OCD Posted February 19, 2011 Report Share Posted February 19, 2011 I am more worried that in all of this the licensing will become harder and as the firearms dept that deals with my app has been fantastic and granted me guns I never thought I would get then standardisation may mean that I would loose some of the things they let me have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markbivvy Posted February 19, 2011 Report Share Posted February 19, 2011 isn't FEO's that impose 'conditions' on applications,it's the chief officer. Like its been said i dont think the COP has a clue about some of the things the firearms managers are getting up to. We have a firearms manager who said in public" no civilians should have firearms" sound like the right man for the job :blink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveK Posted February 19, 2011 Report Share Posted February 19, 2011 Scully, re-reading your post, lets make something clear. You mention FEO's not having a say. To clarify. FEO's are Firearms Enquiry Officers who come out and visit you, so technically you're sort of right but it's not what you meant. They make recommendations to the Firearms Licensing Manager (normally a civvy) who then makes the decision to issue or not. The Chief Constable's input to all of this is a rubber signature on the end of an ink pad. Yes the Force policy will come into it but the decision is made at a departmental level and, as I said earlier, unlikely that the Chief Constable or any of the management team for that matter know anything about what happens in that office (unless something goes wrong and they get bitten on the bum) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted February 19, 2011 Report Share Posted February 19, 2011 Dave, Whether or not your FEO is part of the answer or part of the problem, if you challenge their bosses to come up with a consistent approach, they will provide an ACPO working party with hours of fun. Its making them (police on the ground) 'enforce' the resultant guidelines that we have failed to do. This should have been a 'crusade' for the representative groups when the last guidelines were issued but I agree with Mark, too little, too late and it results in this mess and the costs we are now apparently expected to pick up. I've had a good and now a bad FEO - first a man, second a woman. The first retired early and no doubt, good and intelligent bloke though he was, his early retirement costs will be levied on the Firearms Licensing Section as 'justified costs'. This is simply police policy for which we are paying and not the 'true costs of the licencing function. I hope BASC will spend an hour looking at the accounts for items like this ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveK Posted February 19, 2011 Report Share Posted February 19, 2011 Its making them (police on the ground) 'enforce' the resultant guidelines that we have failed to do. Therein lies the problem. While it's just guidance each force will interpret it as they see fit and to their own ends. The Home Office need to grow a pair and tell them that they WILL act in accordance with the guidelines and use them as instructions. The guidance is actually pretty good if read with a sensible open mind but. as we know, this doesn't often happen at their end. And it's not necessarily the police on the ground Kes. It's civvies, in some cases protecting their jobs and in others building little empires. Fortunately these are getting fewer and our rep bodies are on their cases. But that's no good either while we roll over and cave in when they say NO. many of us believe that kicking up a fuss will mark our cards. Thats what our shooting orgs are for and it's actually the licensing managers who are getting their cards marked. Just needs BASC, SACS, et al to wise up and beast their chief constables rather than try to re-educate pork. :yp: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted February 19, 2011 Report Share Posted February 19, 2011 As I said earlier Kes, the number of constabularies that were being, shall we say awkward, has reduced considerably in the last 5-10 years due to the very proactive approach by BASC, SACS and the NGO. Others may have sat back and done ****** all, but you can’t levy that charge at us three. We are now left with a very small number, about 10% who are awkward, in different ways. As Mark rightly says, some totally ignore the ACPO best practice, some use the HO guidance when it suits them and when it does not they say ‘well its only guidance’. I don’t think anyone at BASC or in any other org is ‘too cosy’ with FEO’s, but we have done all we can to build as productive and professional relationship with as many as possible, this has always been BASC’s approach and has most certainly reaped dividends in many cases over the last few years with several constabularies. But I also know that SACS have used their legal insurance from time to time to take FLM’s to task, and it would be useful if more details of these actions were published, it may well serve as a warning to others.. . As you know, during last year the HASC sat and one of the many messages that they got hit with by BASC, CA , NRA , BSSC etc was the need for consistency from the police licensing system – so this is nothing new, as I said its been brewing for ages and it has now come to a head. There are, and always have been option to make formal complaints to senior officer’s et al due to poor performance by an FEO, FLM, but this has to be made by the applicant. Not to surprisingly people who have been messed about tend not to want to rock the boat, so no complaints are made, so they keep getting away with it! As to challenging the status quo (of these who remain awkward) this is exactly what some of the shooting organisations have been doing, and this is exactly what those that go to the meeting with the minister on Tuesday will most certainly do. We want the system changing so it is fair and equal to all across the UK, and those that don’t toe the line must be made examples of. It’s in the hands of ALL of us to work together to make this difference, not just the few reps from the shooting organisations, but all of you certificate holders too – you are the customers if you are not getting the service then COMPLAIN David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 (edited) Do you ACTUALLY believe that Scully? Is your FEO in the room with you? Yeah,he's sat on my sofa scoffing all my chocolate digestives! The only influence FEO's have in the licensing procedure is if they come across an applicant who is blatantly undesirable.In the past 30 years I have been visited by an FEO on 2 occassions!That's how much of an influence they have.As you say chief officers are the 'rubber stamp',but any grievances I've had have not been due to an FEO,but rather to licensing. FEO's are such an integral part of the licensing process it is being considered their visits should be almost non-existent! In my opinion FEO's should visit shooters on a regular basis.They are the only link between a shooter and a licensing office. As David basc says,if you're not happy with the service you get,then complain....or maybe you're frightened to 'rock the boat'? Edited February 20, 2011 by Scully Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 I love shooting, its My hobby so I would pay - but the price has to balance against quality of service, and for that money it would need to be 1st class. I would have to give up my golf membership though Flippen 'ek, golf membership tends to be £1000+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ round here, shooting gets nothing close to that even if it does go up! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 If having the monopoly means 'they get away with it',then what assurances can we be given that they wont 'get away with it' again David.Whatever happens,they'll still have the monopoly. I don't understand this downer people have on FEO's either,they're don't have any say in what you can and can't do,they're just representatives of those above them.It isn't FEO's that impose 'conditions' on applications,it's the chief officer.If you're not happy about 'conditions' get in touch with your shooting organisation. . Stopping shooting is not an option for me,it's not a hobby. FEO's have considerable influence on what you get or don't. Don't let any of them fool you, by the time the paperwork lands on their desk it has gone through all the background checks, what happens then is 99.9% down to what they say! Some, including the last idiot FEO I had liked to pal up to you, and be your mate, suggesting he would do it but those above would not let him.......... B******t! They have a lot of clout, FACT! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 FEO's have considerable influence on what you get or don't. Don't let any of them fool you, by the time the paperwork lands on their desk it has gone through all the background checks, what happens then is 99.9% down to what they say! Some, including the last idiot FEO I had liked to pal up to you, and be your mate, suggesting he would do it but those above would not let him.......... B******t! They have a lot of clout, FACT! [/quote It's not a fact at all I'm afraid Dekers.First time applicants are visited by an FEO,but it's just a cursory visit to check on not only the applicant but the domestic situation of the applicant,and even security is not always checked.They work in an advisory capacity but final decisions are made by licensing,including 'conditions'. If they play such a vital role in the licensing process,then how come I've only had 2 visits in 30 years.Ihad 12 handguns at one time,security was never checked,not even when I applied for my first centre-fire rifle.I gifted all my nephews shotguns to him some months ago,he's still to receive a visit to check his security.Vital role! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bagsy Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 This would be a bitter pill to swallow for many, particularly for occasional shooters - and I'm sure there are a lot of them! What's to stop it becoming another 'road tax' with annual increases?? We're easy targets. Let's face it, it won't take much to convince the public it's a worthwhile price increase with funding being reduced/stopped in many other areas of policing. Guns? "Make 'em pay heavily for the privilege" will be the view of many - and let's not kid ourselves here, the vast majority of Joe public have no knowledge or understanding of what we do or why, much less do they care. It's worthwhile considering the new shooter here too. I know of people who have already been put off by initial set up costs (licence, gun, cabinet, slip/clothing, cleaning kit, carts). It's doesn't sound much but soon adds up if you don't have savings and another 150 quid on a licence will certainly put many off. BASC will doubtless be aware of these issues and argue the point on our behalf. Yes they are a business, but they're in the business of looking after our interests and on the whole they do a bloody good job - after all, fewer shooters means fewer members, and that's not good for business, so let's get behind them I'll pay it, but many wouldn't Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCD Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 This is what they should do http://www.dorset.police.uk/pdf/Procedural_Good_Practice_Guide.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
valley boy Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 I am interested in what people would do if they suddenly increased the FAC&SGC renewal to £200 as was suggested in the thread by DavidBASC. Are the scaremongers correct that people will hand in their FAC/SGC in large numbers because they can't afford £40/year or £3.33/month. Why should it go up its dear enough now it costs me 30 quid every time i go shooting thats just for diesel without bying cartriges and bullets i just paid 40 quid for 500 rimy rounds 2 years ago the same rounds 25quid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewluke Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 (edited) if the firearms departments want to save money/cover costs why don't they double the certificate cost and let the certificate run for 10 years,this way same income and half the paperwork,just a thought andrew Edited February 20, 2011 by andrewluke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CZ550Kevlar Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 If the fee increased i would expect to see a quicker turn-around with renewals and variations, alot shorter than at present and would also expect an appointment quicker than the current waiting period. Also i would expect a standardisation of calibres throughout the country along with conditions on each calibre for vermin etc etc. Lastly i would expect my FEO to be an FEO and deal with the people they are paid to deal with at £200 a pop not being farmed out to do work for other departments seeing as we are being expected to pay the price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markbivvy Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 Last time an FEO was at my house he told me the firearms department had amalgamated with the custom and excise mob, and both teams had to mix and match.?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
