panoma1 Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 The initial project by Durham clearly implied that the medical forms had to be filled it, this we stopped. As we have said many times, only the official forms need to be filled in. Sending extra forms is of course a waste of time and money. Appreciate all the feedback David No David BASC, not just a waste of time and money! this appears to be yet another deliberate attempt by the police to pervert the agreed licensing process by misuse of their authority in order to bully and mislead licence holders into compliance with another agenda!....theirs!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 As I have said, only the official forms have to be filled in unless of course you have declared a medical condition. If any authority are bullying or misleading certificate holders to do anything other than follow the procedure in law, then that certificate holder must make a written complaint to the Chief Constable and copy in their shooting organisation. David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 As I have said, only the official forms have to be filled in unless of course you have declared a medical condition. If any authority are bullying or misleading certificate holders to do anything other than follow the procedure in law, then that certificate holder must make a written complaint to the Chief Constable and copy in their shooting organisation. David Isn't that why most people who are not comfortable, competent or confident enough to write such a letter themselves join an organisation such as BASC David? Are you saying BASC members are in fact.........on their own? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 No I am not saying that at all! When we go to meet senior officers to complain about the actions of the licencing teams, and if there are no complaint on file, it makes our position very weak. I am sure you can see that? Yes we take up cases when the police appear to have acted wrongly on an individual basis, but when we have what is in effect an authority wide policy that rides roughshod over the prescribed protocols we ask for shooters support in this way I hope that clarifies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka Joe Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 If any authority are bullying or misleading certificate holders to do anything other than follow the procedure in law, then that certificate holder must make a written complaint to the Chief Constable and copy in their shooting organisation. David, a mate of mine has just received his letter for renewal of both certs, & has been told to download, & fill in all the forms, including the medical form. Clearly Durham are not taking any notice of BASC, or HO Guidelines. https://www.durham.police.uk/Information-and-advice/firearms-and-firearms-licensing/Pages/default.aspx Second off last page clearly states that representatives of shooting orgs have been consulted, but obviously not heard.! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted November 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 Perhaps BASC should write to their members in Durham and other areas with a proforma letter that they can sign and include with renewals stating the reasons for not returning the forms? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 BJ you are spot on, they are going over and above what's required, but they do say the forms are voluntary. What's not acceptable is the clear inference that failure to fill in the forms that are NOT required could delay your application! HDAV , a valid point, thank you David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 (edited) Has anyone seen the front page of Modern Gamekeeping ? The article says Cheshire have been accused by the NGO of "jumping the gun, after the constabulary's website announced a three month campaign of checks on firearms licence holders in Cheshire to ensure all guns are kept safe and secure". It declared that as well as 'taking dip samples of registered certificate holders', its officers would be visiting people based on crime patterns within Cheshire to check that weapons are not easily accessible to criminals". NGO told modern gamekeeping that "Cheshire seem not to be following guidance on unannounced visits". There is a BASC logo atop the Modern Gamekeeping banner. No comment from BASC on this is reported. This is in Cheshire - both David BASC and I appear to be firearms holders in Cheshire - is BASC aware and David of the article and the police 'initiative', as NGO is, and responding on behalf of shooters ? I am now a member of NGO, based on advice from another PW member - he certainly called that right. With other comments on the Visit thread, this seems to be a fairly widespread response - anyone checked constabulary websites or asked ? Anyone asked about stats in Cheshire or any other area. Anyone any idea of numbers of revocation normally and recently - does anyone care? FOI requests have to be ansewered and I have decided I will do this personally as a member of NGO and pass this info on for them to use, since they seem an active if under- resourced bunch. Edited November 17, 2014 by Kes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 Yes I am are of the Cheshire police web site, their comments are based on the original communication from ACPO I think you will find that went to all constabularies. If you take a look you will find a similar message on several authority web sites, its not specific to Cheshire The point remains that unannounced visits have to comply with the points I have already mentioned Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 The point also remains that this information is in the public domain and to me at least the implications are obvious. BASC's position, as opposed to the NGO position is that this is OK then ? 'taking dip samples of registered certificate holders', its officers would be visiting people based on crime patterns within Cheshire to check that weapons are not easily accessible to criminals". NGO told modern gamekeeping that "Cheshire seem not to be following guidance on unannounced visits". After NGO's intervention with Cheshire the website was changed - but it was OK with BASC apparently ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 No, I do with you would stop making things up about BASC. I fail to see why you take up so much of your time doing so BASC's position on unannounced visits is clear and has been from day 1, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted November 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 PW while probably the largest shooting forum in the UK also has a minority of FAC & SGC holders visiting regularly, I think BASC should be writing to all members in affected areas with supporting information and actually push the issue, as well as making the BASC and legal stand point clear in the next magazine. With the new revocation insurance every member should feel confident to stand up to the Police forces and know they have the full backing and support of the organisation, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 Very valid points and we will make use of all forms of communication to try and get the message over David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 No, I do with you would stop making things up about BASC. I fail to see why you take up so much of your time doing so BASC's position on unannounced visits is clear and has been from day 1, David, HDAV makes a very similar point, with a very different response. What is 'made up' about BASC not doing what the NGO did in Cheshire to correct their website Has BASC spoken to ANY errant police forces, since you point out over this precise issue - there are a number. Initially there was surprise that anyone was worried about the ACPO initiative (BASC included - now, there is understanding. I dont think BASC took this seriously enough whereas others did (CA, NGO) - that is my whole