Reading the recommendations themselves, the IPCC are basically calling for certificates to be practically revoked (not revoked in the legal sense, worryingly) and a fresh grant process undertaken if the police decide they don't like you holding an FAC.The recommendations were made as a result of an investigation into Durham Constabulary which concluded the force missed opportunities to assess Michael Atherton’s suitability to remain in possession of his firearms and shotguns and to take action to remove them from him.
Atherton fatally shot his partner Susan McGoldrick, her sister Alison Turnbull and Alison’s daughter Tanya before turning the gun on himself in Horden, Peterlee, on Sunday, 1 January 2012.
The recommendations call for a uniform test of fitness to possess firearms and shotguns, reviews to be carried out during the term of the licence and for clear guidance and tighter restrictions in connection with applications where domestic violence has been a factor.
They're also recommending that at least one referee should include an ex-partner. Madness. Of course, there's no mention of legal liability for malicious ex-partners who provide false information.
The IPCC also recommend "achtung, firearm owner!" markers be put on your medical records. (lateral thought - it is possible to de-register from GPs altogether, isn't it?)
Of course, Durham Constabulary's failure to act against Atherton despite being called out no fewer than four times is neatly glossed over. It's those nasty firearms owners who should be targeted - and they say that police interactions which did NOT lead to a criminal conviction should be treated in the same way as actual convictions.
