visit

[Scully]

Thankyou David.

[hawkeye]

Thank you

 

Underpaid!? 9 months old and has cost me a fortune already

Glad I'm not the only granddad like that my 2 grandsons are 7 and 3 and they get spoilt rotten by me....

[David BASC]

Regarding the 'who pays' side of things there are two issues. If the need for a medical report comes at renewal or mid term of the certificate for some reason, then the licencing authority has to pay, I am sure that is the case but I will double check in the morning.

 

The need for a medical report at the time of initial application is another matter. It used to be clear in the HO guidance that if something was flagged up on the initial application which the licencing authority thins needs more investigation by way of a report form the applicants GP for example this was up to the licencing authority also, although there was nothing to support that within the rules as it were, it was in the past common practice.

 

This changed, when the new HO guidance became silent on who pays in this instance. Now the police don't want to pay and nor does the applicant... we have had several meetings with ACPO, the BMA and others to try and resolve this, I hope, in the not too far distant future to be able to bring more news on this which , if all goes well, will be perfectly acceptable to shooters.

 

David

Edited November 17, 2014 by David BASC

[KFC]

David,

Given that ACPO is a company limited by guarantee (company number 3344583) and, supposedly, independent of the government can I ask if there is any sense within the discussions taking place that, along with the current amnesties going on, these visits are in preparation for the privatisation of firearms licensing?

 

http://www.acpo.police.uk/About/AboutACPO.aspx

 

http://www.acpo.police.uk/About/BusinessStructure.aspx

[David BASC]

Firstly, ACPO is being disbanded next year - not that this has anything to do with your question, but its interesting never the less!

 

There is nothing in the pipeline to privatise licencing

 

David

[wymberley]

Firstly, ACPO is being disbanded next year - not that this has anything to do with your question, but its interesting never the less!

 

There is nothing in the pipeline to privatise licencing

 

David

Hope to Heaven that the replacement doesn't turn out to be 'better the devil we knew'.

[HDAV]

As I have said, we need more people to complain formally when the licencing staff are off side, without formal complains the orgnisations are in a much weaker position when we go to the senior officers to complain. We get hit with ' There are no complains on file, shooters including you members are complying with what we have said so where is the problem?'

 

Complaints can be made on line and your specific constabulary can be contacted off the IPCC web site here: https://www.ipcc.gov.uk/complaints

 

More help and advice on this from BASC in the very near future.

 

David

 

David I think the issue is partly our own fault (we tend to be a quiet, bunch relatively conservative in our views (not in a political sense)), thus we don't like making a fuss and i think many feel that complaining will get a black mark on their record and jeopardize future renewals, variations etc.

 

Now no one should feel that by being treating unfairly or not inline with the guidance and making a formal complaint inline with the process (every force has a process) they will in future be judged as a "troublemaker" or be "black listed". FOr the vast majority of shooters we have little day to day contact with the police and perhaps don't understand the way the process works.

 

This is why people need associations, however if the association was to provide more assistance in making a complaint (template letter etc) perhaps more would. Fact is most of us trust the police to get it right and take their comment as Gospel. So the underhanded nature of these "visits,letters, medical forms(purporting to be official) is in my opinion very wrong, especially the rumoured revocation tours we are hearing about, if they are finding they shouldn't have issued a cert 5,10,20 years ago how can they now revoke them as the applicant has proven a suitable person for the time have have held cert. It smacks of the shooter paying the price for police cock ups, haven't we already paid a high enough price following their failings with Ryan and Hamilton?

[David BASC]

Wymberley - , I am not joking, but I think is going to be called the Council of Chief Constables, or something like that...

 

HDAV, yep I agree. I remember when I was at university, psychology was one of my key subjects within my Human Biology degree and one thesis I did was on .Conformity to authority' You would be amazed, or maybe not, at how conformist people are just because they THINK the person telling them something is an authoritative figure.

 

Put on a lab coat and carry a clip board and you can make subjects do all sorts of things...

