Jump to content

BASC welcomes police intent to remove unnecessary FAC conditions


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 81
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Good news, though you wouldn't think so by reading some of the responses on here. David, you have the patience of a saint! I'm sure if you had negotiated free certificates and a free monthly ammo allowance delivered to your door by the police, the BASC haters would still be out in force whingeing about it :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cant please all the people all the time...just glad, for the sake of shooting, that all the hard work BASC and NGO gave been doing not simply bashing the police with threats (although we have on occasion!) we have been playing the long game and working with them too.

In more news. Nottinghamshire police - who have been high on BASC's agenda for poor service, have today openly apologised to shooters for their poor service and have promised to work with BASC to get their service improved- even those who attack BASC will benefit from this, but I can almost guarantee won't event have the courtesy to (grudgingly) say 'thanks - ho hum, so be it - broad shoulders and all that, we move on the keep fighting for ALL your benefit - love us or hate us we are on your side!

David

Edited by David BASC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cant please all the people all the time...just glad, for the sake of shooting, that all the hard work BASC and NGO gave been doing not simply bashing the police with threats (although we have on occasion!) we have been playing the long game and working with them too.

 

In more news. Nottinghamshire police - who have been high on BASC's agenda for poor service, have today openly apologised to shooters for their poor service and have promised to work with BASC to get their service improved- even those who attack BASC will benefit from this, but I can almost guarantee won't event have the courtesy to (grudgingly) say 'thinks - ho hum, so be it - broad shoulders and all that, we move on the keep fighting for ALL your benefit - love us or hate us we are on your side!

 

David

 

David you are a Gentleman . :good::good::good: .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you may know, thanks in no small part to one person wanting to ‘have their day in court’ several years ago, against expert advice I may add, there is no legal right of appeal against conditions on a certificate (unless of course it’s totally daft and unreasonable) and the licencing teams know this full well.

 

So in the past it has been very difficult indeed in some cases to get conditions removed or changed.

 

I am far more optimistic that you that there will be a significant shift towards removing the ‘automatic’ mentoring condition that several forces implement in many cases just because a person wants to shoot a deer rather than a fox…

 

I am also confident we will see a significant shift towards AOLQ as a standard condition on Sec 1, which will be a significant benefit to shooters.

 

David

Well i think someone needs to speak to Gloucestershire.

 

I have just had my FAC back after going in for a variation. with it was a letter from firearms licencing.

 

It reads.

 

Dear Mr #######

 

FIREARM ACTS 1968 TO 1997

 

I am writing concerning the inclusion of the wording'any other quarry' in the conditions for the permitted use of your arms. This is a matter that has come to the attention of the senior officers' within this Force and the decision has been made not to approve such requests at this time.

 

There are issues I cannot go into in reaching this decision but I believe the decision may be subject to review at a future time but unfortunately I cannot be more specific.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Firearms Licensing.

 

 

I have had AOLQ on my FAC for a long time but now im very restricted as to what i can shoot.

 

22lr and 17 hornet. vermin control

222 fox control

6.5 and 7x57r deer control.

 

so now i can not shoot rabbit and muntjac with the 222 or Canada goose as their pest not vermin

i cant shoot the squirrel, mink, goose with the 22 or hornet

any smaller spices with the bigger rifles.

I often shoot rabbit with the 6.5 if im heading back to the car and there are rabbits out, im asked to shoot them by the keeper and land owners, now i cant.

 

Has anyone a list of the lawful species so i can itemise every single one that is lawful for each rifle and ask Glos firearms licencing to put every one on my FAC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well i think someone needs to speak to Gloucestershire.

 

I have just had my FAC back after going in for a variation. with it was a letter from firearms licencing.

 

It reads.

 

Dear Mr #######

 

FIREARM ACTS 1968 TO 1997

 

I am writing concerning the inclusion of the wording'any other quarry' in the conditions for the permitted use of your arms. This is a matter that has come to the attention of the senior officers' within this Force and the decision has been made not to approve such requests at this time.

 

There are issues I cannot go into in reaching this decision but I believe the decision may be subject to review at a future time but unfortunately I cannot be more specific.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Firearms Licensing.

