Firearms fees proposals - time to act

[Cannon]

I wonder are there any inefficiencies built into the fees proposal? It takes on average 8 minutes to process an application from start to finish. How much is a phone call or email worth to a doctor? The police database also takes seconds to access if you are the police. What other checks are necessary? Apparently here in NI there are additional security checks that must be done, and they aren't by the police. So who does them then? Will there be an itemised list showing the processes and costs for all to see? This is something that needs to be clarified regardless of location.

[panoma1]

Is that the point you made when you replied to the consultation?

It is David! I also commented separately on an improved service via a SLA!

[David BASC]

thank you!

[Blunderbuss]

Consultation completed. I said that any fee increase MUST be linked to fair, efficient and consistent implementation accross the country. I also said the the panel conducting the annual review of fees MUST have a shooters reps on board holding them to account on this.

 

I think the proposed increases could have been far worse. I'd love a free ten year certificate, but get real, that's never going to happen. Lets not shoot ourselves in the foot. If this gets blocked, we could end up with the £200 cert (or worse) if (god forbid) we end up with a Labour government in May.

[mossberg-operator]

Is that the point you made when you replied to the consultation?

i did.

[David BASC]

excellent, thank you too and all who have responded, but please, spread the word, we have a fantastic opportunity here, lets not loose it!

David

[spanj]

Firstly, lets put this into perspective.The police et al were asking for increased to over £200, this BASC fought on the basis there was no evidence for this cost. This was reduced to a little over £100, this again was challenged for the same reasons.It is also well documented that BASC have been consistently stating that there are inefficiencies in the licensing system in some cases which add to the costs, hence efficiencies must be made, the shooter must not pay for inefficient practice.It is also well documented that BASC have indeed stated that a 10 year licence is a good way forward, over and above other improvements in efficiency.So I would urge you to take part in this consultation and make your points in the consultation as well as on here.ThanksDavid

David,

 

The polices approach to price setting isn't exactly innovative or rational is it, i.e pick a stupidly high figure then settle for a still very high figure... I also don't think that they should be able to "review" the cost of licensing without the active input and cooperation of the

shooting organisations (which must not be diluted by none shooting orgs). I have made this point in my response.

 

Rgds

Edited December 1, 2014 by spanj

[panoma1]

or....

 

it genuinely costs them over £100 for each application at the time of process, so even stretching it out over 10 years wont make a blind bit of difference. its still costing them more than they charge in the first instance.

 

essentially, spanning it out over 10 years just means that they will lose money every 10 years instead of every 5. great for us, still no better for our police force.

 

this in turn can only lead to more resentment towards shooters in the long run.

 

dont get me wrong, i'm in favour of 10 year certificates, but the cost was still well overdue for an increase and whats on the table is actually better than most expected it to be.

 

 

 

By my reckoning if the police have to renew my certificate every five years that's twice in ten years! (It costs them £100 a time, ie £200 in ten years.....using your figures) as opposed to them only my renewing certificates once in ten years...... That's £100 in ten years! Is that not a 50% saving?

[panoma1]

One of the oldest political con tricks going is for the authorities to flag up a request for a massive increase in cost of something (council tax for instance!) everyone is outraged!....and the council tax payers are mightily relieved when the final settlement is at a lower figure! (Exchange council tax for gun certification!!).............most don't realise they have been cynically shafted!

 

When the authorities tell you they can't afford something they are lying to you! They can afford it they just choose to spend the money on something else!

 

Of course they can afford to keep the cost of certification at the current level....they just choose not to!

[bostonmick]

One of the oldest political con tricks going is for the authorities to flag up a request for a massive increase in cost of something (council tax for instance!) everyone is outraged!....and the council tax payers are mightily relieved when the final settlement is at a lower figure! (Exchange council tax for gun certification!!).............most don't realise they have been cynically shafted!

 

When the authorities tell you they can't afford something they are lying to you! They can afford it they just choose to spend the money on something else!

