David BASC Posted September 7, 2012 Report Share Posted September 7, 2012 BASC has held a meeting with Royal Mail to discuss its plans to ban the transportation of guns and their component parts. BASC is fighting the proposals which were outlined in a consultation document launched last month. The aim of the meeting was to inform Royal Mail of the impact the plans could have on the gun trade and people who shoot and to highlight BASC’s findings that claims in the consultation document were flawed, legally incorrect and not evidence-led. Royal Mail representatives at the meeting were also told that guns and component parts have been carried in the post for years with no evidence of them falling into the wrong hands. Matthew Perring, BASC’s firearms and explosives officer lead the meeting at Royal Mail offices. We hope Royal Mail now has a better understanding of firearms legislation and an understanding of shooting sports. They learned something from the meeting and were grateful for the information. Royal Mail has stated that it expects the impact of these proposals on customers to be minimal. Matt told the meeting there are more than one million people who shoot in the UK and that these proposals, if they go ahead, will have a significant impact on them. He explained that many people who shoot live in the countryside and rely on the post instead of travelling long distances to take guns for repair or to buy accessories. They were also told that there would be a knock-on effect on people’s businesses and livelihoods. Under the proposals, Parcelforce Worldwide, which is part of the Royal Mail Group, and other carriers would continue to carry firearms and component parts but only between Registered Firearms Dealers. BASC will also be attending a meeting with the independent regulator Ofcom which has the power to overrule Royal Mail’s final decision. BASC is calling on its members and others to respond to the public consultation by the closing date of 17th September. http://www.basc.org....B487E7EF4E1528F Thanks very much to all who have already responded to this consultation, and thanks too to the CA for joining in the fight!! David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Geordie Posted September 7, 2012 Report Share Posted September 7, 2012 Just done My bit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Livefast123 Posted September 7, 2012 Report Share Posted September 7, 2012 (edited) Just recieved a reply from my MP today in a nice posh House of Commons envelope. Basically it said the following:- Uploaded with ImageShack.us It doesn't sound very pro shooting to me.....as far as I can read into it the real reason that Royal Mail don't want to carry is due to 'firearms and other dangerous goods not being profitable'. I have also completed the consultation as he suggested, only I completed that a few weeks ago when this lunacy first aired it's ugly head. Edited September 7, 2012 by Livefast123 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parapilot Posted September 7, 2012 Report Share Posted September 7, 2012 Nice one basc. First in fighting our corner again. Why we all should be members and support these guys. Bigger the better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted September 9, 2012 Report Share Posted September 9, 2012 Well, what that MP says is most certainly NOT why RM claim they want to stop carrying firearms. They say it is so that they don't put their employees in a potentially unlawful situation which is utter toss to begin with. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harnser Posted September 9, 2012 Report Share Posted September 9, 2012 (edited) I dont know what all the fuss is about . Any body who sends stuff via parcel farce wants their brains tested . Harnser . Edited September 9, 2012 by Harnser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted September 9, 2012 Report Share Posted September 9, 2012 I dont know what all the fuss is about . Any body who sends stuff via parcel farce wants their brains tested . Harnser . It's Royal Mail we're talking about. Not ParcelForce. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harnser Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 (edited) It's Royal Mail we're talking about. Not ParcelForce. J. I think you will find that they are one and the same . with the worst record in the parcel industry for not delivering . They had more complaints than any of the national carriers . Just try and make an insurance claim for lost goods ,they will run you ragged untill you give up . Harnser . Edited September 10, 2012 by Harnser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 I think you will find that they are one and the same . with the worst record in the parcel industry for not delivering . They had more complaints than any of the national carriers . Just try and make an insurance claim for lost goods ,they will run you ragged untill you give up . Harnser . They aren't the same. Parcel Force is a seperate company. In their consultation document Royal Mail point out the Parcel Force will still carry firearms. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harnser Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 They aren't the same. Parcel Force is a seperate company. In their consultation document Royal Mail point out the Parcel Force will still carry firearms. J. Seperate in name only . Harnser . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 (edited) They aren't the same. Parcel Force is a seperate company. In their consultation document Royal Mail point out the Parcel Force will still carry firearms. J. Between RFD and RFD only where there isnt a problem but getting a spare/replacement trigger for a paintball or airgun (none FAC) is what they are suggesting banning.....or sending a barrel by special delivery to have it blued or threaded..... they seem to have taken the S1 firearms definition of compeont parts and applied it to all parts for all guns! Edited September 10, 2012 by HDAV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 Between RFD and RFD only where there isnt a problem but getting a spare/replacement trigger for a paintball or airgun (none FAC) is what they are suggesting banning.....or sending a barrel by special delivery to have it blued or threaded..... they seem to have taken the S1 firearms definition of compeont parts and applied it to all parts for all guns! Almost nothing in their consultation document is legally correct! It does make you worry as to whether Royal Mail are