Topgunners Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 Just listened to the news and the chief super from Mercia police is pushing to DOUBLE the shotgun and firearms licence fees. Stating that it is costing the force £25m to process licences and only getting back £6m. A huge burden to the taxpayer he stated. I hope he can have a word in my gaffer's ear to double my wages, lol Dave K Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike737 Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 Yes, I just heard that as well; closing line from the reporter: 'And until it rises, the taxpayer bears the burden'... (Or something close to that.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scolopax Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 Fair enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bagsy Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 Just seen it on the morning news along with a response from BASC (who else, CPSA are never to be seen on shooting matters). Personally I'd happily accept an increase - provided the service levels improve accordingly. But - the licence is imposed on us so in my view the taxpayer should pick up some of the cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fisheruk Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 Still good value at that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
team tractor Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 We shouldn't pay anything in my view . I'm a tax payer and its my right to be able to own firearms so why should we pay anything at all ? I was watching a program on the British constitution and its never been changed from saying were all allowed a firearm. We pay the police through are taxs . Do they invoice the criminals ? Saying this tho I still would pay double as I love my sport and pay 6 times the licence fee to basc £67 a year to basc ( I think ) £50 over 5 years for ticket Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
countryman Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 Its a pity the Police are not as vocal when it comes to burglars who cost the victims and tax payers millions all the time. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepper&Bess Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 Got to agree with countryman ( Its a pity the Police are not as vocal when it comes to burglars who cost the victims and tax payers millions all the time.) But like Team Tractor I would pay £50 for 5 years, as we all love our sport. They will not be happy until they stop our sport. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twistedsanity Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 Got to agree with countryman ( Its a pity the Police are not as vocal when it comes to burglars who cost the victims and tax payers millions all the time.) But like Team Tractor I would pay £50 for 5 years, as we all love our sport. They will not be happy until they stop our sport. If you go to court and are convicted of any offence you are forced to pay a victim surcharge fee between £15 and £80 , been that way for years and that is on top of any fines and court costs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
super sharp shooter Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 This has been on the cards for ages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mossy835 Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 i love my shooting, so i would pay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
super sharp shooter Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 Lets hope the service will improve with the increase in cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aris Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 They should increase the renewal cycle to save costs. 10 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
team tractor Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 If you go to court and are convicted of any offence you are forced to pay a victim surcharge fee between £15 and £80 , been that way for years and that is on top of any fines and court costsPaid at £1 a week . They don't charge them for b+b tho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twistedsanity Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 Agreed , but they charge everyone a victim surcharge regardless of their being a victim or not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
four-wheel-drive Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 I am shore that there are lots of things that cost more to do than people pay why should it be up us that have to pay it seems to me that they are presuming guilt I would have thought that it was up to them to prove that we cannot be trusted with a gun not for us to pay them to to to do it they are the ones making up the rules they should be the ones to pay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexl Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 (edited) If you go to court and are convicted of any offence you are forced to pay a victim surcharge fee between £15 and £80 , been that way for years and that is on top of any fines and court costs There is also the proceedes of crime act, ive been told they do go in really hard and try to 'recover' anything you cant prove youve legitimately obtained. Edited June 9, 2013 by alexl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twistedsanity Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 There is also the proceedes of crime act, ive been told they do go in really hard and try to 'recover' anything you cant prove youve legitimately obtained. They do indeed and have recovered a shed load of money this way but most little thugs or junkies don't have anything worth recovering , i am forced under threat of imprisonment to pay extortionate taxes like everyone else for a reason and have a right to own my shotguns, the governbent are all to keen to spend millions on funerals, museums for ex prime ministers, jubilees , weddings and give it away hand over fist to foreign countries whilst they allow the likes of Vodafone , Starbucks and many others to circumvent paying what they have a duty to pay but want to screw us for something we have a right to anyway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njc110381 Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 I'd like to see a better service. If doubling the fees is what it takes then fine, I'm happy with that. It would still be cheaper than a rod license to go fishing. Lets face it they do the checks, send an officer out for an interview and a land check too often enough, then free variations if it's a one for one - I wouldn't offer that service to my customers for £50 over five years and I don't suppose anyone else here would either? You'd go bankrupt pretty quickly, or at least not make the minimum wage! It's easy to moan, but why should the general public pay for us to get a certificate? It's our choice to have one at the end of the day - they're not making anyone pay anything! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 Well, that will actually be a relief to many, figures of £150-£200 have been mentioned! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleeh Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 £100 isn't bad.For that you get -1.) 5 years certification.2.) A rather handy form of picture ID with your address.3.) A Phone line to you FEO, a person who will answer any questions you have about firearm law.4.) All the admin work involved (I'm sure half you trade people will charge a lot more for a lot less work)5.) Infinite ability to get land check/cleared. If you think of the time involved in doing this, it's not a bad deal. (imagine if they charged for this!)6.) (Hopefully) further funding into some sort of online system.Stop moaning, £50 / 5 years was a steal, and £20/year is still a brilliant deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twistedsanity Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 I don't think £100 is bad if this was some private organisation you wanted membership to, in that respect it is a bargain but I think the justification for charging us £100 for something we have a legal entitlement to is seriously lacking , its our right to have a shotgun and they have decided we need a licence , I didn't ask for it to be that way or make the law surrounding it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 (edited) £100 isn't bad. For that you get - 1.) 5 years certification. 2.) A rather handy form of picture ID with your address. I have plenty, I don't need to pay for any more! 3.) A Phone line to you FEO, a person who will answer any questions you have about firearm law Often incorrectly 4.) All the admin work involved (I'm sure half you trade people will charge a lot more for a lot less work) Commonly inefficiently 5.) Infinite ability to get land check/cleared. If you think of the time involved in doing this, it's not a bad deal. (imagine if they charged for this!) Only for some, not Open FAC holders and once land is checked theoretically it is done! 6.) (Hopefully) further funding into some sort of online system. What online system? Stop moaning, £50 / 5 years was a steal, and £20/year is still a brilliant deal. ....and kindly stop trying to give my money away! Edited June 9, 2013 by Dekers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 (edited) They should increase the renewal cycle to save costs. 10 years.ABSOLUTELY RIGHT +1 Plus time spent checking land is a massive and expensive waste of resources in a lot of instances. Often the FEO is the least knowledgable person in the equation. Just a jaunt, a day out of the office on expenses. A lot of it could be done off Google Earth these days. There is no such thing as totally safe land in the south of England anyway and not very much elsewhere. So the visits don't really achieve what it says on the box. More emphasis on shooter training would actually be more productive. I have to pay to undergo training to dive, for example, nobody balks at having to pay for that. Its expensive but its good fun. You have to pay to do a probationer course if you want to shoot at Bisley. But once you are competent you don't have to reapply to shoot on the 600yds range if you have previously been shooting on 200yds range just because its a different piece of land. Licence the shooter as competent and stop all the faffing about having FEOs driving around the country looking at muddy fields. Edited June 9, 2013 by Vince Green Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njc110381 Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 For those suggesting that we shouldn't have to pay because we have the right to own firearms, would you rather there was no certification process?! 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.