HO Guidance - Help Required Please

[Kes]

Gentlemen, I need help again - sorry.

I am being advised that the HO Guidance does not support the use of .243 for fox and that, even after holding a .223 on an open ticket for 5 years I would be retricted to a closed cert if I was granted a .243. Ironically the land I shoot over I was advised was passed for .243 and yet, despite this, recent advice indicates its only passed for .233.

Am I jumping to conclusions here and thinking that circumstances alter cases?

 

 

The specific advice on .243 for fox from the HO Guidance would help in my continuing struggle. If anyone knows where it is, it will save me a long read.

Thanks

Kes

Edited March 6, 2012 by Kes

[Gonk]

Interesting, I only know of a MINIMUM calibre for fox (.22 centrefire GMP)?

[Beretta28g]

This is from the Home Office Guidance. It would seem .243 is OK

[bedwards1966]

Interesting, I only know of a MINIMUM calibre for fox (.22 centrefire GMP)?

 

I don't think so, some forces allow .17HMR's, .22WMR's and even sometimes .22lr's, so I don't think there is a minimum. I could be wrong, but I think it's just the police interpretations.

 

 

I'm pretty certain that the HO guidelines DO say that a .243 is an acceptable calibre for fox where long ranges, windy conditions etc require a large calibre.

I'll have a look for the relevant stuff now as I'd like to know myself (I want a bigger rifle but want to keep the .243 for foxes) so I'll have a look. Someone may beat me to it.

[apache]

You've missed the .243 bit out, it's the next column down and refers yo to 13.23

 

13.23 Common rifle cartridges considered

suitable for the shooting of foxes range from

.17 Remington, and .22 Hornet to .22 -250

and .220 Swift, though there is a wide range

of suitable similar calibres commercially

available. In windy areas, where heavier bullets

aid accurate shooting, or if applicants wish to

use one rifle for shooting both deer and foxes

they may choose a rifle in 6mm (.243/.244) or

6.5mm (.264) calibre. .22 Rimfire is generally

too low-powered to be used against fox

except at short range, but may reasonably be

permitted for use against such quarry in

certain circumstances. However, sole use

against fox would not normally be sufficient

“good reason” to acquire such a rifle (see

paragraph 13.15). Combination shot gun/rifles

should have the rifled barrel in a similar

calibre. Expanding ammunition should be

authorised for shooting foxes. Those involved

in shooting foxes will normally be authorised

to possess up to 250 rounds and acquire 200

at any given time, but consideration should

though be given to each shooter’s individual

circumstances, particularly where re-loaders are

acquiring missiles. See also paragraph 13.14 on

allowing applicant’s flexibility to reasonably

shoot other species on named land.

[Gonk]

Bedwards1966 you are correct, some forces do allow other calibres, GMP is .22cf minimum specifically

[bedwards1966]

Aaargh, Apache! I had just found that very section and was going to post it to follow on from Beretta28g!

 

It seems I'm right then anyway!

[JonathanL]

It's not about what the police will 'allow' you to have. A firearm certificate is not granted by the police because they are feeling generous today.

 

You have a right in law to be granted an FAC (and an SGC) if you meet the statutory criteria. The Firearms Act is very clear on that. It is unlawful for the police or the Home Office to have a blanket policy on what they will or will not grant a particular authority for - every application has to be considered on its merits. If you have 'good reason' to acquire a particular firearm then the police must grant you a certificate for it.

 

J.

[Kes]

It's not about what the police will 'allow' you to have. A firearm certificate is not granted by the police because they are feeling generous today.

 

You have a right in law to be granted an FAC (and an SGC) if you meet the statutory criteria. The Firearms Act is very clear on that. It is unlawful for the police or the Home Office to have a blanket policy on what they will or will not grant a particular authority for - every application has to be considered on its merits. If you have 'good reason' to acquire a particular firearm then the police must grant you a certificate for it.

 

J.

 

I'm sure you are right but instead of it being a 'right' in Cheshire, it seems to be more, 'if you persist', 'if you know the condition has been granted before' and so forth. The discretion of the Chief Constable covers a multitude of sins and sinners here !

