding to support the development and rollout of a national training package produced by the College of Policing and the National Police Chiefs’ Council. “In due course, this training will become mandatory for police firearms licensing teams,” he said.
He also launched a consultation on a series of possible new measures, including giving police the right to undertake searches and seize shotguns without a warrant, shortening the firearms certificate renewal period from five years, and tightening the rules around referees for licence applications.
It will also ask if GPs should be compelled to engage with the licensing process, if more mental health advice and support for firearms holders ought to be provided, and whether a phone line should be introduced to report concerns about someone who has a firearm.
The Home Office said an inspection would take place of police forces’ licensing departments in 2024-25 and it was also reviewing firearms licensing fees.
Bill Harriman, the director of firearms for the British Association for Shooting and Conservation, said: “This is the most significant and important firearms licensing consultation in 35 years. It is essential that the shooting community respond and feed in their views.”
The association welcomed proposals in the consultation such as mandatory involvement of GPs and the review of the length of a certificate.
The families of the Plymouth gunman Jake Davison’s victims accused the police of giving him a “licence to kill” by allowing him to have a shotgun despite a known history of violence, and called for “radical change” to the licensing system.
Speaking after an inquest jury concluded in February that Davison, 22, unlawfully killed five people, the bereaved relatives said the attack was “pure evil” but argued it was facilitated by systemic failings and incompetence.
The senior coroner who heard the inquest, Ian Arrow, said Britain’s gun laws needed “root and branch” changes to protect the public. He argued the Firearms Act, which applies to England, Wales and Scotland, was at “odds with public safety and the fundamental principle that owning a gun is a privilege and not a right”.
He specifically called for the legislative distinction between section 1 firearms – such as rifles – and shotguns to be ended. The regulations around shotguns are less stringent than for weapons such as rifles, and Arrow argued this led to a false impression that they were less dangerous. His calls were echoed during and after the inquest by senior police officers and gun campaigners.
The chief constable of Devon and Cornwall, Will Kerr, was among those calling for fundamental change, claiming the firearms legislation, introduced in 1968, was “no longer suitable”.
However, the powerful UK gun lobby vowed to fight demands to tighten the rules around shotgun ownership, arguing that many people would be “regulated or priced out” of the activity and may even be tempted to keep guns without a licence.
On 12 August 2021, Davison – an apprentice crane operator who was fascinated with “incel” culture, previous mass shootings and serial murderers – killed his mother, Maxine, 51, three-year-old Sophie Martyn, her father, Lee Martyn, 43, Stephen Washington, 59, and Kate Shepherd, 66, in Keyham, Plymouth. Davison then turned his pump-action shotgun on himself.