valley boy Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I am increasingly tired of those who can pay must pay - I'm always the one paying. Like most I have paid my tax, asked for nothing back and am coming up for retirement. It all mounts up, fuel (vastly increased) for car and house etc, etc. What about all the older (and younger) farmers who shoot. The smaller farmers aren't exactly flush. We all pay the Police precept in our Council Tax - which will go up. WE consistently get less for more. This should be the other way round !!!! I love shooting but if its shooting or the family, you dont have much choice. As shooting should be a right of the free state then, if the public wish us to be as fiercely controlled as we are, they should pay. I dont see the police recovering the costs of attending and sorting car crashes from those at the scene of an accdent. I think we are all too frightened of losing our sport. It will happen as the youngsters cant afford this kind of hike. Shooters used to fight price increases on the basis that it would put many off taking up the sport. BASC should be arguing for a review of the firearms licensing function first before mildly accepting a 400% increase. For gods sake its 400% - imagine how you would complain if road tax went up 50%. I think you know where my vote went but, finally which members did BASC ask to take this viewpoint ? That will save me £60 quid next year. Not happy at all. WELL SAID MATE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 £200 for 5 years is still less than a pound a week to do something you enjoy doing. Have you ever been to a premiership football match? I haven't but at a guess they are a bit more than a pound a week. I have no issues paying it as I love shooting and the licence cost is insignificant. I would have no objection to paying 50% more on my road tax if it was to improve the roads and get rid of the congestion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Why should it go up its dear enough now it costs me 30 quid every time i go shooting thats just for diesel without bying cartriges and bullets i just paid 40 quid for 500 rimy rounds 2 years ago the same rounds 25quid What has the cost of diesel or ammo got to do with the licencing costs? Are you propsing that we get it free because cartridges have gone up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cranfield Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Why should it go up its dear enough now it costs me 30 quid every time i go shooting thats just for diesel without bying cartriges and bullets i just paid 40 quid for 500 rimy rounds 2 years ago the same rounds 25quid What has the cost of diesel or ammo got to do with the licencing costs? Are you propsing that we get it free because cartridges have gone up? I think valley boy was referring to the total cost of following his hobby/interest. Whilst I doubt any increase in licence costs will dramatically reduce the amount of licence holders, I do know very many shooters who are cutting back on clay shooting and quarry shooting, because of the overall increase in the cost of ammunition, fuel,etc. If you only go shooting once a month, then its not so bad, but if you are trying to shoot at least weekly it all mounts up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 (edited) FEO's have considerable influence on what you get or don't. Don't let any of them fool you, by the time the paperwork lands on their desk it has gone through all the background checks, what happens then is 99.9% down to what they say! Some, including the last idiot FEO I had liked to pal up to you, and be your mate, suggesting he would do it but those above would not let him.......... B******t! They have a lot of clout, FACT! It's not a fact at all I'm afraid Dekers.First time applicants are visited by an FEO,but it's just a cursory visit to check on not only the applicant but the domestic situation of the applicant,and even security is not always checked.They work in an advisory capacity but final decisions are made by licensing,including 'conditions'. If they play such a vital role in the licensing process,then how come I've only had 2 visits in 30 years.Ihad 12 handguns at one time,security was never checked,not even when I applied for my first centre-fire rifle.I gifted all my nephews shotguns to him some months ago,he's still to receive a visit to check his security.Vital role! Don't let any of them fool you, by the time the paperwork lands on their desk it has gone through all the background checks, what happens then is 99.9% down to what they say! You are missing my point, at the final stage as I pointed out above, whether they visit you or not, question you or not, it is their report that says what you get and don't, they are the last line in the process and do have a LOT of say at this point! As regards a VITAL ROLE, ...absolutely NOT in my book, with more and more mentoring conditions being imposed these days, even for rimfire, I believe you could do away with the FEO totally with a little re jigging of the system! ATB! Edited February 21, 2011 by Dekers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devon Fox Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Flippen 'ek, golf membership tends to be £1000+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ round here, shooting gets nothing close to that even if it does go up! My golf membership is £500 (more if I include leisure package) Its about justifying the suggested cost for a Hobby, and my gameshooting days far exceed cost of golfing days . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Hi. If I might suggest it, its the overall costs which are likely to push people out of shooting. How many have calculated a driven day on the basis of carts, fuel, lunch, tips, beer, certcosts etc, etc? How many finish a day, think, I enjoyed that, but overall it was a bit expensive. Those who can pay have an obligation to think of those starting out and those who find it more difficult to fund shooting. How many people say "wow thats great" when someone offers a newbie a day out or help getting out? We stand together and think of those who are less fortunate or we think of ourselves and ***** the rest - because "I love MY shooting". Theres no excuse I'm afraid, shooting exists because we are ALL in it - it gets better because more people join, it will fail as people are priced out, especially where costs are rising elsewhere so fast. Still - I'm all right - arent I? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 When you look at the cost of a driven day, £30 per bird £30 tip Cartridges fuel etc etc then the 2p it cost to licence that gun for that day fall into insignificance as they would at £40 a year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Those who can pay have an obligation to think of those starting out and those who find it more difficult to fund shooting. why? Shooting is probably one of the hobbies you can set at whatever level you want, from vermin control to big driven days at 5K a day. Its a bit off the topic though really its should we pay what it costs to license ourselves or should it be subsidised by those who make us need licenses. Somewhere in the middle gets my vote. Belonging to BASC costs me £330 in the same period and i can go shooting without that but I can't without guns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.