Amendments to FAC/SGC licence procedure

[HDAV]

So we can be pretty sure there will be a change in the cost and style of FAC/SGC application and renewals what would you like to see:

 

1: Standardisation across the country as far as possible

a: Renewal and grant timescale and process

b: application of guidance to applications

c: suitable calibres for various species

d: mentoring debacle cleared up

 

 

2: RFD's should be able to 1 for 1 variations or local police station while you wait for same calibre.

 

3: If a single licence is decided upon it should allow for traffic both ways i.e. SGC holder who wants a rimfire can get one as well as FAC holder who wants a Section 2 shotgun can just buy/borrow one.

 

4: Better training for FEO's whether shooters or not

 

5: Understandable guidance for all to be published and followed

 

6: Drivers licence style photo card with chip (allowing PNC/RFD checks on certs to be done instantly at any time of day)

 

Anything else?

[stubby]

dunno why your moaning, I think they do alright as it is

[Kes]

An end to the variety of conditions for each type of rifle. For those with open certs;-

i.e. a .243 use would be qualified; for use shooting of Target, Zeroing on land approved for the calibre, Deer, fox, other vermin and for humane despatch, approval given for DEER.

say a .223 use would be qualified; for use shooting of target, zeroing on land approved for the calibre, CWD, Munjac, fox other vermin and for humane despatch, approval given for FOX.

 

So its clear what the Quarry species is which justified the grant but its also that all of the rest are included, permitted and legal

 

If you have a .223 it cannot just be conditioned for 'Fox' - as mine is !!!

 

For those with closed certs Just the quarry species which justified the grant;

 

Say a .223 for shooting at an approved club, zeroing on land only set out in the second schedule, Fox and vermin on land only set out in the second schedule.

 

I'm sure this would and should come under 'standardisation'.`

[Luckyshot]

An end to the variety of conditions for each type of rifle. For those with open certs;-

i.e. a .243 use would be qualified; for use shooting of Target, Zeroing on land approved for the calibre, Deer, fox, other vermin and for humane despatch, approval given for DEER.

say a .223 use would be qualified; for use shooting of target, zeroing on land approved for the calibre, CWD, Munjac, fox other vermin and for humane despatch, approval given for FOX.

 

So its clear what the Quarry species is which justified the grant but its also that all of the rest are included, permitted and legal

 

If you have a .223 it cannot just be conditioned for 'Fox' - as mine is !!!

 

For those with closed certs Just the quarry species which justified the grant;

 

Say a .223 for shooting at an approved club, zeroing on land only set out in the second schedule, Fox and vermin on land only set out in the second schedule.

 

I'm sure this would and should come under 'standardisation'.`

 

 

This already is pretty standard (IF) you can show a need for it. My condition for my 243 reads the same as above apart from it also has groundgame listed aswell.

[apache]

1: Standardisation across the country as far as possible

 

This sends a shiver down my spine! I'm with North Yorkshire and although I would like them to be a little faster at times (6 weeks for a grant 4 weeks for a variation) they are great. Give them good reason and some land to shoot over and they give you what you want and we all have open certificates from the start, no daft mentoring conditions.

 

My fear is that if things become 'standardised' it will drag the good forces down rather than the poor forces up.

 

3: If a single licence is decided upon it should allow for traffic both ways i.e. SGC holder who wants a rimfire can get one as well as FAC holder who wants a Section 2 shotgun can just buy/borrow one.

 

This is what I think we should have, prove you are a responsible person to hold firearms and let you buy what you can securely store. Where is the harm in that? Why not let me buy a second gun if I want or to change on a whim. Either I'm safe or I'm not. Is there any evidence that would make me a greater risk? I like the idea of treating the FAC like the SGC. Still in support of intial 'good reason' and maybe more thorough checks.

[HDAV]

dunno why your moaning, I think they do alright as it is

Not moaning, just wondering what people would like to see as part of the inevitable change that will be coming soon.

[The Essex Hunter]

So we can be pretty sure there will be a change in the cost and style of FAC/SGC application and renewals what would you like to see:

 

1: Standardisation across the country as far as possible

a: Renewal and grant timescale and process

b: application of guidance to applications

c: suitable calibres for various species

d: mentoring debacle cleared up

 

 

2: RFD's should be able to 1 for 1 variations or local police station while you wait for same calibre.

 

3: If a single licence is decided upon it should allow for traffic both ways i.e. SGC holder who wants a rimfire can get one as well as FAC holder who wants a Section 2 shotgun can just buy/borrow one.

 

4: Better training for FEO's whether shooters or not

 

5: Understandable guidance for all to be published and followed

 

6: Drivers licence style photo card with chip (allowing PNC/RFD checks on certs to be done instantly at any time of day)

 

Anything else?

 

I believe the problems lies in the way the different counties interpret the guidelines.

This is only due to the people in the Fire Arms Departments putting their spin on them.

Unfortunately it is a truly British system that has been in place for quite a while, with laws reaching back even further…..

I cant see it changing very much in the future, it is something we will have to put up with, for some people it works very well and for others, it does not.

One thing is quite clear, that it is the only one we have…….

 

 

TEH

[Bowen20]

id like to see all of the above apart from say the standardisation across the board the chip and pin kinda credit card license is a very good thought ive often thought about this for a couple of years now it would be a much better option and for the gun shop to do a variation if you have had say a .22lr before but you sold it and didnt put back in for it and wanted it back on your license.

[Dekers]

So we can be pretty sure there will be a change in the cost and style of FAC/SGC application and renewals what would you like to see:

 

1: Standardisation across the country as far as possible

a: Renewal and grant timescale and process

b: application of guidance to applications

c: suitable calibres for various species

d: mentoring debacle cleared up

 

 

2: RFD's should be able to 1 for 1 variations or local police station while you wait for same calibre.

 

3: If a single licence is decided upon it should allow for traffic both ways i.e. SGC holder who wants a rimfire can get one as well as FAC holder who wants a Section 2 shotgun can just buy/borrow one.

 

4: Better training for FEO's whether shooters or not

 

5: Understandable guidance for all to be published and followed

 

6: Drivers licence style photo card with chip (allowing PNC/RFD checks on certs to be done instantly at any time of day)

 

Anything else?

 

Thats a good opener!

 

Is that your own work or did you cut and paste from somewhere? There is nitty gritty to be sorted but that would be an excellent start!

 

....and an end to sending 8 photos for co terminus when all they do is scan them now anyway!

 

Edited October 21, 2011 by Dekers

[Dekers]

An end to the variety of conditions for each type of rifle. For those with open certs;-

i.e. a .243 use would be qualified; for use shooting of Target, Zeroing on land approved for the calibre, Deer, fox, other vermin and for humane despatch, approval given for DEER.

say a .223 use would be qualified; for use shooting of target, zeroing on land approved for the calibre, CWD, Munjac, fox other vermin and for humane despatch, approval given for FOX.

 

So its clear what the Quarry species is which justified the grant but its also that all of the rest are included, permitted and legal

 

If you have a .223 it cannot just be conditioned for 'Fox' - as mine is !!!

 

For those with closed certs Just the quarry species which justified the grant;

 

Say a .223 for shooting at an approved club, zeroing on land only set out in the second schedule, Fox and vermin on land only set out in the second schedule.

 

I'm sure this would and should come under 'standardisation'.`

 

 

Are you avin a larf, just which bit of that makes things easier to understand or simpler?

 

lets take a look....

An end to the variety of conditions for each type of rifle. For those with open certs;-

i.e. a .243 use would be qualified; for use shooting of Target, Zeroing on land approved for the calibre, Deer, fox, other vermin and for humane despatch, approval given for DEER.

 

For Open FAC holders you do NOT need the land approved anyway, and for OPEN FAC holders whats wrong with....

Target Zeroing and all lawful quarry?

Slaughtering/Humane despatch to be included under all lawful quarry, why try to complicate it?!

 

[HDAV]

Nope all my own work an original HDAV comment (I tend to reference when i copy and paste not plagiarise others)

[Dekers]

Nope all my own work an original HDAV comment (I tend to reference when i copy and paste not plagiarise others)

 

 

[Kes]

Are you avin a larf, just which bit of that makes things easier to understand or simpler?

 

lets take a look....

An end to the variety of conditions for each type of rifle. For those with open certs;-

i.e. a .243 use would be qualified; for use shooting of Target, Zeroing on land approved for the calibre, Deer, fox, other vermin and for humane despatch, approval given for DEER.

 

For Open FAC holders you do NOT need the land approved anyway, and for OPEN FAC holders whats wrong with....

Target Zeroing and all lawful quarry?

Slaughtering/Humane despatch to be included under all lawful quarry, why try to complicate it?!

 

 

Dekers,

I have no problem with your simplification - its probably better but for most of us it isnt simple in Cheshire, I would be acting illegally if I used my .223 as currentlt conditioned for anything other than fox. If it can be understood all of the issues are included in your type of condition, I'd prefer yours.

Cheers

[fruitloop]

This sends a shiver down my spine! I'm with North Yorkshire and although I would like them to be a little faster at times (6 weeks for a grant 4 weeks for a variation) they are great. Give them good reason and some land to shoot over and they give you what you want and we all have open certificates from the start, no daft mentoring conditions.

 

My fear is that if things become 'standardised' it will drag the good forces down rather than the poor forces up.

 

 

 

This is what I think we should have, prove you are a responsible person to hold firearms and let you buy what you can securely store. Where is the harm in that? Why not let me buy a second gun if I want or to change on a whim. Either I'm safe or I'm not. Is there any evidence that would make me a greater risk? I like the idea of treating the FAC like the SGC. Still in support of intial 'good reason' and maybe more thorough checks.

 

i agree with him

[pboro shot]

im pretty happy with the way things are to be honest,the only thing i think would be a good idea is a small licence card ,

[Dekers]

Dekers,

I have no problem with your simplification - its probably better but for most of us it isnt simple in Cheshire, I would be acting illegally if I used my .223 as currentlt conditioned for anything other than fox. If it can be understood all of the issues are included in your type of condition, I'd prefer yours.

