UK Requiring Note From Doctor to Own Gun?

[Charlie T Waite]

The process for obtaining a firearm license in the United Kingdom is even harder and more invasive than it used to be. Last October, the Tory government issued new “statutory guidance” relating to firearm licensing and announced that “No one will be given a firearms license unless the police have reviewed information from a registered doctor setting out whether or not the applicant has any relevant medical history…” Extending beyond a medical veto on firearms licenses, the UK Home Office also announced guidance encouraging law enforcement to delve into an applicant’s social media and financial history when making license determinations.

Under existing UK law, a subject may not possess, purchase, or acquire a shotgun or rifle without a shotgun or firearm certificate/license. The already onerous application process requires an applicant to: divulge sensitive personal information, including medical data and contact information for the applicant’s general practitioner (GP); detail their firearm storage arrangements, which are subject to warrantless inspection; provide justification for possessing a shotgun or rifle; and furnish two character references.

The new Home Office rules go a great deal further, requiring a GP to sign off on a firearm license application.

Dismissing civil liberties concerns, the Home Office adopted the collectivist view that “Doctors owe a duty of confidentiality to their patients, but they also have a wider duty to protect and promote the health of… the public.”

The new rules also encourage law enforcement to conduct other invasive checks on applicants; calling for for licensing authorities to examine “information obtained from open source social media,” and for police to conduct “credit or other financial checks” as part of the firearm licensing process.

The deputy chair of the British Medical Association GP committee England stated that he was “pleased” and “delighted” by the rules change, also noting, “As doctors we support the government’s overall message – that gun ownership is a privilege and not a right…”

The right to keep and bear arms is an extension of the natural right to self-defense and is not dependent upon government for its existence. As a natural right, it is inherent to all people regardless of political interference. A government may infringe upon this right, but it cannot extinguish it.

As is so often the case, this latest UK infringement offers an important lesson for U.S. gun owners. While announcing the new rules, Home Secretary Priti Patel noted, “The UK has some of the toughest firearms laws in world, but we must never become complacent about these high standards.” Once again, gun control supporters have made clear that no amount of gun restrictions will satisfy them - short of total civilian disarmament.

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

[Gateway Kid SASS# 70038 Life]

10 hours ago, Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 said:

To a politician (either party) this an outdated piece of paper, to be seen as an obstacle to their total control of the citizens lives, to be outwitted and ignored as they deem appropriate. 
Haven’t you heard? Today the citizens are to incompetent to run their own lives and the faceless and unaccountable elitists In government will handle everything for you. (Per THEIR plan). The government knows everything, just ask them. 
Disgusted

    

Gateway Kid

[Rye Miles #13621]

The UK has completely lost their minds! 

[El Chapo]

On 1/13/2022 at 11:49 AM, Gateway Kid SASS# 70038 Life said:

To a politician (either party) this an outdated piece of paper, to be seen as an obstacle to their total control of the citizens lives, to be outwitted and ignored as they deem appropriate. 
Haven’t you heard? Today the citizens are to incompetent to run their own lives and the faceless and unaccountable elitists In government will handle everything for you. (Per THEIR plan). The government knows everything, just ask them. 
Disgusted

    

Gateway Kid

 

It is outdated.  We won the american revolution and got to make our own rules.  It was the inspiration for that decision, however.

[Gateway Kid SASS# 70038 Life]

1 minute ago, El Chapo said:

 

It is outdated.  We won the american revolution and got to make our own rules.  It was the inspiration for that decision, however.

Guess I am missing your point.

My point was the political representatives currently in dc pay absolutely no attention to the Constitution, and they see it as an impediment to their vision of nirvana in a progressive world. Even when their illegitimate legislative efforts are struck down by an increasingly less Constitutionally oriented Supreme Court it is a good bet that a near word for word copy will be introduced before the ink on the decision of the court is dry. And of course there is no point (in their minds) to asking the unwashed masses what kind of world they would like to live in as the all mighty representatives are so much more intelligent and focused on the correct way to do things.

I see virtually nothing in the past hundred years or so that would convince me that the original document is useless or incapable of being applied to any current situation.

I do see plenty of power hungry wanna be dictators who want to eliminate the enumerated rights documented in the Constitution and substitute a framework of ever growing rules/regulations that make the spider web of ropes of Gullivers travels seem nonexistent. Sadly they are incredibly persistent and and with the aid of an apathetic populace it seems they are advancing towards their goal of complete power and control.

In my experience most people just want to be left alone to live their lives as they please, where they please without answering to some faceless unaccountable person in dc who feels they must have a voice in every aspect of the citizens life.

YMMV

Regards

   

Gateway Kid

[El Chapo]

8 hours ago, Gateway Kid SASS# 70038 Life said:

Guess I am missing your point.

My point was the political representatives currently in dc pay absolutely no attention to the Constitution, and they see it as an impediment to their vision of nirvana in a progressive world. Even when their illegitimate legislative efforts are struck down by an increasingly less Constitutionally oriented Supreme Court it is a good bet that a near word for word copy will be introduced before the ink on the decision of the court is dry. And of course there is no point (in their minds) to asking the unwashed masses what kind of world they would like to live in as the all mighty representatives are so much more intelligent and focused on the correct way to do things.

I see virtually nothing in the past hundred years or so that would convince me that the original document is useless or incapable of being applied to any current situation.

I do see plenty of power hungry wanna be dictators who want to eliminate the enumerated rights documented in the Constitution and substitute a framework of ever growing rules/regulations that make the spider web of ropes of Gullivers travels seem nonexistent. Sadly they are incredibly persistent and and with the aid of an apathetic populace it seems they are advancing towards their goal of complete power and control.

In my experience most people just want to be left alone to live their lives as they please, where they please without answering to some faceless unaccountable person in dc who feels they must have a voice in every aspect of the citizens life.

YMMV

Regards

   

Gateway Kid

 

I guess I'm struggling as to how a letter to the king we no longer have was the inspiration for this response. 

 

It's not that the declaration wasn't revolutionary, but once we won our independence, it was up to us to structure a country to preserve the liberties we fought and died for.  That vision never dies, but thanks to the declaration, we no longer call him "king."  That same constitution you cite bans titles of nobility.

[Slapshot]

Well honestly I don't feel sorry for them. I worked in the North Sea for a year and half. Talked to allot of Brits and Scots. Overwhelmingly over 90% talked to agreed that people just didn't need any guns. So as far as I am concerned they asked for it and got it. Funny when I was there back in 2005 they was outlawing hatchets , and machetes' cause people was using them to kill with in the absence of guns. Got so bad they was talking about outlawing all knives except knives in the kitchen. I asked them what they was going to do when they did and people started using clubs? Cut down every tree over there?