 

Of course they can afford to keep the cost of certification at the current level....they just choose not to!

But by your reckoning then prices of all services should still be at whatever the original cost was whenever they first came into being.do wages and other expenses in your world not rise the population is higher which means more officers needed bigger police stations etc etc the list goes on.Look at manufacturing modern equipment makes for less people on the production line yet all things in life cost more today than say forty years ago. The proposed rise is negligible I would be more concerned about the level of service we are given. Edited December 2, 2014 by bostonmick

[panoma1]

But by your reckoning then prices of all services should still be at whatever the original cost was whenever they first came into being.do wages and other expenses in your world not rise the population is higher which means more officers needed bigger police stations etc etc the list goes on.Look at manufacturing modern equipment makes for less people on the production line yet all things in life cost more today than say forty years ago. The proposed rise is negligible I would be more concerned about the level of service we are given.

 

So in your world you have been given an inflation busting pay rise regularly over the last few years? lucky you!.....where In my world the standard of living has gone down because of income rise stagnation on one hand and across the piece price rises on most things (including food!) on the other which has caused the redistribution of wealth that has taken place over the last few years! (evidence food banks for working people!) the financial crisis that has caused this is/was not of my making but I am having to contribute to the bailout for those that were responsible!........when my standard of living increases above the rate of inflation then I would expect to pay pro rata increases for services.

 

In this case I do not believe shooters should pay for a "public safety measure" (what else is firearm certification for?) but I am a realist and understand we will be forced to pay, its just a question of how much, an increase in line with the current rate of inflation would be fair when an increase above inflation is not!.......because it further erodes ordinary working peoples standard of living.

 

As I remarked in a previous posting there is no real need to increase these certificate fees, the government is awash with our money, they just prefer to spend it on other things! HS2, MP's 11% salary increases, foreign bribes etc. etc. Ad infinitum.

 

What perhaps we can agree on is that any increase in fees should be equalled by a correspondingly improved level of service.

[brett1985]

By my reckoning if the police have to renew my certificate every five years that's twice in ten years! (It costs them £100 a time, ie £200 in ten years.....using your figures) as opposed to them only my renewing certificates once in ten years...... That's £100 in ten years! Is that not a 50% saving?

 

not really, because they are still going to lose that money eventually. be it 5,6,7,8,9 or 10 year intervals the fact remains that they will still lose out. even though on the face of it it would look like they are saving money, theyre not.

and also dont forget, by leaving the costs the same but extending the life span of the certificates it would take at least 5 years for the current ones to wash through, so no real benefit would be seen immediately.

and even when they had washed through and everyone was on 10 year certs, the police would still be losing 50% on every certificate...

by charging more from the certificates, they are losing less money from the off. thats the bottom line really.

 

whether we like to admit it or not, we are bound by the laws which govern us and because of that we need to apply for a licence to own firearms.

while it may seem silly, and while some dont agree with the way its done, its the law.

 

the best we can do at the moment is look at the offer we have and decide wether we are prepared to pay what is essentially a small amount every 5 years for the ability to own and use guns, and continue to protect the rights that we currently have in an effort to be able to keep gun ownership and shooting legal.

 

i do, however, totally agree that the level of service recieved from the police for our money is what this decision needs to be based on. if we're not getting a fair, swift and appropriate service that totally justifies the increase in price then we should not pay more.

[panoma1]

not really, because they are still going to lose that money eventually. be it 5,6,7,8,9 or 10 year intervals the fact remains that they will still lose out. even though on the face of it it would look like they are saving money, theyre not.

and also dont forget, by leaving the costs the same but extending the life span of the certificates it would take at least 5 years for the current ones to wash through, so no real benefit would be seen immediately.

and even when they had washed through and everyone was on 10 year certs, the police would still be losing 50% on every certificate...

by charging more from the certificates, they are losing less money from the off. thats the bottom line really.