 

Firstly shooters must know their rights - that's up to BASC et al

Secondly shooters must not be afraid to stand up for their rights and be supported by their organisation

Finally, we must all work together to gather evidence of bad practice and get this resolved at the highest level

 

David

[KFC]

Firstly, ACPO is being disbanded next year - not that this has anything to do with your question, but its interesting never the less!

 

There is nothing in the pipeline to privatise licencing

 

David

Thanks for that.

With that news I too wonder what the replacement will be

[Scully]

 

This changed, when the new HO guidance became silent on who pays in this instance. Now the police don't want to pay and nor does the applicant... we have had several meetings with ACPO, the BMA and others to try and resolve this, I hope, in the not too far distant future to be able to bring more news on this which , if all goes well, will be perfectly acceptable to shooters.

 

David

I was told by Mike Eveleigh that neither the BMA, ACPO nor our organisations could come to an agreement on who should pay for the GP's report so the HO decided not to stipulate it in new guidance, and so this is now why our licensing authorities request an applicant pays; because the new guidance doesn't say they can't. He also told me that a GP's report will, in the future, become the norm for any and all applications/renewals etc and that there is nothing our shooting organisations can do to prevent it. ACPO are pressing for this due to the Atherton case ( of which, he told me, his GP had knowledge of his alcohol filled abuse but didn't inform the police ) the case down South some years ago when a firearms owner shot his family, his horses, dogs etc before setting fire to his property and then shooting himself, and the fatal shooting of a police officer, the latter of which I have no knowledge of, and as it must have been carried out by a legitimate firearms owner, I couldn't think how I had missed it, and told him so. Nevertheless, those were the reasons he gave, and also added, amongst other things, that BASC were pushing for a 10 year certificate as a compromise in the hope this would go some way to placate shooters.

Is this latter the 'more news' which it is hoped 'will be perfectly acceptable to shooters' ?

[fieldwanderer]

So, what exactly will be considered unacceptable?

 

I've got a sticker in my car's rear window that reads "my other toy has a trigger" now, isn't that making it a bit obvious - would I lose my licenses!? All because my sister thought it suited me and I was too polite to say no.

 

IF I came home late one evening from shooting and left a box of 12g cart's on my back seat, is that really such a haenous crime, after all, it's locked, alarmed and would be a genuine mistake :wacko: Yeah it's a bit lax but seems a bit cruel to take someone's license away for.

 

I couldn't tell you exactly how many of each cal. I've got in the safe but I do know it's all in there and all secure - would that cost me my certificate!?

 

Now, I'm happy to say all this because I know everything's secure but we're only human for crying out loud :(

[HDAV]

So, what exactly will be considered unacceptable?

 

I've got a sticker in my car's rear window that reads "my other toy has a trigger" now, isn't that making it a bit obvious - would I lose my licenses!? All because my sister thought it suited me and I was too polite to say no.

 

IF I came home late one evening from shooting and left a box of 12g cart's on my back seat, is that really such a haenous crime, after all, it's locked, alarmed and would be a genuine mistake :wacko: Yeah it's a bit lax but seems a bit cruel to take someone's license away for.

 

I couldn't tell you exactly how many of each cal. I've got in the safe but I do know it's all in there and all secure - would that cost me my certificate!?

 

Now, I'm happy to say all this because I know everything's secure but we're only human for crying out loud :(

 

 

No restriction on storing sect 2 ammo i often leave most of a slab in the boot, why carry it in to the house to carry it out again in the morning. No need to put it in a safe either. Section 1 ammo is different.This is how creeping changes happen!

[69chris]

jez, reading all this make ya wonder if its really worth all the hassle for wanting to persue a 'unsociable' hobby doesnt it .............. makes me glad im a stubborn ole ***

[Bobba]

So, what exactly will be considered unacceptable?

 

I've got a sticker in my car's rear window that reads "my other toy has a trigger" now, isn't that making it a bit obvious - would I lose my licenses!? All because my sister thought it suited me and I was too polite to say no. :(

Interesting point. I've got a sticker in my car that says BASC. Now, isn't that obvious too? Perhaps I should take it down?

[Davyo]

My FEO clearly stated on my renewal that its not just the past 5 yrs from last renewal thats been checked.All holders in Durham are currently having their backgrounds checked and reviewed regardless of renewals.In his words"we will be revoking a lot of licences"

[will_gleave]

Interesting point. I've got a sticker in my car that says BASC. Now, isn't that obvious too? Perhaps I should take it down?

 

Ill give you a good reason not to have stickers in your window, the other day we had a vehicle come in to us for some work, now i didn't work on it one of the other lads did, anyway he came in a told me that the owner has guns him knowing I'm a shooter, i asked how he knew to which his reply was, "he's got a sticker (basc) on his window like them that are in your magazines". May i point out at this point i do not have any stickers in my window as I've alway thought it was a bad idea for this reason. I told him to ask the customer upon return what guns he had a gauge his response to which he did and the customer told him then asked if the lad was a shooter. he told him "no but you've got that sticker means you've got gun doesn't it?" the customer was shocked that the lad knew this and looked worried until i told the customer id put him up to it an that the sticker was a bad idea as a non shooter assumes he has guns it opens a bag of worms, he removed the sticker and even thanked me as he never thought of it like that.

[Davyo]

When will all this silliness stop.Cant have stickers,next we will be advised its not good to wear green wellies in public or any clothing that might make someone assume you shoot.You will have to swap the springer for a pug or a poodle next.Hope you read your shooting magazine on the pot and don't leave it lying about as someone might assume you shoot.I got a Country Side Alliance magazine but guess what I don't have a horse.

[will_gleave]

Everyone i work with knows i shoot i arrant by-monthly clay trips for them I'm not fussed that they know as its pretty much a family run business but i have been brought up to not advertise to joe bloggs that i shoot and i take care in not making it public knowledge i.e. stickers in my car etc its just common sense. Didnt swap it for a pug got a husky instead .

[phaedra1106]

ACPO are pressing for this due to the Atherton case ( of which, he told me, his GP had knowledge of his alcohol filled abuse but didn't inform the police )

 

The Atherton case had very little to do with the lack of a GPs report, Durham were well aware of Mr Athertons drink problems long before the shootings took place.

 

Here's a few parts of the IPCC report,

 

14 July 2002

Police were called to a domestic disturbance at the home address of Mr Atherton and

Ms McGoldrick, as a result of an alcohol fuelled argument.

 

26 April 2003

Police were called to a domestic disturbance at their

home address. This followed a telephone call from a friend of Ms

McGoldrick who stated that Mr Atherton had pushed Ms McGoldrick

down a flight of stairs following an argument.

 

The record relating to this incident also contains a note from one of the responding officers,

Officer A1, indicating her concerns for Ms McGoldrick. Officer A2

also recorded that Ms McGoldrick was displaying ‘classic symptoms of emotional abuse’

 

24 April 2004

Police were called to a domestic disturbance at their

home address by Ms McGoldrick who stated that she had been

beaten up by her boyfriend. Police described both Mr Atherton and

Ms McGoldrick as being intoxicated. Ms McGoldrick alleged that Mr

Atherton had dragged her out of bed, by her hair, and repeatedly

kicked her in the ribs. Mr Atherton was arrested on suspicion of

assault and later cautioned.

 

10 September 2008

Approximately 11.40pm on 10 September 2008, police were called to

Mr Atherton’s home address following a call from his partner Susan

McGoldrick. The incident log notes that Ms McGoldrick reported how

Mr Atherton had threatened to shoot his head off. This followed an

altercation involving them both and Ms McGoldrick’s sister. Ms

McGoldrick also informed the police that he was the holder of a gun

licence.

 

Mr Atherton was taken to Peterlee police station.

His custody record shows that he was initially assessed by the Custody Sergeant as

being heavily intoxicated. Mr Atherton denied having any self harm

issues and denied making such a threat. His detention was

authorised and he was placed on appropriate levels of observation.

