The UK gun trade is facing the impact of major regulatory changes: the new Firearms Licensing Statutory Guidance for Chief Officers of Police, published in August 2025 alongside the Firearms Amendment Rules, and the latest phase of the Online Safety Act, which came into force in July of this year.
These measures are intended to improve public safety, yet are already causing significant concern within the trade due to increased administrative burdens, potential misuse and instances of overreach by enforcement bodies.
The statutory guidance introduces a series of changes that will affect both applicants and registered firearms dealers. Firearms enquiry officers must now complete a national training course provided by the College of Policing, though Gun Trade Insider has been made aware that the roll-out has been slow and inconsistently funded, leaving many officers untrained and certificate processing further delayed. Applicants will face more stringent scrutiny, with police now required to interview the applicant’s partner and other household members during home visits. These interviews must be conducted separately from the applicant, ensuring consistency across forces but also creating more administrative pressure on licensing teams.
Other elements of the new framework include the requirement for shotgun applicants to supply two referees rather than one, with referees obliged to confirm their ongoing responsibilities throughout the five-year duration of the certificate. Medical checks have also been tightened. GPs are now asked to consider whether applicants have neurodevelopmental conditions that could affect safe firearms ownership and to provide current assessments of patient health. Applicants must also declare any periods when they have not been registered with a UK GP, a measure likely to complicate renewals further.
The statutory guidance clarifies that background checks remain necessary for RFD servants but that medical checks are not routinely required, addressing recent efforts by some forces, particularly the Metropolitan Police, to go beyond Home Office rules. At the same time, suitability assessments have been widened considerably. Applicants must now disclose a broad range of past offences, including cautions, reprimands, fixed penalty notices, overseas convictions and even attendance at speed awareness courses. This expansion is likely to create problems where applicants unintentionally omit minor or historic issues, as certain forces have in the past treated such omissions as deliberate dishonesty, resulting in outright refusal.
The updated rules also confirm the limits of police powers to seize firearms. Apart from situations involving an immediate threat to life, police must rely on voluntary surrender or a magistrate’s warrant under Section 46 of the Firearms Act. In addition, the reliance on Section 7 temporary permits, which some forces have used extensively to manage backlogs, has been expressly discouraged. Chief officers are reminded that their departments must be resourced sufficiently to avoid routine dependence on these permits.
While the changes provide welcome consistency in some areas, they also add heavy new burdens, such as a risk of malicious complaints being used to trigger confiscations, the likelihood of more applications being refused for unintentional omissions, and the increased difficulty many applicants will face in securing two referees.
At the same time, the trade is dealing with the impact of the Online Safety Act. The latest provisions, which took effect on 25 July 2025, require online platforms to implement strict age assurance measures for content deemed include pornography, glorification of violence or the glamourising of guns. While designed to protect children from harm, the rules have been applied indiscriminately by some service providers, leading to the restriction of lawful firearms-related content. Cases reported by GTA members include an embedded video of a deactivated Uzi being blocked behind an age gate despite being an inert collector’s item. These actions are disproportionate and in some cases unlawful, with trade websites, educational content and basic product listings caught up in sweeping restrictions.
The GTA has raised the issue directly with Ofcom, which now oversees the Act’s enforcement. Ofcom has indicated a willingness to challenge unjustified restrictions, but only where it is supplied with clear evidence. To support this, the GTA is urging its members to report instances directly, providing details of the date, provider, website address and type of restriction.
Paul Green, technical director of the GTA, acknowledged the importance of safeguarding but emphasised that service providers must apply the law proportionately. “We support child protection online, but lawful trade content should not be treated as harmful,” he said. “To have deactivated metal objects or basic retail listings flagged is excessive. We need to push back, and we now have a route to do so.”
The statutory guidance and the Online Safety Act highlight a rising tide of regulatory pressure on the industry. The former adds layers of process and scrutiny for applicants and RFDs, while the latter risks curtailing how businesses communicate and market their products online. The GTA is advising members to act early on certificate renewals, brief referees carefully and report online restrictions without delay.