 

whether we like to admit it or not, we are bound by the laws which govern us and because of that we need to apply for a licence to own firearms.

while it may seem silly, and while some dont agree with the way its done, its the law.

 

the best we can do at the moment is look at the offer we have and decide wether we are prepared to pay what is essentially a small amount every 5 years for the ability to own and use guns, and continue to protect the rights that we currently have in an effort to be able to keep gun ownership and shooting legal.

 

i do, however, totally agree that the level of service recieved from the police for our money is what this decision needs to be based on. if we're not getting a fair, swift and appropriate service that totally justifies the increase in price then we should not pay more.

So by your calculations the police can either spend £200 in 10 years.......or £100 over the same period and you claim that is not a financial saving? Sorry I cant see the logic! please explain further? and what money do you claim they "going to lose" eventually?

 

As for "protecting the rights we currently have" ...............if they are not being taken away we are slowly giving them away by trying to placate those who would see guns and shooting further restricted.

Edited December 2, 2014 by panoma1

[brett1985]

So by your calculations the police can either spend £200 in 10 years.......or £100 over the same period and you claim that is not a financial saving? Sorry I cant see the logic! please explain further? and what money do you claim they "going to lose" eventually?

ok, look at it this way. if it costs them £100, and we pay £100 every 5 years, the cost to the police is £0.

it it costs them £100, and we pay £50 every 10 years, the cost to the police is..... £50 (allbeit over 10 years).

plus, if they up the price of a certificate to £100 straight away, they start to cover the full cost immidiately with every one applied for.

if they just extend the lentgh of the certificate to 10 years but keep the cost the same, for the next 5 years they will still be footing 50% of the bill for every application thats due to run out, and still spending more than they return from fees. only after 5 years when all of the old certificates have run out will the have a few years grace of not having to fork out for half of the fees all over again.

 

 

As for "protecting the rights we currently have" ...............if they are not being taken away we are slowly giving them away by trying to placate those who would see guns and shooting further restricted.

not at all, no one is placating anything, and contrary to what some may believe i dont see a price rise to cover fees as a way of further restricting shooting. the price of a certificate as laid out in the proposals is still less than a couple of slabs of clay carts.

some of us just realise that the police are just like any other business and cannot afford to run at a loss. any business that runs at a loss will eventually either 1. fail, or 2. bring in new rules and regulations to recoup their money. in our case, that potentially leaves the door wide open for them to hike the cost of a licence up even further than they are suggesting now. and guess what? we wont get a say in it. that you can be sure of.

do you honestly think that the government and police couldnt just ban guns all together if they wanted to? pretty sure if you asked any ex hand gun owner that question they would tell you that the goverment could take your guns at will and there is pretty much naff all that anyone would be able to do about it.

the moral is, better to work with them (as BASC are currently trying to do) than against them.

Edited December 2, 2014 by brett1985

[panoma1]

 

So by your calculations the police can either spend £200 in 10 years.......or £100 over the same period and you claim that is not a financial saving? Sorry I cant see the logic! please explain further? and what money do you claim they "going to lose" eventually?

ok, look at it this way. if it costs them £100, and we pay £100 every 5 years, the cost to the police is £0.

it it costs them £100, and we pay £50 every 10 years, the cost to the police is..... £50 (allbeit over 10 years).

plus, if they up the price of a certificate to £100 straight away, they start to cover the full cost immidiately with every one applied for.

if they just extend the lentgh of the certificate to 10 years but keep the cost the same, for the next 5 years they will still be footing 50% of the bill for every application thats due to run out, and still spending more than they return from fees. only after 5 years when all of the old certificates have run out will the have a few years grace of not having to fork out for half of the fees all over again.

