The article claims this "review" was prompted by an accidental death of a youth by an airgun.
Should we presume this risk to be anywhere near the same magnitude as drownings in swimming pools, lakes, etc., or automobile accidents, or even a simple fall?
I realize it's hard to find the happy balance between freedom and safety...not to say they are mutually exclusive, but in many ways maximizing one minimizes the other. So any time I see a "look at this sad story, we've got to do something" rather than a more reasoned approach like "let's look at the statistics and put this in context of other risks that we accept without a second thought", it makes warning bells go off.