What experience for mentoring?

[Frenchieboy]

I have just had a letter back from my firearms Office about my .243 variation. One of the things that they are saying is that the chap who was willing to mentor me has not got enough experience. He has a full Open FAC for a .243 with Deer as a condition and has his DSC1 - How much experience is required please? Can anyone advise?

[markbivvy]

:blink: :blink: :blink: :blink: :blink: :blink: :blink: :blink: :blink: :blink:

Scan it and copy it, you know who to send it to.

A bit of give and take is no bad thing, but there are times when you can be rogerd to much.

Edited December 29, 2010 by markbivvy

[Redgum]

This is a question you should be asking your Firearms dept as they all seem to differ in their interpretation of the law. The mentoring thing is being asked for more often,even on .22LR but how does the mentor stand legally it you have a mishap, in theory your his responsibily. What are the legal guidelines for a mentor when taking a new Fac out, if the police are going to ask for these requirements then they really need to lay down some specific rules on it, if only to let us know what the hell is meant to be happening.

[al4x]

yup ask them, they are making everything else up so they should be able to explain it

[Redgum]

And as for asking BASC don't expect to much from them, I'm with em and they do a great job in many areas of shooting. The membership is well worth it and have helped me a out a few times but when I originally applied for my 243 the FA dept said they would require DSC1 and even then would require a mentor on top, called BASC and they said the police could do that and I would just have to go with the flow.

I had my DSC1 when I applied for the 243 and luckily didnt get a mentoring clause, just a closed condition that I had open a while later.

[Mungler]

A bit of give and take is no bad thing, but there are times when you can be rogerd to much.

 

Never a truer word said

Edited December 29, 2010 by Mungler

[Frenchieboy]

Munger, what you and Markbivvy are saying is quite right. I agree that a bit of give and take can be a good thing. This is exactly why I went out of my way to find someone that has a full open FAC with a 243 for deer and also has their DSC1 to mentor me. I offered this off my own back before being asked in order to show a bit of "give" and that I was perfectly prepared to be reasonable and show "responsibility"! It appears to me that my Firearms Office want to be all "Take" and are not prepared to give anything in return!

They have also said in regards to wanting the 243 for shooting foxes (And I quote from their letter which arrived this morning)

"You mentioned to ***** **** about the section in the Home office Guidelines relating to using a larger calibre to shoot fox because of weather conditions. (They are refering to section 13-23 of the Home Office Guidelines here) You are quite right in your research, but this obviously has to be justified. As there is no mention of poor weather conditions in your shooting diaries whilst using your .222, it would be difficult to justify this authorisation. (End Quote) (The words in itallics are mine)

Note should be made here that I have chosen to omit the name of my FEO in order to save any "personal problems" and to show that I am not trying to be vindictive or to show any mallice towards him. It was however suggested by this FEO that I should keep a "Shooting Log" while I was using my .222 in order to show "good usage" when applying for an Open Certificate. There are obviously no mentions of shooting with the .222 in bad weather anywhere in my log as I did not bother when it was too windy because of the difficultied that it might involve with accuracy and "humane kills" of live quarry. I realise that there is no legal requirement whatsoever to keep a shooting log but I agreed to do so purely to show willing to my FEO, yet now they seem to want to try to use that against me as well!

Exatcly how much do I have to "give" while they are doing nothing but all "take"?

[al4x]

so have they turned you down?

[garyb]

Shocking!

 

Shame you don't belong to BASC... ?

[Mungler]

Yes, I recently had a serious problem (which is on-going and which is why I haven't posted about it) and I have now had to get BASC involved.

 

BASC have been extremely helpful and without wishing to sound too gay, they have actually been very supportive - having someone independant and experienced look at the situation, give a view and surmise it will all be fine has been very settling.

 

I would add that when I first notified BASC I got a email from the head of their firearms team within the day.

[Frenchieboy]

so have they turned you down?

No, they haven't turned me down as such yet. These are just extracts from the letter they have written. They are also questioning my permissions and the deer on them - This is something that I can get cleared up quite easily in writing from the landowners so it is not a problem!

They have finished the letter by saying - "I look forward to your response".

At the moment it is looking like they will be getting a response from Ian Clark of the SACS rather from me!

[Frenchieboy]

Shocking!

 

Shame you don't belong to BASC... ?

 

Gary - I do not belong to the BASC but I am a full member of the SACS which do basically the same thing. I will be contacting them as soon as the New Year is over!

