fortune Posted November 5, 2013 Report Share Posted November 5, 2013 (edited) So where is basc now? Where is a draft letter to the head of firearms asking why they are doing this? Edited November 5, 2013 by fortune Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted November 5, 2013 Report Share Posted November 5, 2013 Why just BASC? I'd have thought this was an issue for a combined front, BASC, CA, SACS, NGO, etc. to all stand up to it together on behalf of their combined members. Not a problem with that either its just that BASC are perhaps the most vocal we hear and I am a member 600k if looking at SGC holders............. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/firearm-and-shotgun-certificates-in-england-and-wales-2011-to-2012 Shotgun renewal/ grants are not mentioned and the 150K was a bit more than BASC's membership figure but maybe they have recruited a few more. I agree FAC holder numbers are greater but one voice speaking on their behlf would, I suspect, be better than each of us - who they tend to ignore. Also they can get to the Chief Con(s) we cant. I am also not on Bill Harrimans (and others) level of experience. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 BMA guidance (interim) http://bma.org.uk/practical-support-at-work/ethics/firearms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikk Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 Everyone knows that psychotic maniacs tell their doctors how they are feeling before they go on a killing spree! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted November 17, 2013 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 I wonder if we're now at the stage where it is easier, cheaper and quicker to obtain a firearm illegally than legally. It is seemingly the case with handguns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnlewis Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 Here in Hampshire I do know that a person I know was on anti depressants for a while and when reapplying for his SGC he did not put down that he had been on them he had hell of a job getting his SGC renewed but it was in the end so the police must of contacted his GP or they would never of know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 I am of the opinion that if I was asked for a letter from my doctor I would supply this at my cost to speed up the renewal it makes no difference to the police how long you wait for it to come through.i also think that the current charges are unrealistic today at only £8 per year and before you all start with its not law we are on our own as far as complaining to the authorities as our organisations seem to be very slow at coming forward on our behalf.my own opinion on renewals is it should take no more than four weeks to be done but we should pay a price that reflects this my thought would be a fee of £200.00 would not be to much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 I am of the opinion that if I was asked for a letter from my doctor I would supply this at my cost to speed up the renewal it makes no difference to the police how long you wait for it to come through.i also think that the current charges are unrealistic today at only £8 per year and before you all start with its not law we are on our own as far as complaining to the authorities as our organisations seem to be very slow at coming forward on our behalf.my own opinion on renewals is it should take no more than four weeks to be done but we should pay a price that reflects this my thought would be a fee of £200.00 would not be to much. Issue is some renewals and grants are straightforward and easy some are much costlier, and at the end of the day licensing is designed to increase public safety and is of no benefit to shooters (infact it is mostly a detraction) a passport is £72.50 for 10 years......... so per year cheaper than an SGC or FAC....... Full driving licence is £50....... SGC for £50 for 5 years looks quite expensive in comparison! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 I am of the opinion that if I was asked for a letter from my doctor I would supply this at my cost to speed up the renewal it makes no difference to the police how long you wait for it to come through.i also think that the current charges are unrealistic today at only £8 per year and before you all start with its not law we are on our own as far as complaining to the authorities as our organisations seem to be very slow at coming forward on our behalf.my own opinion on renewals is it should take no more than four weeks to be done but we should pay a price that reflects this my thought would be a fee of £200.00 would not be to much. I completely disagree. If you go down that road then you are saying that the police can require anything from you at any cost! The application form is laid down the the Home Secretary via a statutory instrument. If he/she wants to add a form to that which requests a doctors report then he/she is free to do that. The forms have only just been changed and, guess what, an additional doctors report form wasn't included! There is the standard authority you have to sign on the application form so that they police can contact your doctor. That is all that is required. There is no facility in that for the police to require you to pay the fee the doctor charges, if any. As far as the fee goes - I disagree with you there too. The licensing system is there for public benefit so it should be funded with public money. The applicant/ cert holder derives no more benefit than any other member of the public from it. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted November 17, 2013 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 The forms have only just been changed and, guess what, an additional doctors report form wasn't included! J. Sorted....that's good enough for me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 I completely disagree. If you go down that road then you are saying that the police can require anything from you at any cost! The application form is laid down the the Home Secretary via a statutory instrument. If he/she wants to add a form to that which requests a doctors report then he/she is free to do that. The forms have only just been changed and, guess what, an additional doctors report form wasn't included! There is the standard authority you have to sign on the application form so that they police can contact your doctor. That is all that is required. There is no facility in that for the police to require you to pay the fee the doctor charges, if any. As far as the fee goes - I disagree with you there too. The licensing system is there for public benefit so it should be funded with public money. The applicant/ cert holder derives no more benefit than any other member of the public from it. J. shooting is one of the most exspensive hobby's there is yet I am amazed at the attitude of some shooters you choose to shoot so we the shooters should pay for our certs.so you part with £50 to apply for your sgc well it takes uparound four hours of the fao time to do his visit and report so there is your money gone.then someone else at the police station has to process his work to get it signed off now your