Cheers

 

This is a problem that really must be addressed, and already mentioned by HDAV... the regional variations of FAC conditioning must be sorted out!

[soontjen]

i applied for my f.a.c and you can now have the shotgun and f.a.c running together and they come up for renewal together and it only cost's 40 for the two instead of the useual 40 each

but they could try and get round and sort out the time you have to wait

[phaedra1106]

i applied for my f.a.c and you can now have the shotgun and f.a.c running together and they come up for renewal together and it only cost's 40 for the two instead of the useual 40 each

but they could try and get round and sort out the time you have to wait

 

Not quite, if you go for an FAC grant and the grant or renewal of an SGC at the same time it's £50 for the FAC and £10 for the SGC. If it's a renewal of an FAC and grant or renewal of an SGC at the same time it's £40 for the FAC and £10 for the SGC.

[Gimlet]

To qualify for the job all FEOs should be FAC holders themselves with a minimum of 10 yrs experience on an open ticket with deer legal calibres. Preferably they should be from a professional shooting background with relevent vocational qualifications such as advanced level DMQ or Range Officer certification.

 

Chief Constables should not be responsible for interpreting the law. Parliament makes laws and CCs should be required to uphold them without bending them to suit their prejudices. This is what causes so much variation and confusion across the country. It would be better to appoint to each force a County Firearms Licensing Officer with the same level of qualifications and experience suggested for FEOs.

 

Nor should the police be able to dictate the terms of use for calibres in relation to quarry species. They are not in any way qualified to do so. Leave the minimum power limits in place for deer (though England and Scotland should be standardised with, IMO, England adopting the Scottish standards which I think are sensible), but allow shooters to use their judgement and knowledge in regard to vermin. They are the ones best qualified to do so.

 

Do NOT standardise mentoring. This will lead to every new applicant being restricted to supervised shooting for the full 5 yrs of their first ticket. (Something Dorset CC seems to be trying to do) which is ridiculous. Much better is for a novice with no shooting experience to be required to shoot 'under the auspices' of an experienced shooter for a reasonable minimum period. Say 1 or 2 years. This allows the mentor to decide when a novice is sufficiently experienced and competent to shoot unaccompanied, and where, as he is best placed to do so, and not a police officer in a distant building who has no idea at all.

 

I also think the shooting fraternity and the police should get together and devise an affordable gun safety training course that novices with no shooting experience or no mentor should attend, and those making the transition from air rifles to rimfires which is one of the areas of highest risk. PROVIDED such courses do not turn into long-winded money making exercises for BASC or BDS etc.

Edited October 22, 2011 by Gimlet

[happypig]

Well Hampshire for one are contacting GP's regardless of circumstances for every new SGC and renewal........ Same for FAC's

 

This costs the force £32.50 from each and every application. As this is the fee paid to the GP.

 

Even money says that this cost will be transferred to the applicant in the near future. Plus this will add weeks to the application renewal time as GP's especially those who are anti will be under no obligation to hurry a reply.

 

Can anyone say how many new applications Hants Pol deal with per year plus how many SGC holders there are in the county?...... multiply the new applicants by 5 for the cert life and add to the current SGC holders and multiply the whole lot by thirty two pounds fifty. Its going to cost a fair whack.

 

This in a time when forces are being squeezed for millions. It does not seem to be with Common Sense or sound judgement or with a degree of proportionality that this hoop is being added.

 

David BASC any thoughts?

[HDAV]

I'm not david but i recon £120-£150 is what we'll be looking at for renewals/grant (possibly with charges for other services) and then GP's Fees etc on top HGV/PSV drivers already have to pay for basic medical checks for their licence (after 50?) however if you want to panic have a read here: http://www.bma.org.uk/employmentandcontracts/fees/fees1.jsp?page=2

http://www.bma.org.uk/employmentandcontracts/fees/fees1.jsp?page=3#DVLA

 

£32.50 looks cheap!

Edited October 26, 2011 by HDAV

[happypig]

Its not but my point was this is coming out of an already stretched budget .......

 

leaving about £15 from our fees to grant the certs that forces are already can not be done on the current fee structure....

 

Hampshire and Sussex are not required to go to the doctors on every occasion

Edited October 26, 2011 by happypig

[HDAV]

Hampshire and Sussex should be challenged on this as they are not required to go to the doctors on every occasion

Then put in a freedom of information act request for the annual spend on medical reports relating to Firearms certs put it in writing and by law they have to respond within 5 days IIRC they can reject it under law if its sensitive, (for many reasons but asking for the last 5years expenditure on GP reports should be fine as should the number of grants and renewals)

 

If it bothers you that much do something about it you could try using http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/ or send a letter to the force disclosure officer. (best to look up contact details prior to sending it)

 

To make it really easy for you http://www.hampshire.police.uk/Internet/rightinfo/foi/obtain.htm

Edited October 26, 2011 by HDAV

[Sprackles]

According to Home Office guide to Chiefs of Police, medical reports should only be sought where there is grounds for concern, ie, you have declared a mental illness etc.

Can you not raise a complaint on these grounds.