An extract from chapter 8

The certification system relating to section 1 firearms

---

9.113  If for any reason that course is not to be followed I see no alternative to considering the more draconian alternative of a ban on multi-shot handguns. However, in such circumstances I would suggest that the ban should be directed to the possession of such handguns by individual owners rather than the possession of handguns by shooting clubs, since it is through possession by individuals that the risk, in so far as there is a risk, of homicide or serious injury arises. Thus I do not consider that the banning of handguns for target shooting or the banning of shooting clubs would be justified. I have no particular recommendation as to the legislative means by which effect would be given to such a ban.

9.106  I will now review what I have set out above. I am satisfied that of all the measures which stop short of a ban the one which is open to the least objection on the ground of practicability is the temporary dismantling of self-loading pistols and revolvers by the removal of major components
(para 9.83-9.93). It has the merit that it does not require clubs to accommodate the handguns, with the various accommodation and security problems which I have already mentioned. In each case the component which is removed could be kept by a club official or on the club premises, where there was adequate space and security for the purpose, while the remainder of the handgun would be kept by the shooter at home. In exceptional cases it would not be practicable for some pistols and some revolvers. The exact extent to which that would be the case is a matter of detail. The solution to it, short of banning such handguns, would be to require barrel blocks of the type which Mr Paton envisaged (para 9.94). The barrel block would require to be fitted and locked to the satisfaction of a club official. He would keep the key while the shooter would keep the handgun in its blocked state until it was to be used again. Where the club had premises with adequate security to accommodate members' handguns, there would be no need for either of these expedients. If the shooter is to be able to shoot elsewhere there would be a limit on the effectiveness of such measures. However, a pass system of the type which, as I have explained in para 9.68, was outlined by the Dunblane Snowdrop Petition would be worthy of consideration. I appreciate all that has been said about what a calculating would-be killer could do but it does seem to me that such a system would effect a substantial reduction in the opportunity for misuse of lawfully held handguns.