 

 

I have had AOLQ on my FAC for a long time but now im very restricted as to what i can shoot.

 

22lr and 17 hornet. vermin control

222 fox control

6.5 and 7x57r deer control.

 

so now i can not shoot rabbit and muntjac with the 222 or Canada goose as their pest not vermin

i cant shoot the squirrel, mink, goose with the 22 or hornet

any smaller spices with the bigger rifles.

I often shoot rabbit with the 6.5 if im heading back to the car and there are rabbits out, im asked to shoot them by the keeper and land owners, now i cant.

 

Has anyone a list of the lawful species so i can itemise every single one that is lawful for each rifle and ask Glos firearms licencing to put every one on my FAC.

 

As suggested ACPO make the suggestion and the individual departments will just carry on either ignoring or complying depending on what they want to do so its basically the same as ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great positive attitue Al4x! :lol:

 

Seriously, its early days and if we get a hard copy of the letter that will help enormously, it may simply be that the letter from ACPO has not yet filtered down to the FEO level.

 

Anyway, if a copy of the letter could be sent to the BASC firearms dept. that would be great. :good:

 

 

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"robust" excellent obviously we already have cases appearing of ignoring their "robust" advice and till it is actually binding in any way it presumably will carry on. But I will be interested as we all will be to see how it goes you can only hope they all roll over and the issue goes away but we shall see

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact remains that ACPO are on board, it will take time for the information to filter down and be put into action, and if constabularies are not playing ball we need hard copy of the letters they are writing to take to ACPO please.

 

 

David

 

David, some of us have been shooting the odd year or two and have heard so much baloney over the years it is difficult not to be sceptical. Too many times have there been suggestions of improvements/help/easing the burden for shooters only for them to seldom, if ever materialise.

 

I currently have AOLQ on ALL my FAC tools, I hope it continues and others also get to see the benefits of it, BUT, I'll believe it when I see it!

 

Sceptical but hopeful, but we have been kicked a lot in the past and many of us find it difficult to forget!

 

ATB! :good:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great positive attitue Al4x! :lol:

 

Seriously, its early days and if we get a hard copy of the letter that will help enormously, it may simply be that the letter from ACPO has not yet filtered down to the FEO level.

 

Anyway, if a copy of the letter could be sent to the BASC firearms dept. that would be great. :good:

 

 

David

 

The most shocking thing I find with this is the fact that are saying that they won't divulge as to why they won't use the 'any lawful quarry' wording as if it's some sensitive police secret - which it isn't. If there's a reason as to why they won't use it then they should say what it is. You cannot judge whether the decision is unreasonable otherwise.

 

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They only reason i can think as to why they will not go into it as this moment in time is because of the area im in and what is going on here as from today.

 

I tried to phone 5 different numbers that i have for people within the office and no one home it looks like.

 

I have nothing to do with it though as i like my car and house to stay in one piece and not smell of burning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They only reason i can think as to why they will not go into it as this moment in time is because of the area im in and what is going on here as from today.

 

I tried to phone 5 different numbers that i have for people within the office and no one home it looks like.

 

I have nothing to do with it though as i like my car and house to stay in one piece and not smell of burning.

 

What is going on there today? Whatever it is it seems unlikely that it would affect whther they can tell you why they won't give you a particular condition on your FAC.

 

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Badger cull and its unlikely to have much to do with the licensing teams admin

 

Precisely. Nothing to do with the licensing department. Also, it wouldn't apply as it says 'any other lawful quarry' and shooting badgers isn't lawful unless you have been granted the required licence.

 

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Badger cull and its unlikely to have much to do with the licensing teams admin

 

I thought about that when it was originally posted, and I don't really see any connection to AOLQ, their refusal and reluctance to advise why, as you say just what has that got to do with the Firearms Admin?

Edited by Dekers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I thought about that when it was originally posted, and I don't really see any connection to AOLQ, their refusal and reluctance to advise why, as you say just what has that got to do with the Firearms Admin?

Those employed to do so by the companies already have the designated condition, so I can't see any reason for this reluctance by the licensing team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...