Install on your iOS device:
Tap then "Add to Home Screen"
  • SUPPORTING RESPONSIBLE SHOOTING

The Future

Sound Moderators

Sound Moderators 8192 5464 Vicky Downs

A quick read to summarise the recently announced Home Office position on sound moderators.

Introduction

The Home Office consulted on a proposal to remove sound moderators (commonly known as suppressors) from firearms licensing controls.

The original thinking behind including such “accessories” within regulatory control is unclear but it seems to be rooted in a misunderstanding that such items were the tools of assassins and murderers.

The proposed change to Firearms Act 1968 could remove this section at 57(1)(d)

“an accessory to a lethal barrelled weapon or a prohibited weapon where the accessory is designed or adapted to diminish the noise or flash caused by firing the weapon”

from the definition of a Firearm.

In practical terms Police are currently holding records of tens of thousands of metal tubes which are typically recorded on Firearms Certificates as “NVN” (No visible numbers).

Some questions remain about when this will take place and what the new offence of possessing a sound moderator without a firearms certificate will look like.

I strongly suspect this will cause more unnecessary confusion and leave a legally imprecise situation. i.e. if a sound moderator fits both a Section 1 rifle and an unregulated air rifle – what is it?

However overall, this direction from the Home Office is a victory for common sense and has the potential to remove significant administrative burden from police and the shooting community with no demonstrable risk to public safety.

Key Findings from the Consultation

94% agreed that police certification to possess a sound moderator should be removed.

98% agreed there is no public safety risk in deregulating sound moderators.

95% supported their health and safety benefits, especially for hearing protection.

96% felt the criteria for a Legislative Reform Order (LRO) had been met.

Most respondents were certificate holders or those involved in shooting sports. Notably, even a high percentage of police and public respondents supported the proposal.

Concerns Raised

  • Risks of substandard moderator manufacture if deregulated.
  • Potential misuse by criminals or poachers due to reduced sound.
  • Suggestions that moderators should still only be sold to certificate holders, even if no variation is needed.

Government Position

  • Sound moderators are inert, non-dangerous accessories.
  • The government agrees with simplifying their legal treatment.
  • It plans to remove moderators from the definition of “firearm” via primary legislation.
  • A new offence will be created: possessing a sound moderator without holding a valid firearms certificate—thus removing the admin burden of certificate variations but retaining some control over possession and ownership.

The full government response can be found via this link:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/684953fe7cba25f610c7da8c/Sound+moderators+-+Consultation+response+document+_030625_+final__8_.pdf

Safe Hands, Sound Judgement

Safe Hands, Sound Judgement 2560 1707 Chris Downs

This article provides a practical guide to demonstrating competence in firearms handling, particularly in the context of UK Firearms Licensing. It highlights how Firearms Enquiry Officers (FEOs) increasingly assess applicants’ ability to use firearms safely, a factor that has been overlooked but is now central to licensing decisions.

Key points include:

  • The link between Competence and Public Safety
  • Ways to demonstrate competence
  • Common FEO questions

It advises applicants to prepare thoroughly for FEO interviews, ensuring they can confidently answer questions and provide evidence of safe firearm handling.

Sorry you do not have access to this content - register or upgrade.

Firearms & Shotgun Regimes compared

Firearms & Shotgun Regimes compared 2560 1537 Chris Downs

This article provides a detailed comparison of Firearms Certificates (FAC) and Shotgun Certificates (SGC) under UK law, highlighting key differences in requirements, restrictions, and police assessments. It explains how the SGC regime was introduced in 1968 as a less stringent form of control compared to the FAC, but recent trends show police forces tightening their stance on renewals.

Key points include:

  • Legal wording differences
  • Good reason requirement
  • Ownership and conditions
  • Increasing Police scrutiny

The document also discusses potential future alignment of the two regimes and advises SGC Holders to prepare for more intrusive scrutiny.

Sorry you do not have access to this content - register or upgrade.

Back to top