CPSA solicitor advises to surrender certifcate voluntarily

[ehb102]

Anyone seen the new issue of Pull! magazine? Whilst flicking through to check for new posters of Ed (lowest pic count in months) I read the article "Medical Matters" by the honorary solicitor Laura Sainsbury. Page 25-26.

If you are experiencing an extended period of ill-health (particularly if it is an episode of serious stress or depression as a result of major traumatic events in your life such as divorce or bereavement following the death of a loved one), consider taking a proactive approach rather than simply waiting for it to come to the attention of the police from other sources or on your next renewal. By this, I mean consider placing your guns in temporary storage with a dealer or a friend who has capacity to keep them until such time as the particular difficultly has passed and your health has improved. You should notify the police that you have done so and, in the more serious cases, you may even wish to consider volunteering that you will temporarily surrender your certificate to the police.

This all may sound like a brave move, but it may be the lesser of two evils. Surely it is preferable if it avoids revocation of your certificate you have to embark on the costly and slow process of an appeal to the Crown Court. Your open and upfront is approach is likely to be welcomed by the police, as they place a considerable value on developing a relationship of trust with certificate holders. It will probably be interpreted as an indication that you are a responsible gun owner who has some insight into your current problems and your capacity to handle them, rather than being in denial. As a result they may well be prepared to work with you or agree a temporary compromise (such as storage elsewhere than your home address( until your difficulties have been resolved.

I am not sure what I think about this advice coming from the official solicitor of the CPSA. The bits in bold make me think if I had received this as advice I'd paid for I'd say it wasn't certain enough. I'm mulling it over, but like so much of the advice around gun control it seems to be not about the law or even on official Home Office guidance on interpreting the law but about opinions and suppositions and in fact prejudices. Personally I'm a big advocate of measures to stop incidents like the Atherton shootings, and very tired of people who like to ignore the fact that if you have a gun it becomes a possibility that you may use it to kill a person, but I think this statement about mental health is stigmatising and needs unpicking. Being depressed is common. Being a risk of suicide is much less common.

I don't know. I don't think if I went to see the doctor for a bit of mild depression I'd be rushing to send my guns off elsewhere, let alone give up shooting (gentle exercise, activity, open air, company - it's recommend treatment for depression). What do you all think? 

 

[** Pending Removal **]

I never read it anymore or other magazines contributions to this subject because i used to find myself thinking ' what '..!

After reading the above clipping....I have to say do what you think best........but i would not advise any friend of mine who gets divorced or has a bereavement to do any of the above....I think it is a daft suggestion. There are many tough times in life where people can feel very down...and often it is their sport and playing their sport amongst friends which helps pull them through tough times..! Nope....I am afraid i am shouting 'balls' at this bit :wink:

As for anyone bringing anything to the attention of the police as stated above........well I suppose someone could....and then take the consequences. Malicious reporting in the past has put people in court for libel....and in my opinion so it should.

If you have not got chapter and verse about any supposed condition etc.....you will end up in serious trouble yourself....and your licence / character can be then vulnerable. You need a lot more than 'I don't like that person' in the grown up world of litigation.

As for depression or similar issues......this has been discussed before at various levels. Many contributors pointed out that if medical tagging came in....shooters who started presenting with any problem....would be likely to not report it to the doctor for the obvious reasons.

This is of course a very complicated subject.....I agree with the idea of putting your guns with a licensed friend or RFD if you need thinking time. I know chaps who did this during a divorce so that they could not be falsely accused of any action with a gun.

But i would never suggest voluntarily surrendering your ticket.

However.......Each to their own.......you pay your money......you make your choice.

(Edit for spells on iPad)

 

[Dunc]

This is so dependant on circumstances it is difficult to be definitative. 

However, if you're suffering from severe depression as seems to have been suggested,

.............particularly if it is an episode of serious stress or depression as a result..............

then the advice seems to me to be reasonable. 

And I agree totally with TinkerB 

This is of course a very complicated subject.....I agree with the idea of putting your guns with a licensed friend or RFD if you need thinking time. I know chaps who did this during a divorce so that they could not be falsely accused of any action with a gun.

