Taxpayer subsidies and the price of a firearms licence

Grouse hunting
'For whatever reason, I am being required to subsidise gun owners across Warwickshire.' Photograph: Press Association

The price of a firearms licence hasn't risen since 2001, but it is a matter of great concern to me that – for whatever reason – I am being required to subsidise gun owners across Warwickshire.

Frankly, it defies all logic and is manifestly unfair. To my disappointment, when Midlands Today chose to cover the issue, its report failed to point out that the £50 licence fee covered five years; it said the charge was for "processing paperwork". The truth is that the costs cover rigorous background checks, as well as inspections of the gun owner's property and security. One reason that we are able to live in a society with unarmed police is because of our rigorous system of firearm regulation.

I am not prepared to enter any sort of party political debate on this. Party politics should be utterly irrelevant. The latest comprehensive spending review requires me to take a further £9m out of Warwickshire's policing budget. I'd like to see anyone – irrespective of their political persuasion – convince me that I can justify heavily subsidising gun owners at the same time as reducing staffing levels then maintain the same level of service to the public.

I have no problem with the well-regulated use of firearms in the country and in gun clubs. This is one thing. Expecting the rest of the population to pick up three–quarters of the cost for licensing is another matter entirely.
Ron Ball
Police and crime commissioner, Warwickshire

The current renewal system for firearms and shotgun licences is onerous and outdated (Row over taxpayer subsidisation of gun licences, 23 April). But simply passing the cost of inefficiencies on to responsible firearms owners is not the right solution. The requirement to renew firearms licences every five years takes up far too much valuable police time and creates red tape. Put simply, it's not good for the police, it's not good for responsible firearms users and it's not good for the taxpayer.

That is why the Country Land and Business Association (CLA) has called for shotgun and firearms licence renewal period to be extended from five to 10 years, freeing up police time, creating a cost-efficient system and saving the taxpayer money. This is not a new idea. In 1995 the Association of Chief Police Officers argued for an extension from three to five years and it worked, creating significant savings in bureaucracy and improving public safety. The police now have the incentive to look into problems as and when they arise and not simply when a specified amount of time has passed.

That is why it's time for a common-sense approach to firearms and shotgun licences. If this government is serious about its red-tape challenge, then ministers must realise that passing on the cost simply won't work. By extending the renewal period, firearms officers can target resources where they are needed rather than waste money on paper chasing, without any impact on the public safety.
Henry Robinson
CLA president

What level of madness have we reached when taxpayers, on the say-so of the prime minister, have to subsidise by millions of pounds the ownership of guns, many of which are owned by rich men, including the PM, who kill things for pleasure?
Sheila Rigby
Bognor Regis, West Sussex