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
- Use the official Parliament website: https://members.parliament.uk/members/Commons
- Enter your postcode to get their name, email address, and postal address.
Step 2: Include your full name and full postal address
- MPs can only respond to people who live in their constituency.
- If you don’t include your full address, your message will not be logged or passed to the MP.
Step 3: Keep your message short and personal
- 5–7 sentences is ideal.
- Say you are a certificate holder and a constituent.
- Pick from the points above (or something else) and write in your own words
- Explain why this matters to you.
Step 4: Be polite and constructive
- MPs respond far better to respectful, measured messages.
- Avoid templates – your own words carry far more weight.
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.
