Author’s Note:
I originally wrote this piece for Gun Trade Insider magazine, but the implications of the Home Office’s knife‑sales licensing proposals are too significant not to share more widely. Our new Trade section is designed to give RFDs – and anyone operating in the wider outdoor, sporting, and specialist retail space – clear, practical insight into regulatory changes that directly affect day‑to‑day business.
This article sets out the key issues the sector needs to understand, the operational risks that have been overlooked, and why a strong, informed response from the trade is essential.
Introduction:
Knife crime remains one of the most significant threats to public safety in the UK. After nearly three decades dealing with the consequences of this on the streets of London, I have no doubt about the scale of harm it causes. The Government’s ambition to halve knife crime over the next decade is something every one of us should support.
However, the recently announced Home Office consultation on licensing knife sellers raises serious concerns. The proposals concern the introduction of a new licensing regime covering the sale and importation of knives – affecting retailers, private individuals, online sellers, second hand markets, and anyone importing bladed items for personal use. This is one of the most far reaching regulatory expansions in recent years.
It is essential that the trade responds, not least because:
Please note, in writing this article I have consulted with a variety of partners including the British Shooting Sports Council.
Key Issues and Concerns
1. Unrealistic Expectations on Policing
The independent review by Commander Stephen Clayman states:
Lessons learned from firearms licensing shows that the regulation of the weapons markets reduces the availability and use of weapons in incidents, but it comes at significant cost to law enforcement.
Firearms licensing and knife sales are not directly comparable. Even if they were, forces already struggle to meet statutory firearms licensing obligations. Adding a licensing population potentially larger than the entire firearms community is operationally unachievable and would inevitably divert resources from their core functions.
2. Vague and Subjective Suitability Criteria
The consultation refers to “intelligence”, “dishonesty”, and “concerns” as grounds for refusing or revoking a licence but provides no definitions. This mirrors the inconsistent decision making and postcode lottery already seen in firearms licensing. Without a single clear primary agency in place and statutory criteria, the risk of arbitrary or uneven enforcement is high.
3. Import Licensing Is Unworkable at Scale
Border Force cannot realistically police millions of parcels containing kitchen knives, craft knives, or tools. The proposals offer no credible enforcement model for imports, and risk creating a system that is burdensome for legitimate users while having little impact on illicit supply.
4. Weak Evidence Base
The consultation cites knife crime statistics but provides no evidence that licensing sellers or importers reduces harm.
The Clayman review is explicit:
This means the majority of weapons used in the most serious incidents are already present in the home. Regulating the sale of outdoor knives, tools, or specialist equipment will not meaningfully address the highest risk category.
There is also no analysis of:
For a policy with such wide regulatory reach, this is a major omission.
Your Voice Matters
This consultation will shape the future regulatory landscape for knives and may set precedents for other licensing regimes. It is vital that practitioners, businesses, and individuals with operational experience respond.
We encourage all trade members to:
Key opportunities to respond include:
Please note, both questions 8 and 9 have 250 word limits. It is therefore important to use this space well to highlight key issues or use the email address below to add further information.
If you would like support drafting your response, or wish to contribute to a coordinated sector submission, please get in touch at info@firearmslicensing.net.
To respond, search “Home Office knife sales consultation” or visit:
You can complete the online form or email:
KnifeLicensingConsultation@homeoffice.gov.uk
23 February Debate
A parliamentary debate will take place on 23 February following the petition on merging Section 1 and Section 2 firearms licensing.
This debate will not change the law, but it will influence the Government’s direction and MPs need to hear from the people who actually use the system.
Shooting needs you to invest a little time and contact your MP.
In our experience template letters are convenient but easy to for MPs to ignore. A shorter, more personal message from you makes the real difference.
You don’t need technical detail or long explanations these are hard to digest and easy to forget.
Just be polite, factual, and speak as a constituent.
Below are four key points you may want to consider and include in your own words.
Key Points
1. Evidence and public safety
The results of the Firearms consultation 2023 demonstrates that the shooting community supports strong licensing. The post‑Keyham reviews, and repeated HMIC inspections from 1993 to present day, have all highlighted the most serious problems lie in police practices (suitability assessment, leadership, training, and consistency between forces) rather than faults in the law itself.
The only specific reference to Law was made by the Keyham Coroner which has since been examined in detail and found to be irrelevant.
2. Police capacity and focus
Evidence is clear that public safety depends on police making a sound assessment of each individual certificate holder. This is highlighted extensively in the reports following all recent tragedies. National Police Chief’s Council (NPCC) figures show police capacity is already under strain, and redesigning the licensing system would divert focus and resources away from those proven safeguards.
3. Risk profile and purpose
Shotguns have a different risk profile and purpose, and Parliament has repeatedly reviewed their position and recognised this by regulating them separately. The distinction is deliberate and long‑standing, not an oversight.