even fit to be handling other peoples' property at all if they can't even get some very basic legal points right - legal points that they are using to formulate policy, no less! J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guest1957 Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 Almost nothing in their consultation document is legally correct! It does make you worry as to whether Royal Mail are even fit to be handling other peoples' property at all if they can't even get some very basic legal points right - legal points that they are using to formulate policy, no less! J. I doubt RM will spend any money on specialist advice given the minimal loss of business that will result from the change in policy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 ITs more an issue of how many people will end up break the T&C's unknown and then be left without compensation. It boggles the mind that they they think they cant be trusted to take reasonable precautions with items sent through their network. a Gun is an inanimate object how does it need to be handled differently to anything else? The staff shouldn't know the contents of the packages they deliver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 ITs more an issue of how many people will end up break the T&C's unknown and then be left without compensation. It boggles the mind that they they think they cant be trusted to take reasonable precautions with items sent through their network. a Gun is an inanimate object how does it need to be handled differently to anything else? The staff shouldn't know the contents of the packages they deliver. Precisely. All the Act does is put on a statutory footing what is already a common law duty when looking after someone elses property. If they aren't already taking 'reasonable precautions' to ensure the safe custody of parcels in their possession then they should no be handling any parcels at all! Moreover, if indeed they aren't then they have clearly been breaking the law for the past 23 years. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest topshot_2k Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 Im just writing my email, do we need to enclose the Annex D section? If so does someone have a word version? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 I typed the answers in my email and I feel the format of annexe. D allows them to unreasonably bin comments from people who don't include it as it is done in a limiting manner also where is the welsh language version? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest topshot_2k Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 Thats my worry, BASC has no mention of including it but the CA say it needs including. Wonder how many emails will be scrapped without it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted September 10, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 Dear All, No they will not ignore or scrap your comments to the consultation if you have e-mailed with out Annex D. When BASC met Royal Mail last week we double checked this with them David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest topshot_2k Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 Thanks David, I managed to edit it and send it with my objection anyway. Lets hope they see sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FalconFN Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 Almost nothing in their consultation document is legally correct! It does make you worry as to whether Royal Mail are even fit to be handling other peoples' property at all if they can't even get some very basic legal points right - legal points that they are using to formulate policy, no less! J. From your previous posts I assume that you work in, or have some knowledge of law? If so would there be any process by which their decision could be overturned in court? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest topshot_2k Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 OFCOM can over rule royal mails decision Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted October 29, 2012 Report Share Posted October 29, 2012 (edited) Just incase anyone was interested just seen this: http://www.gtaltd.co.uk/ Members will be interested to learn that Royal Mail has made the following statement: “We have recently concluded a public consultation on the carriage of firearms in our network. Royal Mail would like to thank those members of the GTA who took the time to provide helpful feedback as part of the Consultation process. We continue to review options very carefully. We will be working closely with the Gun Trade Association (GTA) and our regulator Ofcom, in order to reach a final decision. In the meantime, we do intend to make two clarifications to our policy covering firearms and ammunition, such that from 14 January 2013: 1. We will amend our definition of 'Guns for sporting use' to specifically prohibit firearms listed in Section 5 of the Firearms Act 1968 (such as handguns and revolvers). 2. We will amend our definition of 'Ammunition' to specifically exclude lead pellets and other air gun and airsoft projectiles, so that these items are allowed without restriction. Edited October 29, 2012 by HDAV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted October 29, 2012 Report Share Posted October 29, 2012 Just incase anyone was interested just seen this: http://www.gtaltd.co.uk/ Going in the right direction then. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted November 7, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 7, 2012 Royal Mail has announced that it intends to make two clarifications to its policy covering firearms and ammunition, such that from 14 January 2013: We will amend our definition of ‘Guns for sporting use’ to specifically prohibit firearms listed in Section 5 of the Firearms Act 1968 (such as handguns and revolvers). We will amend our definition of ‘Ammunition’, to specifically exclude lead pellets and other air gun and airsoft projectiles, so that these items are allowed without restriction. The first clarification addresses the legal status quo. Section 5 items have never been allowed to be sent by Royal Mail. The second clarification is welcome as is allows the carriage of airgun and airsoft pellets. However, BASC awaits a further announcement on the outcome of the recent Royal Mail consultation on its proposals to ban the transportation of guns and their component parts David 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.