Airguns 'should not be subjected to strict licensing conditions' Airguns should not be subject to strict licensing restrictions according to the majority of respondents to a government consultation. A Scottish Government consultation on proposals for licensing air weapons returned 1101 responses, with 87% opposed to licensing. The proposals were described as "misconceived," "disproportionate," "draconian" and "heavy-handed" by opponents, some of whom argued that an airgun is not a weapon. Nearly three-fifths of the responses came from England, and around a fifth came from cut-out coupons from shooting magazines, according to a government-funded analysis of responses published today. These responses "cannot be taken to represent the views of the wider population," according to analysts. While the vast majority opposed licensing in principle, only a minority of these actually engaged with the consultation and provided reasons for their opposition, declining to answer consultation questions at all or responding with short statements such as "I disagree." Shooting is a sport which "is ideal for families, women, the elderly and the disabled," licensing opponents said. They argued that licensing would be costly, bureaucratic, unnecessary for less powerful guns, and could criminalise otherwise law-abiding gun owners and drive the trade in airguns "underground." Some prospective gun owners may decide to buy more powerful and dangerous guns if less powerful airguns are licensed, according to opponents. The "politically motivated" proposals would impact on tourism, deter newcomers from taking up shooting and would impinge on personal freedoms, opponents said. They added the plans should be aligned with UK legislation as cross-border enforcement would be impossible. The analysis states: "The term 'air weapon' was perceived by some to be emotive and misleading. The point was made that a 'weapon' is designed to injure or harm someone, and thus an airgun is not a 'weapon' unless it is used as such. There were also objections to the statement that airgun ownership is 'uncontrolled'. Respondents argued that current legislation controls the use of airguns very well, and the reduction in airgun offences over the last five years - and the current low level of offences - is evidence of this. The minority that supported stricter regulation said airguns are used to injure and kill wildlife, including swans, cygnets and livestock as well as domestic pets. Some said they had been shot with an airgun. Others said the government's licensing proposals do not go far enough and called for enforcement, up to and including a full ban. The analysis states: "Views gathered through an open consultation exercise can not be regarded as representative of the views of the population as a whole. It is generally the case that those with particular expertise or a keen interest in a subject, and the capacity to respond, are more likely to participate in a consultation. It is also the case that those offered a simple means to respond will be encouraged to do so. Thus, while all the views submitted to a public consultation are a valid and welcome contribution to the policy process, offering as they do the benefit of a range of relevant personal and professional experience and expertise, they cannot be taken to represent the views of the wider population.