4. Rural and economic impact
Shooting underpins farming, conservation, and rural jobs, and any major change to the licensing system would have real impacts on the countryside economy. Reform needs to support public safety without undermining the communities who rely on it.
But remember – your own experience is what matters most.
How to contact your MP
Step 1: Find your MP
Step 2: Include your full name and full postal address
Step 3: Keep your message short and personal
Step 4: Be polite and constructive
Step 5: Ask for one clear action
Please attend the debate on 23 February and critically examine the evidence behind alignment. As my MP, I hope you will represent the views of your constituents and ensure any future changes are based on evidence and public safety.
Further Information:
Government Response to the 2023 consultation – https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6895e391586f9c9360656a20/Consultation+response+document+12+02+2025+final__1_.pdf
The petition and initial Government response – https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/750236
Further information on the different regimes – Shotguns aren’t the problem
Watch the debate live or afterwards on the UK Parliament YouTube channel – https://www.youtube.com/UKParliament
The Final Word
The shooting community has a long record of responsible, evidence‑led engagement.
A short, personal message from you helps ensure the debate focuses on what actually improves public safety – not on changes that add complexity without benefit.
Man arrested in the UK for posing with gun in the US
Introduction
There are lies, damned lies and statistics… but credible national information on firearms licensing is vital for the shooting community.
This is especially important when:
Previously, I have been critical on the available information. The first article in this series can be found via this link – https://firearmslicensing.net/behind-the-numbers/
Following this I wrote to the National Police Chief’s Council lead raising my concerns and received this reply on 17th August 2025:
what we will be doing with the recent end of July data capture to ensure it can be interpreted by anyone wanting to understand their local firearms licensing performance and compare this nationally.
This updated information can be found via these links:
In this article, which will be regularly updated, I walk you through my assessment of the figures provided step-by-step. If numbers aren’t for you then skip to “The End Result” of each section to see the final conclusions.
If viewing on a mobile device please note – All images will be available via the gallery at the bottom of this article which will make them easier to read.
Please note– I am not a statistician and errors can be made. The following is presented in good faith and any required corrections that are highlighted will be addressed and apologies offered if necessary.
Chapter 1 – Complete in 4 months
The “Headlines” at the start of the documents look like this.
It’s usual to present key information at the start of a document (not everyone likes numbers as much as I do!) but are they the right numbers?
It’s very natural to read numbers presented next to each other as being linked together. The column “Total Applications Received in last 12 months” and “% Completed Within 4 Months” are right next to each other.
So looking at Bedfordshire we see 1,824 application have been received and 42% completed within 4 months but what does that tell us? Not what we first think…
The Guidance Notes (See below) make it clear that the “completed in 4 months” percentage is not a percentage of all the applications received but rather a percentage of those received and completed within 12 months.
It’s not easy to understand why these are presented in this was but it can seriously distort your perception of what is going on. To try and explain the risks with this information as clearly as possible I have created this fictitious example.
I receive 100 applications and put 60 into a drawer – I do nothing with these. The remaining 40 I work on and complete 38 within 4 months. The remaining 2 take slightly longer. Of those 40 applications I have processed 95% (38/40 = 95%).
But, in reality only 38% of all applications received have been completed within 4 months.
1 – The Detail
Going back to Bedfordshire this means that if we want to know how many of the applications were completed in 4 months as a percentage of all applications received we need to look closer.
1 – The End Result
If we follow this methodology then the results look very different and arguably give a much more accurate idea of performance in this area.
If the image does not display well on the screen go down to the bottom of the article and view it via the gallery.
Across the majority of police forces we now see a very different picture emerging. Taking Gwent as an example we go from 98% (which seems very impressive) to 61%.
Why 4 months?- There is actually some science and background as to why this is important. The Firearms Act 1968 gives those applications received more than 8 weeks before expiry an automatic extension of a further 8 weeks. So 16 weeks in total (4 months ish) is the expected processing time contained in the primary source of law in this area.
Chapter 2 – Productivity
Firearms licensing is a complex system with many variables. The detailed information presented on each individual force is useful but going back to the National Police Chief’s Council (NPCC) earlier comment on what their ambition was for these statistics:
ensure it can be interpreted by anyone wanting to understand their local firearms licensing performance and compare this nationally.
This is what the detailed force data looks like. Does it achieve their aim and allow anyone to understand and compare?
2 – The Detail
The balance between making something simple enough to be useful and acknowledging the complexities is difficult and no single measure will ever be perfect.
The other complication is that no two forces are working in the same way and the data, particularly on timeliness, is open to abuse. If a force chooses to leave a new application for a month before placing it onto the system or grant the certificate as soon as it’s received the system will not recognise this and the impact on “performance” will be significant.