into debit then the license is issued more cost then the fao comes back to inspect your security for your new guns.and we are only just starting.on renewal another visit and who can blame them for asking the doctor for a letter they have to cover themselves in the event of a tragedy.we are quick enough to jump on the police and other government bodies when things go wrong but do not want to pay the true cost of services.a sgc or fac is a luxury.also look at how many certificates there are out there and then look at how many are members of the cpsa and basc it is pitiful between them they only have around 120 thousand members perhaps if people joined then they like the nra in America would have some teeth to go up against the establishment I am no fan of America but they at least are prepared to pay for their pleasure and fight to keep it.it is not your right to be allowed to roam the countryside with a loaded weapon it is a privilege.and as such I feel sure will never be paid for out of public funds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 Shooting isn't that expensive (no more than golf, tennis, fencing, bowls etc) certainly cheaper than any Motorsport I can think of land or marine based! I think you will find owning a shotgun is a right and the costs involved are no different to many others, police forces aren't efficient and some firearms depts are terribly organised and run. Also it isn't big political topic but an overly emotive one as for doctors letters being used to "cover" them for next time they screw up its a total nonsense very few gps have the training to do phscological assements and how are they supposed to do an assement on someone they perhaps have never met ***..... I would like to think most would not entertain trying to make such a judgement. The law and guidance are clear yet FLO's continue to make it up as they go along....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikk Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 shooting is one of the most exspensive hobby's there is yet I am amazed at the attitude of some shooters you choose to shoot so we the shooters should pay for our certs.so you part with £50 to apply for your sgc well it takes uparound four hours of the fao time to do his visit and report so there is your money gone.then someone else at the police station has to process his work to get it signed off now your into debit then the license is issued more cost then the fao comes back to inspect your security for your new guns.and we are only just starting.on renewal another visit and who can blame them for asking the doctor for a letter they have to cover themselves in the event of a tragedy.we are quick enough to jump on the police and other government bodies when things go wrong but do not want to pay the true cost of services.a sgc or fac is a luxury.also look at how many certificates there are out there and then look at how many are members of the cpsa and basc it is pitiful between them they only have around 120 thousand members perhaps if people joined then they like the nra in America would have some teeth to go up against the establishment I am no fan of America but they at least are prepared to pay for their pleasure and fight to keep it.it is not your right to be allowed to roam the countryside with a loaded weapon it is a privilege.and as such I feel sure will never be paid for out of public funds. Hi You can go and buy a sailing boat or speed boat, take it out away from the coast line and get in to trouble, then you need to be rescued by the coastguard or lifeboats costing a lot of money and they don't even need a license. At the same time people who own jet skiis don't need a license and could easily kill someone. There is no difference to this but yet shooters frequently come on here actually encouraging more legislation....why?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 Very true although most slips require proof of competence and insurance the coast guard is paid for by central government not sailors and boaters and the RNLI is a charity funded by donation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 (edited) lifeboats paid for by charitable donations coastguard is funded by government via customs and excise duty also shipping that comes into our ports,there are deaths at sea and would all be put down to accidents.my point that you seem to want to ignore is the cost does not reflect the work needed to produce my certificate.perhaps if you go to work tomorrow and your firm tell you that they are cutting your wages to a quarter of what it actualy costs you to live I take it you would be ok with that.i owned a boat and it cost me nothing like my shooting does after I spent six thousand on the boat and equipment + insurance it was free.i could have bought several boats for what shooting has cost.shooting is like everything else in life if its worth keeping you must pay for it.i would pay £100 per year if that would keep my sport alive governments only ever want to cut the things that make a loss so if police forces profit by our certificates then they might be a bit friendlier towards us.the anti's are funded by donations and they are chipping away at our country sports so pay up now to protect the future. Edited November 17, 2013 by bostonmick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 shooting is one of the most exspensive hobby's there is yet I am amazed at the attitude of some shooters you choose to shoot so we the shooters should pay for our certs.so you part with £50 to apply for your sgc well it takes uparound four hours of the fao time to do his visit and report so there is your money gone.then someone else at the police station has to process his work to get it signed off now your into debit then the license is issued more cost then the fao comes back to inspect your security for your new guns.and we are only just starting.on renewal another visit and who can blame them for asking the doctor for a letter they have to cover themselves in the event of a tragedy.we are quick enough to jump on the police and other government bodies when things go wrong but do not want to pay the true cost of services.a sgc or fac is a luxury.also look at how many certificates there are out there and then look at how many are members of the cpsa and basc it is pitiful between them they only have around 120 thousand members perhaps if people joined then they like the nra in America would have some teeth to go up against the establishment I am no fan of America but they at least are prepared to pay for their pleasure and fight to keep it.it is not your right to be allowed to roam the countryside with a loaded weapon it is a privilege.and as such I feel sure will never be paid for out of public funds. This post entirely misses the point. That in addition to the statement contained in the very first sentence being untrue - shooting isn't particularly expensive. In fact it can be amazingly inexpensive if you want it to be. Whatever it costs the police to operate the system is entirely irrelevant. The system exists excusively for the purpose of public safety not as a service to shooters. That being the case, the public purse should carry the cost. I pay a lot of money via my council tax for all sorts of things I rarely or never use but they are deemed a public benefit so by your reasoning the costs should be bourne solely by those who use them. Also, I really must take issue with your statement that it is a priviledge to have a FAC or SGC. It is not and shooters really need to get that idea out of their heads. The Firearms Act makes it very clear that anyone who meets the rather loose criteria in it has a right in law to a certificate. It is not something which is in the gift of the police so therefore cannot be a priviledge. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 .i could have bought several boats for what shooting has cost.shooting is like everything else in life if its worth keeping you must pay for it. So your happy to pay any cost the police want to throw at you? with no control in how the money is spent? how inefficient the system is? My employer doesn't give a rats *** what my cost of living is....... if i spend more living than i get paid thats my problem not his! He is there to make a profit and only employees because i make him more profit...... That isn't how the public sector works.....The police have a budget they decide how to spend it they know what revenue they get for issuing certs and what they need to allocate from the central budget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 So your happy to pay any cost the police want to throw at you? with no control in how the money is spent? how inefficient the system is? My employer doesn't give a rats *** what my cost of living is....... if i spend more living than i get paid thats my problem not his! He is there to make a profit and only employees because i make him more profit...... That isn't how the public sector works.....The police have a budget they decide how to spend it they know what revenue they get for issuing certs and what they need to allocate from the central budget. I am happy to pay for a good service,as I said certificate turned around in no more than four weeks not like some six months.when I renew my hgv I have to pay for the medical not the nhs also the police and the government don't give a rats *** if you have a certificate they wont lose any sleep over you or I not getting one or having to wait months.i have enjoyed being able to shoot for almost forty years and possibly have another ten to go before I put my guns away for good I doubt my grandson will be able to say the same as the great british way is to just ignore everything and it will go away,well you got that bit right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 my point that you seem to want to ignore is the cost does not reflect the work needed to produce my certificate. And the point you are missing is that that is beside the point. It doesn't matter what it costs. Society wants the system (allegedly for the greater public good) so society in general should pay for it. If you work on the premiss that the people who are forced to use the system should have to pay for all of it then where does it end? If it costs £10K to issue a cert then you will have to pay it. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted November 17, 2013 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 i would pay £100 per year if that would keep my sport alive governments only ever want to cut the things that make a loss so if police forces profit by our certificates then they might be a bit friendlier towards us.the anti's are funded by donations and they are chipping away at our country sports so pay up now to protect the future. I don't understand the logic in this statement really. I can't see how paying 100, 250 or 500 pounds per annum to the Police will ensure the future protection of country sports, as not one penny of that total sum of a licence fee cost goes to any shooting organisation. I neither care how friendly Police forces are towards shooters; I expect them to work within the guidelines and requirements of the licensing act. As for rights and privileges, there are many good books relating to the subject of firearms and their relationship with British subjects, and they go back much further than the rights of Americans and their firearms . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikk Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 This post entirely misses the point. That in addition to the statement contained in the very first sentence being untrue - shooting isn't particularly expensive. In fact it can be amazingly inexpensive if you want it to be. Whatever it costs the police to operate the system is entirely irrelevant. The system exists excusively for the purpose of public safety not as a service to shooters. That being the case, the public purse should carry the cost. I pay a lot of money via my council tax for all sorts of things I rarely or never use but they are deemed a public benefit so by your reasoning the costs should be bourne solely by those who use them. Also, I really must take issue with your statement that it is a priviledge to have a FAC or SGC. It is not and shooters really need to get that idea out of their heads. The Firearms Act makes it very clear that anyone who meets the rather loose criteria in it has a right in law to a certificate. It is not something which is in the gift of the police so therefore cannot be a priviledge. J. Thank god someone with a brain got the point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 paying wont protect shooting it was paying for a quicker service.as for the relationship of firearms and the british subjects the right to bear arms is ingrained on the American constitution and would cause a massive outcry and possibly even bring down the party stupid enough to challenge that,i cant understand how people will spend 50 pounds on a night out drinking go to the bookies every week and blow another 50 spend 50 or 60 on fags then not want to pay a fair price for a cert for five years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 paying wont protect shooting it was paying for a quicker service.as for the relationship of firearms and the british subjects the right to bear arms is ingrained on the American constitution and would cause a massive outcry and possibly even bring down the party stupid enough to challenge that,i cant understand how people will spend 50 pounds on a night out drinking go to the bookies every week and blow another 50 spend 50 or 60 on fags then not want to pay a fair price for a cert for five years. Again you miss the point. It's not about the amount of money. The licensing system isn't for shooters it's for society. That being the case society should pay for it. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 Again you miss the point. It's not about the amount of money. The licensing system isn't for shooters it's for society. That being the case society should pay for it. Do you think I could get them to pay for my guns and shooting as well then J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted November 17, 2013 Report Share Posted November 17, 2013 The point is checking your suitability doesn't benefit you. It benefits society in general.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts