Lincolnshire spot checks

[Davyo]

I would disagree with the over the phone none sense. If they are going to impose medical forms etc and be more intensive on application,I find it totally unacceptable that they can lax a bit for future application(renewal).A lot can change in 5yrs I could of had worrying indicators around the property like a smell of cannabis or lots of signs of alcohol use.A none visit is just heading into Atherton territory in my eyes!

Imagine that a visit is done over the phone and that same person goes nuts a few weeks later.What would the press and the general public make of it when it comes to light that in the renewal the applicant was never visited?Again we'd be back to square one with trying to reassure the general public.I often told my colleagues at work(none shooters) about the cockups that Durham made with our FAC/SCG (wrong guns listed,sons name wrong on licence & an open condition on FAC @ 15yrs old, because after I made them check it, it was the guy who had a renewal in at the same time my sons 1st app went through.They corrected the name but not the condition)and they where appalled (we are only 4 mls from the Atherton incident),

If the police want to impose more paperwork /restrictions on application let's remind them when that are not doing their job right.I did get my visit as I said it wasn't OK to do my renewal over the phone.They made me wait another 3 weeks though but that's just tough.

If the short cuts is due to money being tight then bang it up to say £400 for 5 yrs.I pay £28 a year for a sodding rod licence & double if I want to use more than 2 rods.

Edited April 2, 2017 by Davyo

[walshie]

Well that's the statement printed on the NRA uk and makes no mention of a warrant as they stipulate that they are checking you guns/cabinet/security. It does not require a warrant as it's not a search of the Cert holders property.Refusing entry may give them more reason to suspect something's not right.

 

I understand that, and I wouldn't impede them having a nose round here if it was at a convenient time. If they are just doing a spot check then you may or may not allow them in at your convenience. My point is if they suspected something in particular, then they wouldn't turn up without a warrant or there would be no point.

[oowee]

Northumbria now use phone renewals for people aged between 21-65 providing it's not your first renewal or application. (Shotguns, dunno about FAC)

 

I think that's a great idea,

 

It's your responsibility to inform them of any changes,

 

Saves time and we have a very quick turnaround time.

 

I don't have a problem with it,

 

As for the scenario of taking the cabinet off the wall and not being bothered to replace it or not replacing a busted lock, why wouldn't you do that?

 

You are responsible for your own security, it's nice to be treated as adults not children that need constant checks in case we can't be bothered

 

Its a great idea. The more this stuff is simplified the better. I am happy to have a tough up front process after which simple straight forward admin.

[Davyo]

The reason for the NRA's statement is to stop confusion.They would tell a licence holder why they are visiting, and that reason will be purely to ensure that that holder is complying within the conditions.I like the idea of a none anounched visit, as it catches out the people who are damaging shooting.The ones that maybe haven't bothered to put their guns away or already have them out because they don't want to rattle the cabinet door when the other half is in bed.Phoning them before the visit would just get them to get their house in order before the police land,which defeats the whole plan.

However if it's a warrant then it's clearly something else outside the condition of the licence or something related.I can't see why as licence holders we just can't comply and accept that it's part of being a Cert holder now.Maybe they should update the guidance to clearly state that 'as a licence holder you will/may be subject to unannounced spot checks'.That way if an applicant doesn't want this condition or they are unhappy about this condition, then that applicant simply doesn't apply for a SGC/FAC.

Edited April 2, 2017 by Davyo

[oowee]

The reason for the NRA's statement is to stop confusion.They would tell a licence holder why they are visiting, and that reason will be purely to ensure that that holder is complying within the conditions.I like the idea of a none anounched visit, as it catches out the people who are damaging shooting.The ones that maybe haven't bothered to put their guns away or already have them out because they don't want to rattle the cabinet door when the other half is in bed.Phoning them before the visit would just get them to get their house in order before the police land,which defeats the whole plan.

