Gun Control Laws in England: A Reappraisal in the Aftermath of the Plymouth Shooting Incident
The maritime city of Plymouth, on the southern coast of the Southwestern Peninsula of England, made the national news headlines for all the wrong reasons when one of its residents embarked upon a 12-minute shooting spree during the evening of 12 August 2021. Jake Davison, a 22-year-old apprentice crane operator, first opened fire on his 51-year-old mother at their home in Biddick Drive, Keyham, before killing a three-year-old girl and her 43-year-old father in the street outside. His next victim was a 59-year-old man who was walking his dogs in an adjacent park. Davison then shot another 66-year-old woman, who later died at Derriford Hospital, before turning his self-loading pump-action shotgun on himself, outside a hairdressing salon. Two other shooting victims, a mother and son, aged 53 and 33 respectively, survived. This was the first mass shooting incident in Britain since Derrick Bird went on the rampage in Cumbria on 2 June 2010, killing twelve people and injuring eleven others. Normally such an incident would not attract anywhere near the same level of attention across the Atlantic, where the crowd-sourced Mass Shooting Tracker Project has already recorded 411 mass shooting incidents in America this year (as of 31 July), in each of which at least four or more people were shot at.
Various media accounts have painted a picture of Davison as a troubled person, interested in firearms, pornography, and Americana, a Trump supporter, and a participant in the online “incel” (involuntary celibate) subculture, which attracts misogynistic men unable to form relationships with members of the opposite sex. His YouTube channel and social media accounts (Facebook, Reddit) soon provided a wealth of information about his recent state of mind. It also transpired that Davison lawfully held a firearm certificate for “sporting purposes”. His licence had been revoked in December 2020, following an alleged assault in September, only to be returned in early July 2021, after he had satisfactorily attended an anger management course.
Gun crime is thankfully rare in Britain when compared with the shooting epidemic in America, where firearm-related homicide is not automatically newsworthy. Even the British police are not routinely armed, lessening the risks of gun battles on the streets between officers of the law and members of the public. According to the Home Office, firearms account for less than 0.2% of recorded crime in England and Wales.
The incident in Plymouth has sparked an investigation by the Independent Office for Police Conduct of Cornwall Police into the process by which Devon and Cornwall Police issued Davison with a licence, only to revoke and then reinstate it. It would be premature, and also inappropriate, to speculate further on a matter now under official investigation, but it seems an opportune moment to reappraise the gun laws in England and Wales as they stand.
The Home Office Guide on Firearms Licensing, last revised in April 2016, defines a firearm as a “lethal barrelled weapon of any description from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged”. Somewhat confusingly, ‘lethality’, which should be self-evident, is not defined in legislation and has to be determined on a case-by-case basis. Unlike the situation in America, ownership of a firearm is regarded as a privilege, and not as a constitutionally-defined right.
Legally acceptable firearms in England and Wales include certain types of rifles and handguns (pistols and revolvers), which have grooved bores, and shotguns, which are smooth-bored. Firearm and shotgun certificates are both issued and renewed, under the Firearms Act 1968, by the licensing authority-the police. Certificates can be held by either individuals and organisations in possession of firearms, shotguns, and “dangerous” low-powered air weapons. The recipient must be suitable and have a “good” reason to possess and use a firearm, such as work, sport or leisure, without posing a a threat to public safety. Acceptable reasons include gun club membership, target (clay pigeon) shooting, deer stalking, and “vermin” control. Unlike in the US, self-defence is not considered a legitimate reason for firearm ownership.
As part of their background checks police interview the applicant, visit the person’s property, collect medical and mental health information, check criminal records, obtain references from one (shotgun) or two(firearm) self-nominated referees. This process is subject to police discretion, especially for less stringent shotgun certificates. The applicant’s GP is notified on grant or renewal of a firearms certificate, so that an encoded reminder can be placed on the individual’s record. All grants of licences are subject to the secure storage of firearms and section 1 (firearm) ammunition, ideally in a locked gun cabinet meeting British standard BS 7558, although alternative specified forms of storage may be acceptable.
On the face of it, British legislation may appear stringent enough as it stands, even with an element of inbuilt discretion. Nevertheless, offenders can slip through the safety nets, as in the case of Davison. In a climate of domestic terrorism and the growing numbers of people with grudges against certain sections of the public, the state, or other “enemies”, imagined or otherwise, careful allocation of firearm and shotgun certificates takes on a new urgency. Judging from Davison’s case, it seems that trawling through applicants’ social media accounts may provide much more reliable background information than any of the more conventional checks currently in place.
The tragic deaths of five totally innocent Plymothians is to be deeply regretted. This mass shooting, one too many, should provide a timely reminder that although there are many good initiatives in America worthy of emulation, a libertarian approach to firearms control may not be one of them.
Ashis Banerjee