Jump to content

FAC conditions - or rather the lack of them


Recommended Posts

I've done a search, couldn't find a relevant thread, so I'll risk asking a question on FAC conditions.

 

My FAC was originally for vermin, so I have the recent "all legal quarry" stuff for 22RF and HMR. Recently I applied for a variation for .308 and a few other target guns, which have been granted. The new calibres aren't mentioned at all in the conditions.

 

Is this normal for target guns ? Should I at least have some reference to them being used for target shooting ? Do I need to send the FAC back and get it changed ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Charlie says best to ask and send it back but I do have my conditions linked to all rifles but it does list them first but from the conditions the HMR could be taken to include deer

How could the HMR be taken to include deer it says " all legal quarry " and the HMR is not legal for deer..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mine specifies the rifles .17 .223 and .243 shall be used for pest control and deer obviously you can't use the hmr on deer but that's what is written

 

Mine takes it one step further by stating "The firearms and ammunition shall be used for shooting fox/deer and any other lawful quarry"

 

Remember, FAC conditions do not override the deer act.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's more a case of one of the office girls making a clerical mistake.

 

Some years back a variation of mine came back all to cock, when I phoned and spoke to the girl who did it she apologized saying she was a temp and had only started yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The conditions section is a mess. Surely it's not too much to ask the various forces to get their act together on this.

 

Looks like my FAC is going back again.

 

The conditions themselves are a total mess and most aren't even intelligible by the normal rules of English. I suspect that this is what was being referred to in the BASC/ACPO press release when they refer to "unenforcible" conditions. If they want to restrict the holder to only doing one thing and not others then they should explicitly say that via the use of the word "only" but they vary rarely do. Even when they do it is almost always unnecessary and serves no public safety purpose. A case in point is the condition that is sometimes applied in the case of rifles acquired for use abroad which says something to the effect that it may be carried to and from a port where you leave and enter the country and that it may not be fired in the UK. What on earth is the need for that? If the guy decides to fire it in this country what difference does it make as long as it is done lawfully?

 

If you have a firearm certificate then you should be able to use the firearms it relates to for any lawful purpose, regardless of what specific good reason you initially had in order to obtain authority to acquire them. If a person who owns a .308 rifle which he initially got for target shooting decides to go deer stalking with it then why should he not be allowed to do so as long as he is doing it legally and why is it of any concern to the police?

 

J.

Edited by JonathanL
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...