point and one I have tried to elucidate over quite a number of posts. Why did BASC not see this coming after having been involved with in the initial discussions with ACPO ( as you pointed out CA was also and did). Complacency is not acceptable in ANY shooting organisation - is it ? Thats why I take up so much of my time doing so. I would also point out I am not paid to do this. The NGO needs to do better, in my opinion, CA were on the ball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 Perhaps I should remind you what you posted Kes: 'After NGO's intervention with Cheshire the website was changed - but it was OK with BASC apparently ?' So I replied NO - let me be more clear - the concept of random visits without need is not OK with BASC, nor has it ever been - so I repeat don't make up BASC's position on this, is that clear? We are talking at the highest level possible when we come across any authorities that are errant on this and any other issue and will continue to do so and will continue to support our members to the best of our ability when ever we can. Yes we did take the matter seriously, that's why we are still working on the issues surrounding this as I have posted earlier. Your opinion of BASC is very clear and I suspect well known to all who regularly visit this forum, and certainly colours your posts in my opinion. Thank you to those of you who have offered constructive criticism, its sincerely appreciated. David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 Perhaps I should remind you what you posted Kes: 'After NGO's intervention with Cheshire the website was changed - but it was OK with BASC apparently ?' So I replied NO - let me be more clear - the concept of random visits without need is not OK with BASC, nor has it ever been - so I repeat don't make up BASC's position on this, is that clear? We are talking at the highest level possible when we come across any authorities that are errant on this and any other issue and will continue to do so and will continue to support our members to the best of our ability when ever we can. Yes we did take the matter seriously, that's why we are still working on the issues surrounding this as I have posted earlier. Your opinion of BASC is very clear and I suspect well known to all who regularly visit this forum, and certainly colours your posts in my opinion. Thank you to those of you who have offered constructive criticism, its sincerely appreciated. David David Kes used a question mark after his comment, did you miss that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 Nope did not miss it that's why I answered 'no' to his question. But evidently my short answer was not clear enough so I should have said 'No BASC do not find it acceptable that random visits without specific intelligence are acceptable' Why I should need to reiterate this point about our opposition to random visits is beyond me, I have been stressing in on a couple of threads...but evidently its not got through So let me make it crystal clear: BASC are opposed to random visits without specific intelligence..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 David - A commendable performance. It has NOTHING to do with random visits for me as I have said innumerable times above and has everything to do with protecting members who shoot, from aggressive and unjustified police tactics and 'initiatives'. I cannot believe you are as limited in your reasoning as you have suggested in your posts. Therefore you have another reason for stressing this all too defensible position. However, whilst I can make my own judgements about that, other must make their own. Finally, I dont think the slighting comment very worthy - "Your opinion of BASC is very clear and I suspect well known to all who regularly visit this forum, and certainly colours your posts in my opinion". I fully accept I have rather high expectations of personal and organisational integrity. I find mediocrity a criminal waste of time. If this is all you can say in response - BASC are opposed to random visits without specific intelligence.. then I am confident you know what I am saying but have no adequate response. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted November 18, 2014 Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 Nothing to do with random visits? really? That's the point the NGO got changed on the Cheshire police website wasn't it? i.e. no random visits but stick to the HO guidelines? Exactly what BASC wants and exactly what BASC got changed in the initial letter that ACPO sent out. I have made BASC's position on this issue very clear indeed, and like it or not the centre of the 'campaign' by ACPO is on visiting firearms owners. David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lister22 Posted November 18, 2014 Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 Please remember if there are children in the house airguns need to be kept away from them hate to lose fac or sgc due to a gat gun lying about Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted November 18, 2014 Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 David needs no backing from me, he is a big lad and well able to put the BASC position himself, but...... Like it or not the BASC are not that bad, David does his best and is a regular contributor/adviser here. I am a BASC member, I don't think the sun shines out of their ****, they are certainly not perfect, and David and myself have had the occasional debate. But David is here, may I ask, where is the NGO, CA, etc. presence on PW? ATB! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted November 18, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 You have to give Davud credit for continuing to post in the forum, often outside of the 9-5 and often with little thanks, I am sure CA, NGO, CPSA have people monitoring digital content but so far none willing to post publicly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted November 18, 2014 Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 You have to give Davud credit for continuing to post in the forum, often outside of the 9-5 and often with little thanks, I am sure CA, NGO, CPSA have people monitoring digital content but so far none willing to post publicly. He obviously likes a good arguement!.......I submit this is just the sort of attribute we need from a representative! He certainly does this via cyberspace but the question is can he cut it face to face? Unfortunately I suspect there are far more placatory politicians in BASC involved in pursuing and attempting to protect our interests? There is a time to placate and a time to bite ankles, a mix of these types is tactically most effective. There is a reason the Police use the good cop bad cop scenario! No offence intended David! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted November 18, 2014 Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 panoma1, no offence taken at all I can assure you. I take comments on here seriously, and in the main they points raised here are very constructive and I feed these back to the senior management. It helps enormously, it feeds back from the grass roots shooters, whether they are members or not, what the issues are and what your concerns are. I agree that there are times to placate / negotiate and times to fight, and that's exactly what I wish to see, indeed I am working on a 'fight back' project right now and hope to have something to show you all in the very near future. David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 I find this interesting, sounds like the hot line is still open under another name. I would have thought clubs and shooting associations would already report that type of behaviour. Counter-terrorism officers plan week of awareness initiatives On Friday, police are engaging with shooting associations and clubs to encourage people to report any concerns about the behaviour of gun owners or users. 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.