 

 

As for "protecting the rights we currently have" ...............if they are not being taken away we are slowly giving them away by trying to placate those who would see guns and shooting further restricted.

not at all, no one is placating anything, and contrary to what some may believe i dont see a price rise to cover fees as a way of further restricting shooting. the price of a certificate as laid out in the proposals is still less than a couple of slabs of clay carts.

some of us just realise that the police are just like any other business and cannot afford to run at a loss. any business that runs at a loss will eventually either 1. fail, or 2. bring in new rules and regulations to recoup their money. in our case, that potentially leaves the door wide open for them to hike the cost of a licence up even further than they are suggesting now. and guess what? we wont get a say in it. that you can be sure of.

do you honestly think that the government and police couldnt just ban guns all together if they wanted to? pretty sure if you asked any ex hand gun owner that question they would tell you that the goverment could take your guns at will and there is pretty much naff all that anyone would be able to do about it.

the moral is, better to work with them (as BASC are currently trying to do) than against them.

 

I am suggesting if we pay the same amount over ten years as we pay now over 5 years that obviously saves us money......ok so far!

At the same time you are assuming several things? firstly that Police firearms staffing levels would remain the same! when the 5 year work cycle would be spread over 10 years, they need not!......they would only have at most half the work, so it follows there would only be enough work for half the staff, and consequently would only need to pay half the wage bill, pay half the on costs, pay half the running costs, and pay half the accommodation costs, that's where the police can make the 50% savings, or do you think certificate holders should pay for Police inefficiency, unnecessary overstaffing and empire building?

 

You also seem to blindly accept that the admin cost to the police of issuing/renewing a certificate is not covered by what we already pay! because the police claim this? but they apparently have no statistics to back up these claims?

 

Obviously you don't want to see my point of view and I confess I can't understand yours, so just lets agree to disagree eh? life's too short!

[brett1985]

I am suggesting if we pay the same amount over ten years as we pay now over 5 years that obviously saves us money......ok so far!

At the same time you are assuming several things? firstly that Police firearms staffing levels would remain the same! when the 5 year work cycle would be spread over 10 years, they need not!......they would only have at most half the work, so it follows there would only be enough work for half the staff, and consequently would only need to pay half the wage bill, pay half the on costs, pay half the running costs, and pay half the accommodation costs, that's where the police can make the 50% savings, or do you think certificate holders should pay for Police inefficiency, unnecessary overstaffing and empire building?

 

You also seem to blindly accept that the admin cost to the police of issuing/renewing a certificate is not covered by what we already pay! because the police claim this? but they apparently have no statistics to back up these claims?

 

Obviously you don't want to see my point of view and I confess I can't understand yours, so just lets agree to disagree eh? life's too short!

 

sounds good to me.

 

[Steppenwolf]

 

do you honestly think that the government and police couldnt just ban guns all together if they wanted to? pretty sure if you asked any ex hand gun owner that question they would tell you that the goverment could take your guns at will and there is pretty much naff all that anyone would be able to do about it.

the moral is, better to work with them (as BASC are currently trying to do) than against them.

any business that runs at a loss will eventually either 1. fail, or 2. bring in new rules and regulations to recoup their money. in our case, that potentially leaves the door wide open for them to hike the cost of a licence up even further than they are suggesting now. and guess what? we wont get a say in it. that you can be sure of.

 

The police is not a business it is a public service. If it was a business then we could have a say on how it is run and take our business elsewhere. For example if there were say 3 companies in the Uk doing gun licesing I could use the police or some other service which was more reliable, more efficient and maybe even cheaper. That is how business and the free market works.

 

Secondly your comment about "the government could just ban guns tomorrow and take all guns away" is absolute bull. Even with handguns they had to pay back a fee to every owner not just for guns but for dies and any other things to do with guns such as holsters which would not be needed anymore. It cost the government millions of pounds. The government already said it is not going to pay for people's guns again but at the same time they cannot confiscate them since it would be stealing. If they did it to one person they could get away but do it en masse and you will have a lot of lawsuits which would effectively bankrupt the government.

 

The only way guns are going to be outright confiscated is maybe during a time of war or martial law, otherwise the government are just going to try to discourage gun ownership so that it dies a slow death over the years. This is where we come in to promote it to friends and family.