The NPCC have set out their expectation below but all the evidence suggests that data manipulation remains widespread.
NPCC Firearms Licensing expects all forces to place firearm, shotgun and registered firearms dealer (RFD) grant and renewal applications onto NFLMS within a brief time of receipt to ensure accurate recording of data. Equally, NFLMS should only be updated to show ‘granted’ when the new certificate is ready for print and onward forwarding to the applicant.
To try to solve these issues I have kept it simple and just considered:
This allows us to make a comparison of actual work completed against the numbers of Certificate Holders (the size of the unit).
As a very rough rule of thumb if 20% of applications are completed in one year then the force is managing to keep pace with their existing numbers of certificate holders.
2 – The End Result
Using the approach detailed above I have ranked each force on this basis to enable comment on productivity and comparison between forces.
The yellow highlight shows a percentage which is lower than would be expected and the red and green show top and bottom 15% respectively.
If the image does not display well on the screen go down to the bottom of the article and view it via the gallery.
Chapter 3 – Appetite for Revocation or Refusal
Revocations and refusals are legal means by which a force can remove an existing certificate or deny the issue of a new certificate. Both of these measures have a right of appeal to your local Crown Court. However, in practice this is infrequently used because of the prohibitive costs involved. For someone challenging a police decision:
This is because the person bringing the action is responsible for their own legal bill if they win or usually have to pay for police costs if they lose.
There are a number of factors that can make you more likely to find yourself in this situation and probably the most significant is your postcode!
Someone in South Yorkshire is 25 times more likely to find themselves in this situation than if they lived in Avon & Somerset.
Therefore, the rate of revocations and refusals issued by a force is important information for a shooter.
3 – The Detail
It would be unfair to use the numbers of revocations and refusals on their own because that does not take into account the size of the force and numbers of certificate holders.
It would be reasonable to assume that force A with twice the numbers of holders of force B might reasonably issue twice the numbers of revocations as a result.
To give some clearer idea of individual forces approach in this area I have added together the number of revocations and refusals issued in a yearly period and divided this by the total number of certificate holders. This gives a percentage that we can use to rank forces and give a clearer idea of what is going on in this area.
3 – The End Result
Chapter 4 – Trends
1. Productivity Changes
2. Holders Change
3. Refusals and Revocations
4. Temporary Permits
Summary Chart –
The following chart summarises my assessment of where each Force ranks according to Productivity and Revocation & Refusals. If this does not display on your mobile device please open it via the gallery below.
In Conclusion:
The current presentation of firearms licensing statistics reveals a troubling lack of clarity, consistency, and methodological transparency from the police. These figures are not just confusing; they risk misleading stakeholders and undermining public trust.
Under the UK Statistics Authority’s Code of Practice for Statistics, official data must uphold the principles of trustworthiness, quality, and value. That means clear definitions, robust methods, and relevance to users.
Firearms licensing affects public safety, individual rights, and operational accountability. If we are to govern it fairly, the data must meet the same standards of integrity we expect from the system itself.
Transparency is not a luxury. It’s a duty.
Introduction:
Understanding your rights isn’t about confrontation, it’s about ensuring fair, lawful treatment in a system that serves both public safety and individual responsibility.
It’s why we’ve put together this free article which analyses the position and key messages that can be found on the service updates page of the individual Forces.
It provides some guidance on the main issues and also has links to further information.
Service Updates:
Each force has published its own update. The text appears identical but here’s where to find them:
Bedfordshire – https://www.beds.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/fi/bch/firearms-licensing-service-update/
Cambridgeshire – https://www.cambs.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/fi/bch/firearms-licensing-service-update/
Hertfordshire – https://www.herts.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/fi/bch/firearms-licensing-service-update/
Reasons for delay:
This service update begins by explaining that the current levels of service offered are as a result of:
There is no doubt that Statutory Guidance has imposed a more rigorous series of checks but this has been consistent across the UK and was first issued in November 2021.
In addition to this, if we examine the combined output from BCH over the last 5 years it does not seem to support the mentioned increase in demand.
Note – For the sake of simplicity (and because not everyone likes lots of data like me) I have only considered shotgun grants and renewals over the past five years. This data is drawn from published Home Office Statistics and usually represents the bulk of a firearms licensing departments work.
Key Messages:
These are drawn from the service updates that can be found on their website but also include links to further practical guidance on the various issues raised:
1) Renewals are taking around 9 months – BCH ask you to submit your application at
“least 20–24 weeks before expiry to avoid falling foul of Section 1 of the Firearms Act 1968”.
Ensuring you do not fall into unlawful possession is vital and we would always recommend working with the requirements of your firearms licensing team
BUT… what if you don’t read the website or can’t submit a renewal application that early?
The law states that an application for renewal received not less than 8 weeks before expiry benefits from an 8 week extension.
