Sense prevails: Section 1 & 2 debate result

The voices of over 121,000 UK shooters were heard this week and the result was a resounding rejection in parliament of the proposed merger between Section 1 and Section 2 licensing.

If you remember our last article, we were very skeptical on this proposed merger and for good reasons.

We argued that the government was looking for a “quick fix” to a systemic police failure and that penalising law-abiding license holders wasn’t the answer.

Well, it turns out the MPs agreed.

In a rare display of parliamentary unity, not a single MP spoke in favour of the merger.

Twenty-four MPs from across the political spectrum stood up to defend the current system. From the Highlands to the West Country, the message was clear: shotguns are essential tools for farmers, pest controllers, and the sporting community, and the proposed changes were, in the words of Ben Lake MP, “disproportionate.”

The debate mirrored exactly what we said earlier this month.

The tragic events in Keyham weren’t caused by a lack of regulation; they were caused by a “catastrophic failure” in how those regulations were applied. MPs echoed our sentiment that the government should focus on enforcing the existing rules rather than inventing new ones that would only bury overstretched licensing departments under even more paperwork.

We’d say it’s rare nowadays that we all agree with our politicians but you have to give it to them this time, they are bang on target with those points.

In short: yes.

Our original points of view were validated almost word-for-word in the chamber.

• On Police failures:
  We argued that the issue lay with Devon and Cornwall Police, not the law. Dave Doogan MP and others agreed, highlighting that a bureaucratic burden provides “no significant increase in public safety.”
• On overstretching the system:
  We worried that adding 500,000+ shotgun owners to the FAC regime would break an already struggling system. Julie Minns MP raised this exact concern, questioning whether a “congested system” would actually make us less safe.
• On the power of the community:
  We urged you to sign the petition, and the impact was undeniable. Multiple MPs cited the “depth of anger” and the sheer volume of correspondence from their constituents as the reason they were standing there.

While we can certainly take a “victory lap” the fight isn’t over. The Government has confirmed that a formal consultation will follow.

This means the proposal isn’t totally buried yet; it’s just been embarrassingly knocked flat on its arse with a very bloody nose for the count of 7.

BASC, CPSA and numerous other organisations are already warming up for the next round – the formal consultation.

When that opens, we all need to be just as loud as we were with the petition. The “interested persons” the government keeps talking about? That’s us.

For now, we can breathe a sigh of relief. The values of our prized possessions aren’t plummeting just yet, and we won’t have to justify every single “spare” over-under in the cabinet – provided we stay vocal.

Sense prevailed this time.

Let’s make sure it stays that way going forwards.