[David BASC]

Dear All,

 

I can assure you all that BASC are very much on the front foot on all the issues we have been discussing.

 

Let me please assure you all that its BASC's objective to remain at the forefront of dialogue with the Home Office et al on the following:

 

To be fully involved in any proposed review of the cost of licences

To maintain pressure at all levels for an improvement in the service that certificate holders and new applicants receive

To resolve the issues surrounding medical checks / reports

To continue on our campaign for a 10 year certificate

 

But in the short term, please ask all shooters you know to take part in the current consultation.

 

thank you

 

David

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Well done, please keep up the good work

[panoma1]

It seem true to its word BASC has published a white paper suggesting an increased term of ten years for shotgun and firearm certificates, it is reported that this suggestion has the qualified support of the police via Andy Marsh current police lead (on the new body formerly ACPO) on firearm licensing matters.

Well done BASC.............just watch what the police/government want in return!

[Scully]

.............just watch what the police/government want in return!

Compulsory GP reports for all applicants, and paid for by the applicant? This is the 'compromise' as mentioned to me by a senior BASC representative. Furthermore 'there's nothing we can do about it'.

Ten years is a long time.

[mossy835]

so if you have a doctors report,does that mean you wont go mad.and we will be ok for good

[Scully]

so if you have a doctors report,does that mean you wont go mad.and we will be ok for good

Well, for 10 years anyhow.

Edited September 10, 2015 by Scully

[panoma1]

so if you have a doctors report,does that mean you wont go mad.and we will be ok for good

Is a GP qualified to assess a patients psychiatric health? I think not! The questionable area would possibly be if someone went to the doctor with depression!

And I fear it will be an ongoing assessment rather than a "one off, on application and/or renewal" every ten years assessment? So if at any time during the term of your certificate your doctor doesn't agree with shooting, is an anti or you've upset him/her they could have a seriously detrimental effect on your gun ownership, on the other hand if the doctor as the arbiter of suitability, finds nothing health wise against your holding a certificate?....does that mean certificate holders renewals will just be rubber stamped and renewed without having to get their paperwork signed and verified by other "responsible" signatories?

Interesting times!

[CharlieT]

And I fear it will be an ongoing assessment rather than a "one off, on application and/or renewal" every ten years assessment? So if at any time during the term of your certificate your doctor doesn't agree with shooting, is an anti or you've upset him/her they could have a seriously detrimental effect on your gun ownership

 

This exactly what is being put in place Now.

GP's notified of all SGC/FAC grants and renewals when an enduring marker will be put on your medical file so that GP's can immediatly notify your licensing department of any concern they may have.

 

Here is an extract from the minutes of an ACPO meeting on 13.11.14, which you may find interesting.

 

National Firearms Licensing Issues Supt Charlie Hill referred to national standards and a national approach and asked if consideration has been given to raising the bar to go to a national firearms licensing management system with a national office singularly central. This is an area of the business that could nationalised. Also consideration to moving to a 10 year life certificate rather than 5 year certificate. This could help identify people who are vulnerable or who are causing a concern. Is there a long term steer to work towards a national firearms licensing system?

 

CC Marsh said he agrees with firearms licensing being done collaboratively; it could be done regionally and possibly be done nationally and has regarded the gateway to those possibilities around the consistency of process and eCommerce. Until that time forces need to work bilaterally and collaboratively.

 

CC Marsh said with regards the 10 year life certificate; this has been discussed with the Home Office and shooting representative groups. Some concern had been expressed. BASC have said they would expect to pay a fee that is commensurate with the monitoring of those licences over that period. Two practical things have to happen, medical markers and 24/7 monitoring which would have to be done consistently.

 

Action: CC Andy Marsh to write to Sir Hugh Orde, to seek his advice with regards moving towards a 10 yearlicence and 24/7 monitoring and how this could be taken forward.

Edited September 10, 2015 by CharlieT