 

[sarachambers]

I think what's she's said it perfectly legitimate in respect of someone who has serious stress or depression and think it's quite a good article.

She's not said it explicitly, but the tipping point has got to be morbid or suicidal thoughts (hence serious). It's more than sensible for someone in that situation to hand the guns to a friend or temporarily surrender licence so as not to have guns available to him until they have had successful treatment and are back to normal.

I agree with Nicola that someone who is depressed/stressed but not feeling like that may get great benefit from continuing to shoot and it could be an overreaction to hand in guns if someone is feeling low for perfectly legitimate reasons (stress at work, bereavement etc) and is having appropriate help.

Ultimately it's a matter of degree but it's an absolute fact that people who are seriously depressed have been known to kill themselves and so I see no problem with practical advice on what an individual may do if they are depressed/stressed is a good thing. Better someone hands their gun in / gives to a friend for a few months or a year until better, than have it revoked and face an uphill struggle in future licensing. And certainly better than the worst case scenario!!

Liz made the point is is quite general. I don't think it could be anything other - it's not "legal advice" in the formal sense - no one can rely on it. Everyone's circumstance is different. But it seems a sensible starting point for someone in that situation. I note that we now have revocation insurance - does anyone know if it covers advice pre- revocation stage, for example for someone in a situation like that alluded to in the article?

 

[Aspire]

I think it just says "I can't trust myself" in which case,I don't think somebody so mentally weak should have a cert in the first place. Yes depression is an illness. So is schizophrenia,but you wouldn't let a schizophrenic have a shotgun cert (hopefully) So why let someone who is proven succeptible to depression have one? especially if they themselves don't trust their own actions during such episodes.

 

[Nick Selby]

I think what's she's said it perfectly legitimate in respect of someone who has serious stress or depression and think it's quite a good article.

She's not said it explicitly, but the tipping point has got to be morbid or suicidal thoughts (hence serious). It's more than sensible for someone in that situation to hand the guns to a friend or temporarily surrender licence so as not to have guns available to him until they have had successful treatment and are back to normal.

I agree with Nicola that someone who is depressed/stressed but not feeling like that may get great benefit from continuing to shoot and it could be an overreaction to hand in guns if someone is feeling low for perfectly legitimate reasons (stress at work, bereavement etc) and is having appropriate help.

having worked in Mental health for a few years (yep, physios do work in MH), I have seen how quickly depressionstress can spiral out of control. Personally for me, anyone with this diagnosis should have their cert suspended until they have experienced a lengthy period not on medication and 'well' post treatment for their condition.

 

[sarachambers]

I think that's rather a blanket rule which could have the unfortunate effect of people who could do with support be it through medication or counselling being put off attending the doctor for something that could be easily resolved eg. could indeed not actually be depression or stress, but rather the sign of a particular illness or over tiredness or even bullying at work!

I think some kind of automatic suspension simply stigmatises the situation, and stops people being willing to talk.

Without a doubt if someone gets a severe mental health issue, this is something that they ( possibly along with their doctor) should be discussing with licensing. However, I think it would be quite improper to have a situation where people cannot speak openly with their doctor about a medical condition or personal situation which may be making them feel down, without there being some automatic suspension of their licence - particularly as doctors are not unknown to diagnose depression and offer up anti depressants where they simply haven't worked out what the actual medical problem is!

I don't know what the stats are but depression and stress are very common. I suspect for most people they are also transient or easily treatable.

Let's not the throw the baby out with the bath water.

 

[HDAV]

I think it just says "I can't trust myself" in which case,I don't think somebody so mentally weak should have a cert in the first place. Yes depression is an illness. So is schizophrenia,but you wouldn't let a schizophrenic have a shotgun cert (hopefully) So why let someone who is proven succeptible to depression have one? especially if they themselves don't trust their own actions during such episodes.

Well for your sake I truly hope you never experience depression .

The article does seem rather wet and considering the revocation insurance we now get (I think) it seems odd, putting your guns in storage may be very sensible especially on the case of divorce or similar (having a cert and guns does leave us open to accusations, which can be far more damaging) however the practise of surrendering them every time there is a blip will do more harm than good......