[kent]

Gentlemen, I need help again - sorry.

I am being advised that the HO Guidance does not support the use of .243 for fox and that, even after holding a .223 on an open ticket for 5 years I would be retricted to a closed cert if I was granted a .243. Ironically the land I shoot over I was advised was passed for .243 and yet, despite this, recent advice indicates its only passed for .233.

Am I jumping to conclusions here and thinking that circumstances alter cases?

 

 

The specific advice on .243 for fox from the HO Guidance would help in my continuing struggle. If anyone knows where it is, it will save me a long read.

Thanks

Kes

 

So what they are saying is "if you persist we will make things difficult for you by issueing it on closed terms" As they can say what they want about calibres and land and can change thier minds over time - your stuffed as i see it. You know if you realy must have more wizz bang why not just go 22-250 or similar. High winds and extended ranges or one gun Deer and fox are the main facts in your favour for the .243" if you cannot forfill this why would you want one anyway? dont get me wrong i have used one for years but on general run of the mill foxing like you would get in your area i cannot say it is actually needed

[bedwards1966]

It's not about what the police will 'allow' you to have. A firearm certificate is not granted by the police because they are feeling generous today.

 

You have a right in law to be granted an FAC (and an SGC) if you meet the statutory criteria. The Firearms Act is very clear on that. It is unlawful for the police or the Home Office to have a blanket policy on what they will or will not grant a particular authority for - every application has to be considered on its merits. If you have 'good reason' to acquire a particular firearm then the police must grant you a certificate for it.

 

J.

 

Your aren't quite right on that. In reality, if the police don't like you when you apply for a SGC and refuse you, you can appeal and they have to prove a good reason why you can't be trusted with one, if they can't do that then a court appeal will see that you get a certificate.

A FAC is very different, if the FEO turns up at your door for the FAC interview and decided he doesn't like you/feels you can't be trusted you will be refused one and appealing isn't likely to be able to do anything to help.

It is different, regardless of what they should and should not do in law, it does seem that when FAC's are concerned they get away with doing as they wish. You can often change things by arguing with them, and getting the help of BASC and so on, but they do as they wish, a FAC is more of a privilege than a right.

Edited March 7, 2012 by bedwards1966

[CharlieT]

Your aren't quite right on that. In reality, if the police don't like you when you apply for a SGC and refuse you, you can appeal and they have to prove a good reason why you can't be trusted with one, if they can't do that then a court appeal will see that you get a certificate.

A FAC is very different, if the FEO turns up at your door for the FAC interview and decided he doesn't like you/feels you can't be trusted you will be refused one and appealing isn't likely to be able to do anything to help.

It is different, regardless of what they should and should not do in law, it does seem that when FAC's are concerned they get away with doing as they wish. You can often change things by arguing with them, and getting the help of BASC and so on, but they do as they wish, a FAC is more of a privilege than a right.

 

I have to totally disagree with you on this, Jonathan L is quite correct with his statement.

 

Quite why so many newcomers to our sport think that being granted a fac is a privilege is quite beyond me. The HO Guidance is most specific on this matter and fully addresses such issues constructive refusal etc.

[bedwards1966]

I have to totally disagree with you on this, Jonathan L is quite correct with his statement.

 

Quite why so many newcomers to our sport think that being granted a fac is a privilege is quite beyond me. The HO Guidance is most specific on this matter and fully addresses such issues constructive refusal etc.

 

If the police decide not to allow you a FAC there is usually very little you can do about it, it is different. Perhaps privilege wasn't the best way to describe it but it really doesn't work as a right to have a FAC, unlike a SGC.

That isn't to say they are hard to get, but if the police say no then that's usually the end of it!

[Sharpshooter.123]

Kind of going off track a bit but I was told that SOME forces are stopping 243 for just fox

[barrelsniffer]

Cheshire wont follow ACPO or HO guidelines they add there own bits to it...hence one of the worse areas in england.

[The Essex Hunter]

Gentlemen, I need help again - sorry.