Mr Atherton was subsequently released with no further action.

.

 

[Scully]

 

The Atherton case had very little to do with the lack of a GPs report, Durham were well aware of Mr Athertons drink problems long before the shootings took place.

 

Here's a few parts of the IPCC report,

 

14 July 2002

Police were called to a domestic disturbance at the home address of Mr Atherton and

Ms McGoldrick, as a result of an alcohol fuelled argument.

 

26 April 2003

Police were called to a domestic disturbance at their

home address. This followed a telephone call from a friend of Ms

McGoldrick who stated that Mr Atherton had pushed Ms McGoldrick

down a flight of stairs following an argument.

 

The record relating to this incident also contains a note from one of the responding officers,

Officer A1, indicating her concerns for Ms McGoldrick. Officer A2

also recorded that Ms McGoldrick was displaying ‘classic symptoms of emotional abuse’

 

24 April 2004

Police were called to a domestic disturbance at their

home address by Ms McGoldrick who stated that she had been

beaten up by her boyfriend. Police described both Mr Atherton and

Ms McGoldrick as being intoxicated. Ms McGoldrick alleged that Mr

Atherton had dragged her out of bed, by her hair, and repeatedly

kicked her in the ribs. Mr Atherton was arrested on suspicion of

assault and later cautioned.

 

10 September 2008

Approximately 11.40pm on 10 September 2008, police were called to

Mr Atherton’s home address following a call from his partner Susan

McGoldrick. The incident log notes that Ms McGoldrick reported how

Mr Atherton had threatened to shoot his head off. This followed an

altercation involving them both and Ms McGoldrick’s sister. Ms

McGoldrick also informed the police that he was the holder of a gun

licence.

 

Mr Atherton was taken to Peterlee police station.

His custody record shows that he was initially assessed by the Custody Sergeant as

being heavily intoxicated. Mr Atherton denied having any self harm

issues and denied making such a threat. His detention was

authorised and he was placed on appropriate levels of observation.

Mr Atherton was subsequently released with no further action.

.

 

Wow, thanks for that Phaedra. What a catalogue of events. It beggars belief that Durham didn't revoke, but also returned his firearms ! Little wonder they are acting as they now are. Incredible.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Wow, thanks for that Phaedra. What a catalogue of events. It beggars belief that Durham didn't revoke, but also returned his firearms ! Little wonder they are acting as they now are. Incredible.

 

One might expect that someone should have had a career ending interview following that poor decision or run of poor decisions!

[David BASC]

Morning Scully,

 

thanks for your questions above.

 

This is an evolving situation and you are correct that when you spoke to a member of our firearms team some months ago, that was pretty much the situation.

 

As I said, medical checks or reports during the life of a certificate is a matter of enforcement, the police have to pay for enforcement.

 

The point of contention at the moment is at the time of application, and that's what we are working on. As soon as I have more information I will let you all know, but our objective is that this is at no cost to the applicant.

 

David

[loriusgarrulus]

After that catalogue of poor decisions, I hope the Police had an in house tidy up first and some retraining before going out on a pogrom of licence holders.

[phaedra1106]

They have a new "supervisor" overseeing the firearms department but the original FLM is still in place (despite being singled out for very heavy criticism in the report). Unfortunately as can be seen from posts on here nothing has really changed, in fact things are worse now than they were before, 120 days for renewals (or longer), repeated insistence on having to supply the medical reports and variations that used to take a few days now take weeks.

 

If the standard of service/competency had improved or become more thorough I could understand it but this year for me alone they've lost a notification of a shotgun transfer, took weeks to issue a variation because they couldn't find 300aac blackout on the NFLMS despite not needing to specify chambering at all, missed a Sec.1 shotgun off my FAC (apparently they put it on my SGC records), took weeks to argue about issuing a variation for an approved Sec.1 rifle (not just me on that one) and even when they did do it they stuck a note in saying they may decide to revoke it later!.

[Dan.]

Im wondering what they will do if you are not in for one of these unannounced visitis?