Originally Posted by
Nessie
Those proposals are even more stringent that what is required in the UK. Here there is no fingerprinting or photographing, no doctors reference required, only two referees are used and there is no obligatory or even voluntary safety course.
Yes and No. Everything you say is true, but omits probably the most significant requirement to get a license in the UK: A good reason, that is not self-defence. The requirement of a reason, combined with general culture, means that very few people have a firearms certificate.
In addition, there are some weapons for which you simply cannot get a license for in the UK (in particular, handguns), which are commonplace in the U.S.
Originally Posted by
Sabretooth
I realize that...I designed them to intentionally be stringent. Remember, I based this off of the NY law for a handgun permit that is already in place, with a few added requirements (doctor note, renewals, secure area).
I put in each requirement for a reason.
The doctors note does not have to be specific at all. Let's say an applicant does have a mental condition, the doctor simply states that he feels the applicant cannot safely handle a firearm. Period.
I think that the doctors note would be quite hard to get, unless the law included a lot of language to shield the doctor from liability if the applicant kills or injures someone. I can well imagine a general practitioner, with no particular expertise in mental health, refusing to provide a note without referring the applicant to a psychiatrist.
Requiring secure keeping is a good idea - rather surprising it isn't required already.