Statutory Guidance states that the renewal should be complete by the original expiry date unless “exceptional circumstances” apply and then the Police have a further period which acts as a safety net (The 8 week extension)
Provided you submit in the timeframe above your expectation should be that your renewal will be complete.
Why this is so important relates to the issue of storage and whether the police will expect you to arrange and pay for it while they process your renewal.
The police are not obliged to provide secure storage but according to Statutory Guidance the police should:
the police should work with the applicant to make the necessary arrangements for the safe, legal storage of their property until such time as the application is decided, or the police may consider the issue of a temporary permit, issued in accordance with section 7 of the Firearms Act 1968.
The links below will lead you to 2 articles that are highly relevant to his and provide further detail.
Renewal delays – https://firearmslicensing.net/delays-renewals/
Provides an overview of how firearms / shotgun certificate holders can navigate the renewal process, particularly in the event of delays.
It explains the legal framework, statutory expectations, and the options available when processing takes longer than anticipated.
Temporary Permits – https://firearmslicensing.net/temporary-permits/
Temporary Permits were designed to bridge short gaps—not to become a workaround for systemic delays. Responsible shooters deserve timely, fair treatment.
2) Grants are facing a minimum 12-month wait – but from our customers we know that this is typically significantly longer.
Grant Delays – https://firearmslicensing.net/grant-delays/
This article addresses delays in the processing of firearms certificate grants, highlighting how factors like COVID-related backlogs, the Keyham tragedy, and the introduction of statutory GP requirements have slowed the system. It explains that while the NPCC suggests a 4-month timeline for “non-complex” grants, this varies widely across forces. The piece offers practical steps applicants can take to streamline their application and suggests escalating if necessary.
3) Accurate applications are critical – You should double-check your paperwork before submission.
Accurate Applications – https://firearmslicensing.net/application-process/
This article provides detailed guidance on completing the UK firearms application form (Form 201), emphasising accuracy and transparency. It highlights the importance of avoiding false statements, ensuring all sections are completed correctly to prevent rejection.
In Summary:
Whether you’re renewing, applying, or stuck in limbo – don’t go it alone.
If you live in Beds, Cambs or Herts (or anywhere else) and want principled, practical support – join us today.
Use code BCH50off for a full year of guidance via our ultimate self-help guide for just £6.
Signing up couldn’t be easier:
Alternatively… if you want direct support and problem solving done for you... select the complete membership and leave it all to us. We will assess and understand your situation and then advocate on your behalf to resolve it.
Don’t go it alone and always feel free to reach out to us via this link.
Introduction
Put simply, a drug is any substance that alters how the body or more importantly, the mind functions.
With this in mind I don’t think it’s controversial to say that illicit drug use and safe firearm ownership are not compatible.
But what does the law say and how should police decide on whether to conduct any test?
This guide covers the legal basis for drug testing, when it may be applied, and what to expect if you’re asked to undergo one.
The Law
A key principle of Firearms Licensing is the idea of danger to public safety or the peace. It is mentioned throughout legislation both in terms of grant, refusal and revocation of certificates.
In brief; it is defined as:
A danger to public safety or the peace exists if the applicant’s ownership of the firearm could result in harm to self or others or disturb good order in public.
The Guidance
Statutory Guidance (Aug ’25) directs police as to the checks that they should make in order to ensure that there is no danger to public safety. Within this document “additional non-routine checks” are detailed as follows:
2.55 Chief officers should carry out additional, non-routine, checks if, following the initial enquiries above, they believe them to be necessary to assess suitability fully.
Factors that merit the carrying out of additional checks will depend on the circumstances of each individual case. Police forces are responsible for determining when additional checks should be undertaken.
2.56 More generally, these checks may include, but are not limited to:
a drug or alcohol test
The critical parts are:
The Practical Considerations
When the need for these checks is determined solely by the police it raises concerns about consistency and fairness in application.
There are two ways in which police might choose to apply these tests:
The independent laboratory option gives you reassurance that the test will be conducted in scientific conditions but they will charge you somewhere between £350 and £550 dependent on the type of test.
Note – Costs vary depending on the number of substances tested and whether segmented analysis is required.
In Conclusion
Illicit drug use is not prevalent in the shooting community.
Guidance emphasises that these tests are not routine and their use should be decided on the basis of individual circumstances.
Refusing a test doesn’t automatically lead to revocation but it’s essential to understand your rights and the reasoning behind the request.
If you find yourself being required to complete such a test you are well within your rights to ask for an explanation as to why the test is necessary.
Only once you have received this explanation should you decide whether to comply.
In any case it is time to contact us via this link and get support from the experts.
In an ideal world information and intelligence relating to criminality might be shared freely between law enforcement organisations. But we are not there yet.
It’s therefore not unreasonably that police might expect additional reassurance from applicants who have spent considerable time outside the UK.
