stumpy69 Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 Another article written by some idiot for the Guardian http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/28/britain-plutocrats-landed-gentry-shotgun-owners My personal favourite quote from it The police are furious: it costs them £196 to conduct the background checks required to ensure shotguns are issued only to the kind of dangerous lunatics who use them for mowing down pheasants, rather than to the common or garden variety. As a result they – sorry, we – lose £17m a year, by subsidising the pursuits of the exceedingly rich. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penelope Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 (edited) Do you really expect anything else from the Guardian? Ah, no surprise that it's written (vomited) by George Monb 'idoit'. Another privately educated champagne socialist. Edited April 30, 2014 by Penelope Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo90 Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 The thing is that I can not understand why it costs so much for these checks at renewal. I am a copper. I can see the length of background checks needed on a first application, previous addresses in different force areas would mean lengthy checks with each area for any local intelligence that may cause them concern and a doctors check to make sure your not a complete lunatic. And a pnc check to show any previous convictions and the home check etc......I can see that costing a couple of hundred quid but on a renewal? My feo didn't come out to check the cabinet when I moved (within the same area) nor at renewal..... So what do they do then ? A pnc check and a local intelligence check and post a new certificate? All us sgc and fac holders are on the pnc since 2007 anyway so if we got nicked they could do a revokation then...... You could even argue that we should be given certificates for life and only be revoked if either a doctor raises concerns or we get nicked for going mental......a simple note on our medical records and the already existing pnc file would mean all who need to know we have access to weapons if we go bad or mental would know and no need for renewals......... I feel that's what the shooting and country sports organisations should be pushing for....life long gun licences save renewal fees Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 Perked me up no end....I've never considered myself 'exceedingly rich'. Let's all e mail the Guardian and tell them how much money we have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenshooter Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 An arsewipe like the Guardian is not worthy of being taken seriously! Some really, really stupid people I know read it and end up being really miserable and sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
e2000e2000e Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 I wonder if the £196 figure includes firearms certs. as well, there is obviously greater cost associated with land checks etc. As the above poster mentioned there could save money my extending the period of the certificate, life might me a bit ambitious, although I whole heartily agree, no reason no to, 10 years, meet them half way and put the certificate up to £100, costs covered, police make £4! inflation proof it! The guardian, the champagne socialists charter, only interested in the redistribution of other peoples wealth! At the risk of being shouted down I think it might be reasonable to raise the cost of the cert, but not to £196 level thou, as the certificate is for the public good to prevent those unsuitable from getting a cert, so it is in the public interest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo90 Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 If anyone was going to negotiate for longer certificates, don't ask for 10 years, ask for life long certs and let any opposition argue us down....... How about a larger driving licence that could also be a passport, birth certificate and be endorsed if that person is granted an sgc or fac, all these seperate government licences and certificates, how about just one agency, they issue everyone a birth cert, which should include photo and fingerprints, then as you get older re-issue one every ten years as they do with driving licences to keep pic and prints upto date, add onto the cert, any driving catergories gained, it could double as a passport (removed need for passport agency and costs) and add any such things as firearms cert's too....... I know its an I.d. Card but think of the cost savings and lifelong benefits Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artschool Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 When pheasants are reared, they are classed as livestock: that means the people who raise them are exempt from some payments of value added tax and certain forms of planning control, on the grounds that they are producing food. But as soon as they're released they are classed as wild animals. Otherwise you wouldn't be allowed to shoot them. But if you want to re-capture the survivors at the end of the shooting season to use as breeding stock, they cease to be wild and become livestock again, because you aren't allowed to catch wild birds with nets. is this correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 (edited) £196? Advanced DBS (crb) is £44.......... *** is that font all about! Edited April 30, 2014 by HDAV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris 1985 Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 It's interesting that the article quotes 'sources' when referring to things that 'support' his argument, but when it comes to what would seem to be crucial facts, like who actually holds a SGC and what they use them for, he's happy to rely on the conjecture that we are all lunatics who use them to 'mow down pheasants'. Presumably because it suits his vendetta against what he considers to be an upper class hobby. What about all the other shooting pursuits (sporting and otherwise) that require SGC? I'd be very surprised if anything like the majority of shotgun owners are using them at driven pheasant shoots, but of course the reality wouldn't paint the bloodthirsty image required to get certain peoples knickers in a twist (I'm not saying driven shoots are bloodthirsty, by the way!). I do wish we could get away from everyone twisting the facts to suit their argument, whatever it may be, rather than just debating based on the whole picture. I suppose that doesn't sell papers though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ack-ack Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 The economics of shooting dont seem to come into it. The sport generates revenue for the treasury far in excess of the costs of administrating licensing. There are parts of the country where the local economy is reliant on the income that shooting brings in. What about the jobs and industry that shooting supports? I really struggle with the Guardian. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nial Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 Another article written by some idiot for the Guardian http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/28/britain-plutocrats-landed-gentry-shotgun-owners My personal favourite quote from it The police are furious: it costs them £196 to conduct the background checks required to ensure shotguns are issued only to the kind of dangerous lunatics who use them for mowing down pheasants, rather than to the common or garden variety. As a result they – sorry, we – lose £17m a year, by subsidising the pursuits of the exceedingly rich. Why do you put your brain through the toture of reading all that ********? This... http://www.moretvicar.com/products/the-guardian-mens-white-t-shirt ...says it all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo90 Posted May 2, 2014 Report Share Posted May 2, 2014 The stereotype highlighted above that all shooters are rich and shoot driven game is something we seriously need to fight. Look at what happened to hunting with dogs (dogs here not packs of hounds) the steroetype was landed gentry on horseback with red coats.......reality is often working class lads with lurchers, terriers and a brace of hounds and farmers packs etc....... We are slipping up here and putting what sport we have left at risk by allowing steroetypes like this to continue, banning an elite sport enjoyed by the rich appeals to people, banning something their neighbours and other working class people do that is intrinsically free pest control is a different matter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo90 Posted May 2, 2014 Report Share Posted May 2, 2014 Further to my last point, when the hunting act became law, one labour backbencher was quoted as saying "that's one in the eye for toffs in red coats" , which to me shows that a lot of those who passed the law did so on class grounds....... I don't want that same labour stalwart to be saying "that's one in the eye for toffs in barbours and tweed caps" ....... We need to show to the wider public the true type of person involved in british countrysports, the rough shooters like me with my ten pound single barrel shotgun and a ferret, not the chap shooting driven game with a ftc labrador and a holland and holland side by side..... We need to proactively manage public opinion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cookoff013 Posted May 2, 2014 Report Share Posted May 2, 2014 (edited) i wouldnt mind the 10-15 year licence, but for life would be nice. i also wouldnt mind the maximum 5 shots for semi automatics.... 90% off shotguns are o/u or sxs so only affects the pump or auto guys. i cant see a gun being any more dangerous, because it holds 2 more shells. thats my personal opinion. edit in red. Edited May 2, 2014 by cookoff013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cookoff013 Posted May 2, 2014 Report Share Posted May 2, 2014 (edited) Edited May 2, 2014 by cookoff013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimboblincs2 Posted May 2, 2014 Report Share Posted May 2, 2014 All this about cost of gun licences, no one bats an eye about the policing costs of football, a channel 4 documentary several years ago put the additional cost to yorkshire police for Sheffield home matches @ £110,000/game, add that up for all teams and you have a tidy sum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted May 2, 2014 Report Share Posted May 2, 2014 I believe they now charge pro clubs for security Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Albert Posted May 3, 2014 Report Share Posted May 3, 2014 The thing is that I can not understand why it costs so much for these checks at renewal. I am a copper. I can see the length of background checks needed on a first application, previous addresses in different force areas would mean lengthy checks with each area for any local intelligence that may cause them concern and a doctors check to make sure your not a complete lunatic. And a pnc check to show any previous convictions and the home check etc......I can see that costing a couple of hundred quid but on a renewal? My feo didn't come out to check the cabinet when I moved (within the same area) nor at renewal..... So what do they do then ? A pnc check and a local intelligence check and post a new certificate? All us sgc and fac holders are on the pnc since 2007 anyway so if we got nicked they could do a revokation then...... You could even argue that we should be given certificates for life and only be revoked if either a doctor raises concerns or we get nicked for going mental......a simple note on our medical records and the already existing pnc file would mean all who need to know we have access to weapons if we go bad or mental would know and no need for renewals......... I feel that's what the shooting and country sports organisations should be pushing for....life long gun licences save renewal fees I don't think that will ever come to fruition, it's far too much of a cash cow for the government. Look at the driving licence. Photo licence lasts 10 years and costs, what is it, £40.00. I'm still using my paper one which is in force till 2019. Had it since I was 16. They would lose too much money if they extended the certificate for 10 years or life. Personally I would love it but I live in the real world. Look at the pension. You work your backside off all your working life, don't claim for anything and then they tax the backside off you when you get your state pension. I was fortunate to never be out of work. They give with one hand and they taketh away with another much bigger one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo90 Posted May 3, 2014 Report Share Posted May 3, 2014 Uncle albert, good points, but it would save money and mean they could sack people merging the dvla, passport agency and firearms licensing.........this government love sacking public servants Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted May 3, 2014 Report Share Posted May 3, 2014 (edited) Photo licence lasts 10 years and costs, what is it, £40.00. .£20 is the update fee http://m.postoffice.co.uk/mt/www.postoffice.co.uk/uk-driving-licence-photocard-renewal As I have said before the DVLA, passport agency do similar work on a national scale for far less than the police think it costs them Edited May 3, 2014 by HDAV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo90 Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 Hdav And why I feel that they could combine and do it all as one.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catweazle Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 It's difficult to take Moonbat seriously when he writes such poorly researched twaddle, which is a shame because he actually has some good ideas on other subjects. He's let the paper down this time. 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.