[Redgum]

I hate to say this and have to eat my own words as I would always advise to give as much info to the FEO regards the variation but maybe the FEO has more info than he really knows what to do with. Maybe he see's it that the 222 is doing a great job and the 243 really isnt justified, alot of forces are getting a bit touchy on 243 as a designated fox calibre even though thats what it really was designed for. Have you applied for 243 on just the grounds of fox, the government guidelines do state that 243 is more humane on ground experience windy conditions.

Don't get into a fight with them, bite your lip and just write to them, or call the Firearms dept and ask them to put down in writing what they require from a mentor. The way I'm reading your problem is that if its just for fox and your not shooting gale ripped mountains on the west coast then the 222 is fine in their eyes. They have not refuse 243 point blank, which they can do, so you just have to go with the flow as to speak and beat em at their own game.

[kdubya]

thank christ I live in an area that is reasonable with larger calibre applications never seen so much tripe and unwritten stealth tactics being used to bring in not required "conditions" it really is time that the likes of basc stopped rolling over to get its belly tickled, and stopped rather than supported the slow but steady encroachment of mentoring or dsc1 conditions etc etc, before the likes of .243 are granted.

 

KW

[Scully]

I don't know of anyone who has had to have a mentor,despite knowing dozens of blokes who have centre-fire rifles.As far as i know there is no requirement in law for this,it's simply another ploy by police forces to minimise the number of firearms in circulation.If no joy with BASC then try the NGO.I'm going to have to ring both and get a definitive answer on this subject as I'm hearing about this **** all too often.Ask your FEO to show you this requirement in HO guidelines...if he can then it would seem you'll have to comply,if he can't,then I'd be taking legal advice.

When I first started shooting pistols many moons ago,licensing tried to tell me I could only apply for one calibre,so I took advice from a firearms law expert who told me to I should apply for ten!I applied for four,and got them.BASC wont be against the idea of DSC requirement....they run DSC courses!

[Frenchieboy]

I hate to say this and have to eat my own words as I would always advise to give as much info to the FEO regards the variation but maybe the FEO has more info than he really knows what to do with. Maybe he see's it that the 222 is doing a great job and the 243 really isnt justified, alot of forces are getting a bit touchy on 243 as a designated fox calibre even though thats what it really was designed for. Have you applied for 243 on just the grounds of fox, the government guidelines do state that 243 is more humane on ground experience windy conditions.

Don't get into a fight with them, bite your lip and just write to them, or call the Firearms dept and ask them to put down in writing what they require from a mentor. The way I'm reading your problem is that if its just for fox and your not shooting gale ripped mountains on the west coast then the 222 is fine in their eyes. They have not refuse 243 point blank, which they can do, so you just have to go with the flow as to speak and beat em at their own game.

 

I see what you are saying and would have to agree with you if I had put in for a .243 purely for fox but that is not the case. I have deer on my permissions that I am authorised to shoot so I put in for the .243 for both deer and fox. My permissions are all hill farms where wind can be a bit of a problem so the use of a .243 would offer greater accuracy over longer ranges and therefore would potentially be a more humane rifle to use! The reason that there is no mention of shooting foxes in adverse weather or strong winds in my shooting log is quite simply because I was aware of the problems of accuracy with a .222 in strong winds so I dod not use the rifle in winds where it could have meant that (Potentially) my shots were not humane.

This does not however take away from the fact that Deer are present on my permissions and I have authorisation to shoot them and as such I should be allowed to have the correct caliber to do so!

[Redgum]

It won't get any easier thats for sure, BASC have to keep a healthy relashionship with the police so sometimes they have to roll over a little.Its not all one sided because some people would like to have a 243 calibre when they don't really have good reason. I know a farmer who had the police turn up for a landcheck and they asked him how much damage the deer were doing, his reply, ' we ave never seen a deer here'.

[Scully]

A lot of response has taken place while I was composing mine.They have asked you to keep a shooting log(something not required by law)and then used it against you!There's a lesson there for all of us!They tried something similar with me 'To aid your application come renewal'....yeah? I don't think so!

You're gonna have to fight this frenchieboy I'm afraid.There's enough 'back door' legislation going on without this rubbish.Best of luck...let us know how you get on.

[Redgum]

I see what you are saying and would have to agree with you if I had put in for a .243 purely for fox but that is not the case. I have deer on my permissions that I am authorised to shoot so I put in for the .243 for both deer and fox. My permissions are all hill farms where wind can be a bit of a problem so the use of a .243 would offer greater accuracy over longer ranges and therefore would potentially be a more humane rifle to use! The reason that there is no mention of shooting foxes in adverse weather or strong winds in my shooting log is quite simply because I was aware of the problems of accuracy with a .222 in strong winds so I dod not use the rifle in winds where it could have meant that (Potentially) my shots were not humane.

