Firearms have seldom been out of the news since the Dunblane tragedy in March this year.

Sixteen primary schoolchildren and their teacher were killed by a lone gunman, Thomas Hamilton, who used a 9mm Browning hand-gun, which he was licensed to possess by Central Scotland Police.After this event, and following considerable public pressure further to tighten Britain's strict gun controls, the government set up an inquiry under Lord Cullen, which published its findings in October.

However, the government's Firearms (Amendment) Bill, which had its second reading in the Commons last week, goes a step further than the Cullen report and proposes to abolish the private ownership of all guns except .22 calibre hand-guns.

It requires that these should be kept and used only at strictly controlled gun clubs, where every member must possess a current firearms certificate.

As the Gazette went to press, MPs were shortly to vote on a cross-parliamentary amendment, which would extend the Bill to a total ban on hand-guns.The government has calculated that abolishing private ownership, except for the .22 calibre, would remove approximately 160,000 of the 200,000 licensed hand-guns.

These would be handed in at police stations and, presumably, destroyed.

Apart from introducing stricter licensing procedures, rifles and shotguns would remain largely untouched.

There would be exemptions for vets and slaughtermen and for owners of antique guns held a s curios.

However, if the guns can still be fired, collections could be broken up and disposed of, although the law on the classification of an antique is a grey area.

It is intended that the Bill will be law by Christmas.

If it is enacted, it would give the UK one of the tightest gun control systems in the world.The future for legitimate shooting in this country appears bleak.

Some 70% of the gun trade is in hand-guns and these are almost exclusively used in target shooting.

Shooters traditionally employ a wide selection of calibres fully to test their skills.

It is estimated that the restriction to one limited calibre could force at least half of the existing 2500 clubs to close.

It could also mean the closure of business for between 1500 and 1800 of registered dealers -- approximately two thirds of those operating -- as there is not enough demand generated by the sales of rifles and shotguns.

It has been calculated that if clubs, dealers and manufacturers of ammunition and accessories are all taken into account, it could mean up to 10,000 full-time job losses.Licence holders, who legitimately hold a wide selection of hand-guns, would have to surrender all weapons except their .22 calibres.

The government originally proposed to pay compensation at the market value standing at 15 October 1996.

In view of the impending legislation, the market value had dropped severely and, in some cases, the compensation offered would probably represent only a fraction of the value of the firearms.

During the second reading of the Bill, the home secretary, Michael Howard, announced that there would be additional compensation for the surrender of gun accessories as well as guns.

There would be no compensation offered for loss of trade, or for clubs or businesses that would be forced to close.

In the light of this, shooting organisations might be prompted to mount an appeal to the European Court of Justice.Until the Firearms Act 1920, which gave administrative powers to the police, there was no effective control over firearms and automatic weapons were not prohibited until 1937.

Shotguns were outside controls until as late as 1967.

When the first legislation was introduced, following the recommendations of the Blackwell committee in 1918, it was enacted, not because of armed crime, but through a fear of revolution with the prospect of thousands of discontented troops, trained in the use of firearms, returning from the trenches.Paradoxically, as controls have tightened over the years, so has the inexorable rise in the criminal use of unlicensed weapons.

Furthermore, no amount of legislation seems able to control the amount of illegal firearms believed to be in circulation.

The number is not known, but reliable estimates place it at up to several million.

Some of these are war mementoes or were acquired before controls became tighter.

Others have been smuggled from the former Soviet block.The government has justified its measures on the grounds of public safety and proponents have pointed out that, if only one life is saved, they will be justified.

However, very few licensed weapons are involved in criminal activity.

Disasters with licensed gun holders, such as Thomas Hamilton and Michael Ryan at Hungerford in 1987, seem to lie more at the door of failures of policing and the inadequacies of the licensing system.The proposed Act could have far-reaching consequences and involve many practical difficulties.

Time will tell whether it will be effective, or whether any future government will need to have a fundamental re-think on firearms legislat ion in a free society.