I am being advised that the HO Guidance does not support the use of .243 for fox and that, even after holding a .223 on an open ticket for 5 years I would be retricted to a closed cert if I was granted a .243. Ironically the land I shoot over I was advised was passed for .243 and yet, despite this, recent advice indicates its only passed for .233.

Am I jumping to conclusions here and thinking that circumstances alter cases?

 

 

The specific advice on .243 for fox from the HO Guidance would help in my continuing struggle. If anyone knows where it is, it will save me a long read.

Thanks

Kes

 

What foxes can’t you shoot with a .223? Or is it the case you WANT a .243!

Regarding land clearance in Essex, I call the girls in the office and give the name of the farmer/land owner and address of the farm and the take about 30 seconds to give me an answer.

A friend has a 22-250 coupled with a very good scope which works very well out to

250yards so far, with all my permission letters they have deer and fox on them for my .243. I believe you need to take a look and make a new plan for shooting of your land and check out the deer population!

 

TEH

[Luckyshot]

Your aren't quite right on that. In reality, if the police don't like you when you apply for a SGC and refuse you, you can appeal and they have to prove a good reason why you can't be trusted with one, if they can't do that then a court appeal will see that you get a certificate.

A FAC is very different, if the FEO turns up at your door for the FAC interview and decided he doesn't like you/feels you can't be trusted you will be refused one and appealing isn't likely to be able to do anything to help.

It is different, regardless of what they should and should not do in law, it does seem that when FAC's are concerned they get away with doing as they wish. You can often change things by arguing with them, and getting the help of BASC and so on, but they do as they wish, a FAC is more of a privilege than a right.

 

 

Cheshire wont follow ACPO or HO guidelines they add there own bits to it...hence one of the worse areas in england.

 

Durham wont either, but I found if you go up and speak to your flm in person and can show the need for what you are requesting you will get it.

[Mr_Logic]

It's about proving the need to go to a bigger calibre. A 223 will do a fox out to a pretty good distance. hell, with the target rifle, if I could hit it, I could kill one at 1000 yards (god bless amax bullets!).

 

So why the 243? Generally the reason is deer as well, and then it's deer/fox and they're happy. If just fox, and no prospect of deer, then more justification will be needed.

 

Thames Valley said I couldn't have 243 for rabbits originally. A quick phone call pointed out that I wanted a rifle I could take regardless - out for deer in the morning, maybe some rabbiting later and then some lamping fox at night. As I pointed out, a 22-250 would work but isn't legal, so the smallest thing I could have was the 243 - one ticket, complete with 243 specifically for bunny rabbits.

[kent]

It's about proving the need to go to a bigger calibre. A 223 will do a fox out to a pretty good distance. hell, with the target rifle, if I could hit it, I could kill one at 1000 yards (god bless amax bullets!).

 

So why the 243? Generally the reason is deer as well, and then it's deer/fox and they're happy. If just fox, and no prospect of deer, then more justification will be needed.

 

Thames Valley said I couldn't have 243 for rabbits originally. A quick phone call pointed out that I wanted a rifle I could take regardless - out for deer in the morning, maybe some rabbiting later and then some lamping fox at night. As I pointed out, a 22-250 would work but isn't legal, so the smallest thing I could have was the 243 - one ticket, complete with 243 specifically for bunny rabbits.

The "if you can hit it" bit gives good reason the guidence notes talk of "extended ranges and wind" at 300 yds a 75grn or even the new 87grn v-mav in .243" totally outclasses the 55 grn .224 pill. The 6.5mm is also mentioned though such talk might send the firearms dept into meltdown if they aint granting a 6mm Were i live 300yds and 20mph winds are very common so my FEO (who is actually a pain in the butt) has no issue with my having a 6mm foxer if deer is on it or not i have all the "good reason" in the world

[Kes]

The "if you can hit it" bit gives good reason the guidence notes talk of "extended ranges and wind" at 300 yds a 75grn or even the new 87grn v-mav in .243" totally outclasses the 55 grn .224 pill. The 6.5mm is also mentioned though such talk might send the firearms dept into meltdown if they aint granting a 6mm Were i live 300yds and 20mph winds are very common so my FEO (who is actually a pain in the butt) has no issue with my having a 6mm foxer if deer is on it or not i have all the "good reason" in the world

 

Now thats a fair interpretation of the HO Guidance.

