‘A wicked problem’? Risk assessment and decision-making when licensing possession and use of firearms in Greater London
| Author | Robin Bryant,Roger Arditti |
| Published date | 01 September 2019 |
| Date | 01 September 2019 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0032258X18797992 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
‘A wicked problem’?
Risk assessment
and decision-making
when licensing possession
and use of firearms
in Greater London
Robin Bryant
Canterbury Christ Church University, Canterbury, UK
Roger Arditti
Metropolitan Police Service, London, UK
Abstract
This paper analyses the risk assessment and decision-making used by a police force to
assess the suitability of a person to own a firearm. The decision to grant a firearms
licence has many characteristics of a ‘wicked problem’. Firearms Enquiries Officers
(FEOs) in the police force concerned primarily use professional judgement to solve this
problem, employing various forms of reasoning and heuristics, but potentially also prone
to cognitive bias. We conclude with some observations on how training of FEOs and
their supervisors in risk assessment and decision-making might be further developed.
Keywords
Firearms licensing, police risk assessment, police decision-making
Introduction
The ability of members of the public in the UK to obtain licensed firearms remains
tightly controlled, with successive legislation incrementally giving rise to one of the
most restrictive firearms control regimes in the world (Squires et al., 2008: 10). Gun
Corresponding author:
Robin Bryant, Canterbury Christ Church University, North Holmes Road, Canterbury, Kent CT1 1QU, UK.
Email: robin.bryant@canterbury.ac.uk
The Police Journal:
Theory, Practice and Principles
2019, Vol. 92(3) 203–220
ªThe Author(s) 2018
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0032258X18797992
journals.sagepub.com/home/pjx
ownership levels in the UK are also relatively low compared with most other European
countries (European Commission, 2013: 7) and Greater London has one of the lowest per
capita rates in England and Wales.
1
Further, the majority of the 32,000 or so licence-
holders in Greater London are law-abiding citizens who have good reason to own a
shotgun or firearm, and store and use their guns in a safe and responsible manner.
Moreover, compared to other more ‘action-oriented’ spheres of policing, firearms licen-
sing may appear to be a largely bureaucratic, transactional function with little to interest
the policing or academic communities.
And yet the three most recent, non- terrorist-related mass killin gs in the UK that
involved the use of firearms (in Hungerford in 1987, in Dunblane in 1996 and in the
county of Cumbria in 2010) were all committed by individuals holding shotgun and/or
firearm certificates.
2
Similarly, there have been several tragic domestic incidents involv-
ing licensed firearms, including the attempted murder of Rachel Williams in 2011, the
murders committed by Michael Atherton in Durham in 2012, and the murders of Chris-
tine and Lucy Lee in Surrey in 2014. Evidence is also emerging of an upward trend in
firearms offences in England and Wales from 2016 onwards (Allen and Audickas,
2017).
3
In England and Wales the procedures that determine whether a member of the public
can lawfully possess and use a firear m are governed by the Firearms Act 196 8 (as
amended). The Home Office Guide on Firearms Licensing Law 2016 provides detailed
guidance to police forces on how best to interpret and implement statute (Home Office,
2016).
The Firearms Act 1968 provides several tests in relation to the grant or renewal of
certificates (licences). A key test is that a police force chief officer must be satisfied that
any grant or renewal of a licence is ‘without danger to the public safety or to the peace’.
However, as HMIC notes, ‘there is no definition, either in the Firearms Act 1968 or in the
Home Office guidance to describe or explain ho w “danger to the peace” should be
applied’ (HMIC, 2015: 8). Case law offers limited direction, but suggests that ‘irrespon-
sible and uncontrolled behaviour’ would amount to ‘danger to the peace’ (HMIC, 2015:
63). In the absence of detailed guidance, police forces have taken a pragmatic approach
on what constitutes ‘irresponsible and uncontrolled behaviour’ amounting to ‘danger to
the public safety or peace’. However, there can also be a tension between the emotive or
normative effect of an incident involving a certificate-holder and the tests imposed by
the Firearms Act 1968 which govern how the police can react. For example, during the
analysis of 730 case files (see ‘Methods’ below) we found certificates revoked by FEOs
and their managers on grounds such as ‘unsuitable behaviour to have a SGC [shotgun
certificate] or FAC [firearms certificate], case of possession of multiple indecent
images’. In this case even if this licence-holder were to be convicted of an offence under
the Protection of Children Act 1978 and subject to a Community Order there would still
not be a prima facie case that public safety or order would be at risk if the certificate were
not revoked.
4
However, neighbours of the convicted person might naturally question
why the offender retained the ‘right’ to own a potentially lethal weapon and was licensed
to do so by the local police force.
Forces are also expected to ‘have regard’ to Authorised Professional Practice (APP)
on firearms licensing, issued by the UK’s College of Policing (College of Po licing,
204 The Police Journal: Theory, Practice and Principles 92(3)
To continue reading
Request your trial