 

[Nick Selby]

I think that's rather a blanket rule which could have the unfortunate effect of people who could do with support be it through medication or counselling being put off attending the doctor for something that could be easily resolved eg. could indeed not actually be depression or stress, but rather the sign of a particular illness or over tiredness or even bullying at work!

I think some kind of automatic suspension simply stigmatises the situation, and stops people being willing to talk.

Without a doubt if someone gets a severe mental health issue, this is something that they ( possibly along with their doctor) should be discussing with licensing. However, I think it would be quite improper to have a situation where people cannot speak openly with their doctor about a medical condition or personal situation which may be making them feel down, without there being some automatic suspension of their licence - particularly as doctors are not unknown to diagnose depression and offer up anti depressants where they simply haven't worked out what the actual medical problem is!

I don't know what the stats are but depression and stress are very common. I suspect for most people they are also transient or easily treatable.

Let's not the throw the baby out with the bath water.

Personally, I think it is right that once a diagnosis has been made, that a ban is the right thing to do until it has been proven that the patient is and has been well for a period of time. We all know when we apply for the cert that we have to declare any diagnosis of mental health conditions and also understand that if we are then diagnosed with one whilst in possesion of a cert, that we should inform authorities and expect to have the cert suspended. 

 

[Aspire]

Well for your sake I truly hope you never experience depression .

The article does seem rather wet and considering the revocation insurance we now get (I think) it seems odd, putting your guns in storage may be very sensible especially on the case of divorce or similar (having a cert and guns does leave us open to accusations, which can be far more damaging) however the practise of surrendering them every time there is a blip will do more harm than good......

Me too! But,I'm sure I'd pose no risk if I did! If a person doesn't trust themselves to have access to a shotgun,they should never be allowed near them again. Full stop.

 

[jwpzx9r]

Divorce likely to cause some one stress and possible depression????????? Some people I know have never been better mentally after their divorce's... the bills have been the only cause of angst!

Being more serious about the point though being depressed does not automatically place you in the category that you are likely to self harm and going out shooting with your friends may just be a way of lifting your head a bit and lift you out of the downward spiral. I think it is a difficult one and it would depend on the individual not everybody is actually in a position to understand mental health. Mention "stress" and "depression" and lots of people automatically think of the affected reaching for the gun or a rope ...not at all the case.. my sister had a bout of mild depression brought on by a slipped disc ?? She was not thinking about topping herself though! But the do-gooder in the street would have had her guns taken away! As soon as her back healed she was back to normal.

 

[sarachambers]

Nick, I would be interested in you expanding on your suggestion.

1. Who would give the "diagnosis"? Would it be any medical professional, a GP, a psychologist, a psychiatrist etc?

2. Would there be a legal duty upon specified professional to report that the individual has been so diagnosed?

3. What would be the legal penalty if a professional failed to report?

4. What mental health issues would be covered by this automatic ban/suspension? Would these be listed? Would all DSM conditions be covered?

5. Would there be anti avoidance rules in respect of the license holder? (Eg what of individual went direct to private counsellor/psychologist so as to deliberately avoid diagnosis)

 

[westley]

Although I may not totally agree with the article, I can see some sense in it. I once had first hand experience of a friend, who's ex wife of some 3 years, found out that he had taken up clay shooting. She promptly notified his certificate issuing Constabulary, that, during their divorce, her ex had been receiving treatment for depression. This led to what ammounted to a Police 'raid' and his 1 shotgun was seized. It transpired that when applying for his shotgun certificate, he had failed to mention his depression (some 3 years previous). He was informed that if he surrendered his certificate voluntarily, he would not be prosecuted for NOT making this declaration on his application form. He opted for that course of action and gave up a shortlived shooting career.

 

[ips]

Divorce likely to cause some one stress and possible depression????????? Some people I know have never been better mentally after their divorce's... the bills have been the only cause of angst!

absolutely agree with that. My decree nissi from 1st Mrs nutcase 18 yrs ago was a very happy occasion only thing that was even better was decree absolute. I was and am much happier and generally less stressed ever since even though it cost me hugely. Best money i was ever conned out of though.

