In this second article, we examine the tests to be applied by the police in more detail.
Home office guidance exists in respect of this as well as informal guidance issued by various police forces. Areas that can be taken into account in consideration of the application are:
Cases law in respect of the relevance of previous convictions are:
'Dabek v Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall (1991)', where the court ruled that a woman of good character should not possess a gun where her husband had two ancient drug convictions but still associated with drug users;
'Chief Constable of Essex v Germain (1991)', where the court ruled that a chief officer was entitled, in revoking a shotgun certificate, to take into account the certificate holder’s drink driving convictions. It was felt that this demonstrated irresponsibility and lack of self-control and justified the chief officer believing there was a future risk to the peace involving the shotgun;
'Spencer-Stewart v Chief Constable of Kent (1989)', where the court ruled that the certificate holder’s handling stolen goods conviction was considered not to pose any future risk in relation to possession of a shotgun, and thus the revocation of the certificate was not justified.
Each case must be judged on its own merits, there is not a finite list of good reasons available for wanting to possess a firearm. Where an applicant wishes to possess more than one firearm a good reason in relation to each must be provided. The Home Office guidance states that “Good reason” should be neither confined to need nor equated with desire. Most firearm certificate holders possess firearms for reasons of their profession, sport recreation, or collecting, study or research and may properly wish to exercise discretion as to what types of firearms they choose for these purposes. On the other hand, a simple wish to own a particular sort of firearm is not in itself “good reason” without further supporting evidence of intentions. Case law such as Anderson v Neilans (1940) and Joy v Chief Constable of Dumfries and Galloway (1966) suggests that the application should be considered firstly “from the standpoint of the applicant rather than from that of a possible objector”. “Good reason” will need to be demonstrated for each firearm to be held under section 1 of the 1968 Act.
Section 28(1B) of the 1968 Act, as substituted by section 3(1) of the 1988 Act, provides for sporting or competition purposes and shooting vermin to be regarded as good reasons for possessing a shotgun. Collecting, study and research may also be considered good reason as in the case of section 1 firearms. That sub-section also states that an application shall not be refused by virtue of that paragraph merely because the applicant intends neither to use the gun himself nor to lend it for anyone else to use. This is likely to be the case when the shotgun is of special significance to the applicant, such as an heirloom or is of some other sentimental value and may also be considered good reason to possess a shotgun. The Police may make further enquiries where it comes to their notice that there may be genuine doubts about the applicant’s reason for wishing to possess a shotgun.
Good reason is ultimately fact specific, if you are of any doubt as to whether you have a good reason or if you think that your application has been refused where you have a good reason you should seek specialist legal advice.
The police should satisfy themselves that the applicant can be permitted to possess a shotgun without danger to public safety or to the peace. This will necessitate an interview and consideration of their security arrangements. A Court in England and Wales that imposes a suspended sentence may order the forfeiture of a firearm or cancel a firearm or shotgun certificate. Even if a court does not make such an order, chief officers of police have the power to revoke a firearm or shotgun certificate in certain circumstances. In particular when they are satisfied that the holder is of intemperate habits or of unsound mind, is otherwise unfit to be entrusted with a firearm or can no longer be permitted to have a firearm or ammunition without danger to the public safety or to the peace.