THE COUNTRY'S slack system of gun control is revealed today in figures which show that police virtually rubber-stamp permit applications and renewals.

That is shocking enough in itself but, after the Dunblane massacre, it is an outrage.

Look at the facts.

Nationally, police turned down just one per cent of applications for new firearms and shotgun certificates. In Lancashire, only three per cent were refused.

As for renewals, they can, in effect, be got by return of post.

This is crazy.

For the big, awful question asked after Dunblane was how mass killer Thomas Hamilton, who was well known in the community as a weird character, came to be a lawfully-approved gun owner.

Lord Cullen's inquiry into the shootings has yet to provide the answer.

But these disturbing figures suggest we may have it already - in that it is evidently all too easy for anyone to legally acquire and keep a gun.

And the disclosure today by Shadow Home Secretary, Blackburn MP Jack Straw, that the police themselves are convinced that far more than this tiny handful of would-be gun owners should be turned down is chilling confirmation of this.

But why is it so?

There are two reasons.

Firstly, as Jack Straw says, it is wrong that the police have to show why someone should not have a gun, rather than the applicants having to prove why they should.

Secondly, the police just do not have the resources to properly vet them anyway.

He is quite right to demand tough new legislation to end this scandal.

Nor would that be an impulsive, over-prescriptive, knee-jerk response.

Plain common sense says it is dangerous beyond belief for firearms permits to be less well policed than TV licences.

And the tragic slaughter of 16 little children and their teacher at Dunblane underlines it in blood.

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.