 

[HDAV]

Me too! But,I'm sure I'd pose no risk if I did! If a person doesn't trust themselves to have access to a shotgun,they should never be allowed near them again. Full stop.

Doesn't matter if your sure you would pose no risk, end of shooting for you chap......

That's the point, you don't have to be depressed to go a murderous rampage and severely depressed people don't make good judgement calls so the suggestion you would be able to make the decision if it came is nonesense.

People change circumstances change to suggest any one suffering from any form of mental illness should not be able to have an SGC (terms of which are a danger to society and likely to breach the peace?) is so over handed its untrue! What this course will do is foster the "I'm not going to the doctor they will take my guns away" approach, the best way to treat mental illness is to de stigmatise it not stigmatise it further! Suggesting depression = not safe to have a SGC will just prevent more cert holders seeking treatment and increase the risks......

 

[no.1topdog]

Me too! But,I'm sure I'd pose no risk if I did! If a person doesn't trust themselves to have access to a shotgun,they should never be allowed near them again. Full stop.

Aspire, I used to think just like you when I was younger. At your age (I don't know) I hadn't had too many personal traumas and I thought I could tough things out like you. The older you get the more things happen around round you. It may start with Grandparents dying, but you can handle that because you're not too close, and you only see them twice a year. Then it's your parents, this is harder to take as you are usually much closer. Then it's your close friends, girlfriend or maybe even your own child. You may even see one of them die infront of you traumatically. That hits you hard!

The point I'm trying to make is we all walk a knife edge. No matter how far to one side we think we are, it doesn't take much to tip you over the edge. Any one of us has the capacity to run right off the rails at very short notice, no matter how level headed you think you are. Until that situation arises, you will never be sure how you will react.  

 

[Nick Selby]

Nick, I would be interested in you expanding on your suggestion.

1. Who would give the "diagnosis"? Would it be any medical professional, a GP, a psychologist, a psychiatrist etc?

2. Would there be a legal duty upon specified professional to report that the individual has been so diagnosed?

3. What would be the legal penalty if a professional failed to report?

4. What mental health issues would be covered by this automatic ban/suspension? Would these be listed? Would all DSM conditions be covered?

5. Would there be anti avoidance rules in respect of the license holder? (Eg what of individual went direct to private counsellor/psychologist so as to deliberately avoid diagnosis)

1. The diagnosis can only really be given by a GP or Psychiatrist in my opinion....

2. I would suggest that if the professional is aware of the patient having a SGCFAC then yes, they should inform the correct authority.

3. I would suggest that the professional should have some form of disciplinary for not informing.

4. I would say that anyone with a diagnosis for either Schizophrenia, Bi Polar, Depression etc should have cert suspended and possibly (depression) have to go through further assessment prior to regaining their cert. I would suggest that this is something a psychiatristRCPGPs etc decide upon though, not a physio......

5. This is unenforcebale. If the person decides to hide anything, how will anyone know? I would suggest the person has a moral obligation to do the right thing...

Mental health is a can of worms. I've worked in this area for 4 years now and understand how quickly things change. Personally, I think it is better to err on the side of caution. This is my view, probably quite different from many on here.

Let me ask you a question: If you saw someone who you knew just leave a pub after drinking 10 pints of beer and then get in their car to drive home would you i) try to stop them  ii) Call the police or iii) ignore it and hope that they get home ok without hurting themselves or anyone else?.......

 

[jwpzx9r]

Well of course I would try to stop them by reasoning if possible and if not by calling the police before they left the location.... but what has any of i, ii or iii got to do with someone's mental health?

 

[Nick Selby]

Well of course I would try to stop them by reasoning if possible and if not by calling the police before they left the location.... but what has any of i, ii or iii got to do with someone's mental health?

if someone is drunk, their actionsthoughts are impaired. If someone has depressionmental health problems, their actionsthoughts can be impaired....... quite simple really.

The police will always err on the side of  caution with this as they would be crucified in the media if a person holding a SGC who is also known to have a diagnosis of depression etc then goes on to do something unpleasant....