This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

pulse june2020 80x101px
Read the latest issue online

GPs go forth

GPs will not be legally liable for firearms licence approvals

Police officers - and not GPs - will be legally liable for judging whether someone is able to possess a firearm, and for checking medical records of applicants, new draft Government guidance has clarified. 

The new draft Home Office guidelines, unveiled for consultation today, also clarifies that GPs will be allowed to refuse to provide information for patients applying for licences, and that GPs will be allowed to charge a fee if they so wish. 

The issue of whether GPs hold responsibility for flagging medical issues for firearms licenses has previously been ambiguous, but the latest guidelines have been agreed with the BMA. 

GPs will still be asked to provide medical information if a firearms applicant has a history of relevant mental or physical conditions, and will also be asked to alert the authorities if their patients develop a medical condition that could affect their ability to hold a firearms licence after it has been issued.

However, the Home Office has said this new advice will address GP concerns over liability, and will make it clear that the legal responsibility lies solely with the police. 

It follows a long debate over who holds responsibility for flagging potential medical conditions that could affect a person's ability to hold a firearms license. 

GPs have been involved in the process since 2016, when they were asked to put a 'firearm reminder' code in records of all patients who have a gun, and inform police of those that were at risk of developing a mental health issue. 

Earlier this year, the BMA GP Committee changed its stance on GP firearm checks in favour of the flagging process. Previously they had not recommended this step. 

The guidance was written in consultation with GPs, the police and shooting organisations. All parties agreed greater consistency in the issuing of licences is needed and the Government is now seeking feedback on the draft guidance.

Alongside the Department of Health and Social Care, the Home Office has said it is looking into how it can support the system of flagging patient records with a national IT system to encourage doctors' use of the flagging system. 

It also clarified that GPs would be able to 'conscientiously object' to the process, in which the application would be passed to another GP in the practice and if not, then the applicant may have to move to a different GP practice.

On the issue of payment, the consultation document says that GPs can request a fee but is a matter between the applicant and their GP.

Dr Mark Sanford-Wood, BMA GP Committee deputy chair, said: 'First and foremost, the firearms licensing process must have public safety at its heart, and there can be no half measures when it comes to regulating the ownership of weapons that can be used with lethal outcomes.

'GPs can have an important – but not compulsory - role to play in this and the MOU agreed by the BMA, the Home Office and the police is welcome clarification over where responsibility for licensing and safety lies.

'The BMA supports moves towards an appropriately resourced system to minimise the risks of gun ownership and remains in constructive dialogue with the Home Office in pursuit of a consistent national process. We will be responding to the consultation’s proposals in due course.'

Minister for Policing and the Fire Service Nick Hurd said he is confident that GPs and the police agree that issues for firearms licenses must be more consistent.

He said: ‘We have some of the toughest firearms controls in the world and we must do everything we can to ensure it stays this way.

‘We need to bring greater consistency to how firearms licences are issued and I am confident that the police, GPs and shooting groups agree. We have listened to their concerns and are proposing a way forward that tightens up the system without creating unreasonable demands.

‘The bottom line is public safety. Firearms must only be in the hands of the most safe and responsible people. This is not something we are prepared to compromise on.’

Police departments have previously been in hot water by sending GPs subject access requests for patient data to determine whether applicants were medically safe to hold a firearms licence, which was potentially breaching the law.

An independent police inspectorate, Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS), also previously found that there was inconsistent practice in the issuing of firearms licensing and that medical information was not being shared.


Readers' comments (11)

  • Took Early Retirement

    Took their time. At least it will shut up the BASC who have been loudly shouting that GPs should do it for free.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • About time. Please do not send us any more letters to read. Too much work. Not interested.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Where's Optimus?

    He said: ‘We have some of the toughest firearms controls in the world and we must do everything we can to ensure it stays this way.


    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • if you can be sued for it, you must be paid for it ! no extra monee - no extra workee ! if you do that for nothing, you might as well lock yourself in the surgery overnight to deal with all the other GANFYD requests free - don't forget to take your checkbook, because YOU will have to pay your secretary for typing all this stuff out !!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • best to say no

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Nhsfatcat

    Good precedent to have. Want a job done? Pay here first.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • BASC life membership is £1600.00 or £80 per year for an adult. Surely BASC that should be for free?!

    Not sure why you think your staff should be paid for doing their jobs when you don't think we should..

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Who are they kidding? GPs will be held liable

    All those pre-2016 that do not have records flags - GP failed to notify and someone was shot.

    Fees - there has always been a fee, UNTIL 2016!!!! when BMA abolished it!!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I’m sorry, but I think ALL GPs who provide gun license certifications should provide a charge for verifying and the cost of having to provide additional information at ANY point in that individual’s life time of gun ownership. I think a standard £190 fee is fair.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The ongoing monitoring is the massive risk.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page

Have your say