FAC Condition - Supervision

[grimey121uk]

Thanks for the advice guys,

Basically my FAC got posted out to me on Thursday (still not arrived) but I did speak with the licensing dept who said that the supervisory condition has been applied, I have since joined BASC and will seek some advice once I receive my welcome pack.

 

They did read the supervisory condition to me over the phone which basically stated "..................whilst under supervision by a current FAC holder", there seems to be so many holes in this in the legal sense, for instance it doesn't state that the supervisor shouldn't also have a supervisory condition. Whilst common sense I cant see how they can enforce the condition, there is no documentation that states the criteria for the supervisor, criteria for testing, criteria for length of supervision etc

 

The thing is I don't directly know another FAC holder although my brother does so I don't even know if he is interested in supervising me (bearing in mind I have never even spoke to him), even if he is up for it this is going to be more headache as I now need permission from the land owner for someone to accompany me and also have to schedule my shootings to ensure the he is free.

 

Interestingly GMP do have a template letter on their website for the supervisor to complete in order to get the condition removed, so I imagine its quite common for a first grant

Edited December 24, 2012 by grimey121uk

[T-Bolt94]

I had a 6month supervision placed on both my .17hmr and 12g on my initial grant FAC. I am in NI but I have heard a number of people having these conditions imposed on them. It goes by quicker than you may think but I 100% sympathise with you that it is a nuisance but I guess you can see the reasons why especially on a rifle I was shocked about the 12g but the need to ensure backstops etc makes it a fairly good condition imo.

[ferretfiddler]

Grimey 121uk I,m not too far from you (Ossy) & could act as a mentor if needed, I've just applied to Lancs for a variation to a 243 so awaiting what comes back from that. Please pm me if you wish to meet up etc.

come on guys we are all in the pee'ing in the same pot aren't we ? Lets stand together & help each other instead of ripping each other a new butt hole.

[Frenchieboy]

Grimley mate you have a PM with an offer if you accept this "Supervision" condition!

[Kes]

Excellent PW stuff !

There will be many who wish to apply who could not meet this condition unless a friendly PW member offers willingly.

There should be a better way to establish safety and experience than placing responsibility on an inexperienced shooter - perhaps target clubs could offer safety training for range fees - it doesnt cover gutting vermin but much of the rest a shooter would need. So, if a friendly PW'er isnt available it could be an alternative - shall complete and have verified a safety in handling and use course or mentoring.

Maybe BASC could help with that - it does produce a list of target clubs !

[ordnance]

I had this condition on mine, 6mths mentored shooting. Personally don't think it's a bad thing. If its your first FAC then it's a different type of shooting and I do t see anything wrong with an experienced FAC holder showing you the ropes a little. Worked for me, now I have open on both my rifles.

 

I would have to disagree. Its not rocket science.

 

NEVER POINT A GUN, LOADED OR UNLOADED, IN AN UNSAFE DIRECTION

 

1. TREAT ALL GUNS AS IF THEY ARE LOADED.

 

2. NEVER POINT A GUN AT ANYTHING YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO SHOOT.

 

3. KEEP YOUR FINGER OFF THE TRIGGER UNTIL YOU ARE ON TARGET AND HAVE DECIDED TO FIRE.

 

4. ALWAYS BE AWARE OF YOUR TARGET AND WHAT LIES DIRECTLY BEHIND IT. Etc.

[T-Bolt94]

I would have to disagree. Its not rocket science.

 

NEVER POINT A GUN, LOADED OR UNLOADED, IN AN UNSAFE DIRECTION

 

1. TREAT ALL GUNS AS IF THEY ARE LOADED.

 

2. NEVER POINT A GUN AT ANYTHING YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO SHOOT.

 

3. KEEP YOUR FINGER OFF THE TRIGGER UNTIL YOU ARE ON TARGET AND HAVE DECIDED TO FIRE.

 

4. ALWAYS BE AWARE OF YOUR TARGET AND WHAT LIES DIRECTLY BEHIND IT. Etc.

 

I agree, this is common sense! I have grown up around guns and hence why it is common sense to me. You give someone a rifle who has little or no experience with firearms and these "common sense" statements soon become something they have to learn/remember. I know it's no ideal and yes you could argue that they shouldn't be given the gun in the first place. If however we worked on that basis the shooting community would be bloody small. In order to allow the sport to grow people being granted a calibre significantly different to their past experience should in my opinion have some form of supervision imposed or a short safety course. These should however be based on the individual and not as a blanket rule. For instance members of the Armed Forces I am quite sure would be rather offended by a 6month supervision, or someone who can show they have extensive experience perhaps as a youngshot with BASC etc. The mentoring doesn't only help improve safety it also enables an experienced person to relay knowledge and advice, how good were you at judging range when you got your first gun? We all take shots which are out of range from time to time, for a newbie having a person there for the first few months who can say a specific shots not great or teach them the bush craft techniques to get closer etc would be extremely beneficial.

[ordnance]

I agree, this is common sense! I have grown up around guns and hence why it is common sense to me. You give someone a rifle who has little or no experience with firearms and these "common sense" statements soon become something they have to learn/remember. I know it's no ideal and yes you could argue that they shouldn't be given the gun in the first place. If however we worked on that basis the shooting community would be bloody small. In order to allow the sport to grow people being granted a calibre significantly different to their past experience should in my opinion have some form of supervision imposed or a short safety course. These should however be based on the individual and not as a blanket rule. For instance members of the Armed Forces I am quite sure would be rather offended by a 6month supervision, or someone who can show they have extensive experience perhaps as a youngshot with BASC etc. The mentoring doesn't only help improve safety it also enables an experienced person to relay knowledge and advice, how good were you at judging range when you got your first gun? We all take shots which are out of range from time to time, for a newbie having a person there for the first few months who can say a specific shots not great or teach them the bush craft techniques to get closer etc would be extremely beneficial.

 

 

I think if you are going down that road then it should be someone that had being trained and knows what thy are talking about. Perhaps a training course before you get a firearm. If that was the case than it would have to be everyone. Experienced and inexperienced. As for the supervising the person supervising could be a **** that hasn't a clue what he is talking about. How do the police putting these conditions on the certificate know that the person supervising has a clue what they are talking about. Even people here getting a personal protection weapon don't have to have any training or supervising. I Know plenty of (experienced shooters) i wouldn't trust with a water pistol. PS. Thankfully i haven't heard supervision here yet.

Edited December 30, 2012 by ordnance

[T-Bolt94]

The reason I have this view is that I know a few of a few people who have no firearms xp at all, and don't have any family involved so for them it would be in their very best interests to have someone supervise them, although they probably wouldn't arrange for that to be the case voluntarily a condition would make it compulsory for a short period of time and would be very beneficial to them. I am very shocked at the PPW situation, that's crazy!! Unfortunately supervision is here already, I have the unfortunate task of speaking from experience, as I was imposed the condition on my 17hmr which was frustrating because I felt I was fairly well experienced but was told that as a) it was an initial grant and B) was a bullet firing rifle it was standard. I do agree though that some experienced shooters haven't a clue.