This does not however take away from the fact that Deer are present on my permissions and I have authorisation to shoot them and as such I should be allowed to have the correct caliber to do so!

I think you will be fine, you tick all the box's, you have the permission and as you rightly say 243 will legally cover the deer species. The Firearms dept can sometimes make little sense, as said before you havent been refused, just have a few more hedges to clear.

Ask to be more specific in their requirements, you will get there and good luck.

[markbivvy]

the fact that Deer are present on my permissions and I have authorisation to shoot them and as such I should be allowed to have the correct caliber to do so!

 

 

And that is all the should concern them.

I had 3 A4 size pages of info to accompany my 243 application, my shooting organisation asked me to email it them so they could look at it and alter it as needed, 1 paragraph came back saying i was applying for a 243 for deer and fox .

and a note telling me to only give them what is required by law, as to much info can and will be held against you.

looks like the man was right.

[Frenchieboy]

Just a quick bit of follow up with regards to the "Mentor"! I have just been on the phone to a "Legal Eagle" friend of mine who holds the position of Police Liason Officer with a shooting club that I am associated with. A while ago Lancashire Police accepted him to mentor another chap with a .243 for fox and it all went through with no problems. This friend has just offered to mentor me if required, something they can not refuse as they have accepted him as a mentor for .243 before!

With regards to the other "issues/observations" made by the issuing officer I have been advised to write straight back to them asking for clarification on some of their points and advising them that I will not be allowing them access to my shooting logs in the future and also informing them that I am taking legal advice on the matter, but not to give them any more information than that for the time being!

I would much rather work on a "Give and Take" basis but under the circumstances I believe that I have now given more than enough and got practically nothing in return!

[apache]

Aye, keep it short and sweet. We should all do our best to resist the **** thrown at us.

 

Best of luck with it all!

[al4x]

I see what you are saying and would have to agree with you if I had put in for a .243 purely for fox but that is not the case. I have deer on my permissions that I am authorised to shoot so I put in for the .243 for both deer and fox. My permissions are all hill farms where wind can be a bit of a problem so the use of a .243 would offer greater accuracy over longer ranges and therefore would potentially be a more humane rifle to use! The reason that there is no mention of shooting foxes in adverse weather or strong winds in my shooting log is quite simply because I was aware of the problems of accuracy with a .222 in strong winds so I dod not use the rifle in winds where it could have meant that (Potentially) my shots were not humane.

This does not however take away from the fact that Deer are present on my permissions and I have authorisation to shoot them and as such I should be allowed to have the correct caliber to do so!

 

 

Personally I think as is beginning to surface that you've argued too much for it giving them every little detail etc and you don't need to. In doing so they've just created reasons to make things an issue. Wind is bull you know it I know it so does everyone else its just creating reasons why you need a .243 rather than making blatantly clear its for shooting deer. Unless they know something I don't to shoot deer you need a .240 or above and that is the only concern,

Now you're in the sticky stuff you have to fight and a new mentor would seem a way forward as for deer numbers etc its none of their business. If you have a permission slip stating deer on it that is all you need its between you and the landowner not the police

[Redgum]

Personally I think as is beginning to surface that you've argued too much for it giving them every little detail etc and you don't need to. In doing so they've just created reasons to make things an issue. Wind is bull you know it I know it so does everyone else its just creating reasons why you need a .243 rather than making blatantly clear its for shooting deer. Unless they know something I don't to shoot deer you need a .240 or above and that is the only concern,

Now you're in the sticky stuff you have to fight and a new mentor would seem a way forward as for deer numbers etc its none of their business. If you have a permission slip stating deer on it that is all you need its between you and the landowner not the police

I think on these lines too,the police will not be interrogating the landowner on the deer damage or numbers. You just have to satisfy the Firearms dept you have good reason to possess this calibre. There are alot of people who would love a larger calibre but just do not have a good reason to possess, then a lone Roe trots through one of there permissions and it all seems to change starting with a DSC1. I think we are going to see tougher times regarding all rifles in years to come and those who are floating in the grey area will struggle. I hope that mentioning your taking legal advice and redrawing your shooting logs in future isnt just throwing you a shovel, sometimes the bigger man takes it on the chin ( I said sometimes)

[kent]

I have just had a letter back from my firearms Office about my .243 variation. One of the things that they are saying is that the chap who was willing to mentor me has not got enough experience. He has a full Open FAC for a .243 with Deer as a condition and has his DSC1 - How much experience is required please? Can anyone advise?

 

If this creates you a problem , i am not too far away and could help out if your stalking is not too far away. PM me if required i have held a level 2 for quite a number of years and Lancs have a full file on me