My main feeling here in Cheshire is that the good reason requirement is a means to restrict rather than assist shooting 'customers'.

I have said it before so this isnt new, but its the PERSON who is fit or unfit, establish that then any reasonable reason is 'good reason' within a fair limit of calibres. Not here in Cheshire - doesnt matter if your are the Archbishop of Canterbury.

[kent]

Now thats a fair interpretation of the HO Guidance.

My main feeling here in Cheshire is that the good reason requirement is a means to restrict rather than assist shooting 'customers'.

I have said it before so this isnt new, but its the PERSON who is fit or unfit, establish that then any reasonable reason is 'good reason' within a fair limit of calibres. Not here in Cheshire - doesnt matter if your are the Archbishop of Canterbury.

 

Yes things have to change, there are of course other problems in cheshire constabulary but the sooner the Goverment see scence and turn licencing over to a fully accountable civillian body the better for both public safety and those that have to put up with the postcode lottery and little Hitlers

[Mr_Logic]

The "if you can hit it" bit gives good reason the guidence notes talk of "extended ranges and wind" at 300 yds a 75grn or even the new 87grn v-mav in .243" totally outclasses the 55 grn .224 pill. The 6.5mm is also mentioned though such talk might send the firearms dept into meltdown if they aint granting a 6mm Were i live 300yds and 20mph winds are very common so my FEO (who is actually a pain in the butt) has no issue with my having a 6mm foxer if deer is on it or not i have all the "good reason" in the world

That's my point entirely - you have good reason due to circumstance and ground. It's not unreasonable for the Police to want that demonstrated; but it is unreasonable to get grumpy once this good reason has been shown.

[JonathanL]

I'm sure you are right but instead of it being a 'right' in Cheshire, it seems to be more, 'if you persist', 'if you know the condition has been granted before' and so forth. The discretion of the Chief Constable covers a multitude of sins and sinners here !

 

This is the whole point though. It is not about discretion. There is no discretion accorded to chief officers by the Firearms Act. If the applicant meets the criteria laid down by the Act the police must grant the FAC. There is no option - the Act instructs the cheif officer of police to grant. They can't refuse on the grounds that you are ugly or that you look slightly weird.

 

The exception being Northern Ireland where it is indeed discrestionary.

 

J.

[Kes]

This is the whole point though. It is not about discretion. There is no discretion accorded to chief officers by the Firearms Act. If the applicant meets the criteria laid down by the Act the police must grant the FAC. There is no option - the Act instructs the cheif officer of police to grant. They can't refuse on the grounds that you are ugly or that you look slightly weird.

 

The exception being Northern Ireland where it is indeed discrestionary.

 

J.

 

Jonathan, I would like to think you are right but why so much variation in VERY similar circumstances, if discretion is not being operated?

[Kes]

What foxes can’t you shoot with a .223? Or is it the case you WANT a .243!

Regarding land clearance in Essex, I call the girls in the office and give the name of the farmer/land owner and address of the farm and the take about 30 seconds to give me an answer.

A friend has a 22-250 coupled with a very good scope which works very well out to

250yards so far, with all my permission letters they have deer and fox on them for my .243. I believe you need to take a look and make a new plan for shooting of your land and check out the deer population!

 

TEH

 

Hi - yes I do want a .243 but because;

It is often very windy here and a .243 is a 'steadier' load in such conditions. Also I dont want to buy loads of guns -this one would do me for deer, fox etc. It seems that Tames Valley see the logic in this (above) so Jonathan, again, is this discretion not to grant this in Cheshire, or a disruptive use of the rules, based on 'discretion'. It does exist in my view.

Also, is a .223 at 3600ft/sec and 40 grains v-max a world away from a .243 with 50 grains of blitzking powered at 3000ft per second?

I must continue o pursue this and compare responses across forces.

It would be good to write a report on thiscome the decision and send it to ---

Cheers

 

Is one a 'small' bore and the other a 'full' bore.