UK firearms: Licence applicants may need partners' approval
Mrs May pledged to analyse the evidence before deciding whether to proceed with the policy shift
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.
The home secretary said it was "not appropriate" for people with a history of domestic violence to own guns.
Ministers are examining if the extra check could "reduce the risk to domestic violence victims", she said.
Her comments came in a letter 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.
Suspended sentencesMrs 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 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.
"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."
In Canada, spouses or recent ex-spouses are required to sign gun licence application forms. If they decline, additional checks are carried out on the applicant.
Current UK gun-control laws
- Almost anyone with a gun need to have a certificate, issued by their local chief police officer - exceptions include members of the armed forces
- The certificate must be renewed every five years, and can be revoked
- Applicants need a "good reason" for owning a gun, such as "sporting or competition purposes or for shooting vermin"
- The chief police officer is expected to take into account previous cautions or convictions when deciding whether to grant or renew a certificate
- They should also consider evidence of mental health problems, aggressive behaviour and alcohol or drug abuse
- They may also consult the applicant's GP to obtain medical data
- Convicted criminals sentenced to three years or more are banned permanently from owning a gun; those sentenced to three months or more are banned for five years
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 statement marks a shift in tone from the government's initial response, which said it would look into the proposal despite its "concerns that involving partners and recent ex-partners in signing applications may put them in a position of vulnerability and increased risk of renewed violence and abuse.
"Also, consent from a current partner may mean that the partner signs the application to ensure their imminent safety without consideration for future safety."
The home secretary also said that the government was considering ways to tighten medical background checks on applicants for gun licences.
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.
Supplying a firearm lawsBut Mrs May told MPs that the government was now exploring the recommendation, also contained in the committee's 2010 report, to extend the ban to criminals receiving suspended sentences.
The report said: "The legislation should be amended to clarify that persons in receipt of wholly suspended sentences are subject to the same prohibitions from obtaining a licence to hold... firearms or shotguns as they would be if their sentence had not been suspended.
“Start Quote
End Quote Home Affairs CommitteeWe do not believe it appropriate for those convicted of offences which are serious enough to warrant a custodial sentence to retain their firearms”
"We do not believe it appropriate for those convicted of offences which are serious enough to warrant a custodial sentence to retain their firearms.
"We are also of the view that those who receive shorter custodial sentences should not be allowed to possess firearms."
Twenty years before the Cumbria shootings, Bird had been sentenced to six months in prison, suspended for a year, for stealing decorating materials from his then employer. He also had a drink-driving conviction.
But he had been allowed to keep his shotgun certificate, obtained before his 17th birthday.
In October 2012, Mrs May pledged to create a new criminal offence of supplying a firearm to tackle people who hire out weapons to gangs.
Ms May said those supplying guns were "as guilty" as those using them as the impact was just as deadly.
The maximum sentence for the offence, which will apply in England, Wales and Scotland, will be life imprisonment.
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~08~RS~)


Woolwich: Security services defended
Obama defends 'just' drones war
'Field of diamonds'
The dogulator
Slave pride
Le Shopping?
Winning business
Talking Movies
Comment number 508.
B_Monksummers17th January 2013 - 13:38
As an International Shooter, a Captain of Team GBR Shooting tours and a lawyer I fully understand the principles at play here. The UK has one of the lowest (legally held) Firearms crime rates. This is because of the many checks and procedures in place. Whilst I don't agree with how this view is put across I agree with the principle. Guns are no danger to anyone unless they are in the wrong hands.
Link to this (Comment number 508)
Comment number 238.
ThinkAboutWhatYouAreSaying17th January 2013 - 12:12
The requirement for an licence applicant's partner to provide consent is simply not going to stop domestic violence.
If someone is willing to be violent towards their partner and also wants a gun, then I suspect that they might not take too kindly to them vetoing their application.
It just seems like a poor alternative to thorough background checks.
Link to this (Comment number 238)
Comment number 169.
Andy The Thinker17th January 2013 - 11:45
Times are changing, it's the 21st Century. There's no reason why a civilian should have access to a firearm in a modern civilised society. Guns are designed to kill, either human beings, or animals.
Time for a cross-the-board ban on civilian access to firearms. Hobby? get another, grow up.
Link to this (Comment number 169)
Comment number 165.
A_Sensible_Bloke17th January 2013 - 11:43
Personally I cannot see the harm in asking the person who lives on a permanent basis with a potential gun owner for their approval. This does not include the spiteful ex.
IMHO if somebody would still press ahead with an application knowing full well their family was against it, then that is exactly the sort of person who should not have a gun.
Link to this (Comment number 165)
Comment number 132.
Derpsworth17th January 2013 - 11:28
I see the londoners and office workers are here, forgetting that not everyone lives in a city or works in an office - some of us have hobbies like target and clay shooting, others hunt and there are the farmers and pest controllers - we're not talking assault rifles in the UK, people are getting worked up over the word 'gun' - owning one/getting a license isnt as simple as just handing over money
Link to this (Comment number 132)
Comments 5 of 12