However if it's a warrant then it's clearly something else outside the condition of the licence or something related.I can't see why as licence holders we just can't comply and accept that it's part of being a Cert holder now.Maybe they should update the guidance to clearly state that 'as a licence holder you will/may be subject to unannounced spot checks'.That way if an applicant doesn't want this condition or they are unhappy about this condition, then that applicant simply doesn't apply for a SGC/FAC.

No no no. We don't want and should not accept this. Why not check other random household for other potential discrepancies? We don't expect visits at random to check for anything else so why firearms?

[Davyo]

No no no. We don't want and should not accept this. Why not check other random household for other potential discrepancies? We don't expect visits at random to check for anything else so why firearms?

I honestly can't see the issue, it's not as if they are going to be calling round every week or month.It hardly likely many will get a visit at all on the grand scale of things.Its just the making a Cert holder aware of a possible visit, that alone make make a Cert holder make sure his house is in order.

I don't drink (well rarely) but got pulled into one of those random breath test stops at Christmas.I didn't kick off or felt it was intrusive.In fact quite the opposite knowing that officers are out there taking drivers off the road that are not driving within the conditions of their driving licence. I see the possible unannounced home visit as doing the same.Taking certs off holders that do not comply with the conditions of that licence.

Edited April 2, 2017 by Davyo

[walshie]

The difference is you can be arrested for not giving a breath test. The police can't do anything if you don't want them to come in unannounced to do a spot check, so they will never catch anyone breaking their FAC/SGC conditions. The law abiding will let them in, and the others will tell them to come back another time when they have locked their guns away. Seems a pointless exercise to me.

[Scully]

I have absolutely nothing to hide at all. All my security etc is ticketyboo, but unless they make an appointment they wont be getting in.

[shaun4860]

I honestly can't see the issue, it's not as if they are going to be calling round every week or month.It hardly likely many will get a visit at all on the grand scale of things.Its just the making a Cert holder aware of a possible visit, that alone make make a Cert holder make sure his house is in order.

I don't drink (well rarely) but got pulled into one of those random breath test stops at Christmas.I didn't kick off or felt it was intrusive.In fact quite the opposite knowing that officers are out there taking drivers off the road that are not driving within the conditions of their driving licence. I see the possible unannounced home visit as doing the same.Taking certs off holders that do not comply with the conditions of that licence.

I agree about not having issues with spot checks......don't have a problem at all,

 

We are going to have to agree to disagree about phone renewals though,

 

If as you say, your house may stink of cannabis and such like then we must also assume that if its that bad that it can be detected from out side then it may have been reported and then I doubt very much whether you would get a renewal over the phone,

 

Nothing changes in my house from renewal to renewal so it's really a waste of everyone's time for them to come out and check......so a phone call is better until I reach an age of where they come out and check

 

And why should they even think of an increase to the levels of £100s for a certificate?

 

We fill a form in, on first application they check everything and then hopefully issues your cert. Nothing in that process warrants fees to the level you suggest

 

It's horses for courses and like I said we will have to agree to differ on it.

 

[Savhmr]

It's not a question of whether one has something to hide, it's a question of what is currently legally required or lawful. Currently, spot checks can be refused unless good reason is given for the check, in which case it is not a "spot check" and in that event, you are entitled to request a written statement detailing the reason for the request. That request requires your agreement then for a visit, which should only be made when acting upon intelligence. If things are serious, then they'd just come with a search warrant and with uniformed officers in attendance anyway. "Spot checks" as such would seem to be both a complete waste of time for most forces who are miles behind in their renewals anyway, plus also questionable in terms of their purpose, since by definition, at renewal time, they have already given the OK for you to hold a certificate.

 

No to spot checks. I wouldn't accept one as a matter of principle even though I have nothing to hide. A written statement giving the reason for the check would be a minimum and reasonable demand.

[Scully]

It's not a question of whether one has something to hide, it's a question of what is currently legally required or lawful. Currently, spot checks can be refused unless good reason is given for the check, in which case it is not a "spot check" and in that event, you are entitled to request a written statement detailing the reason for the request. That request requires your agreement then for a visit, which should only be made when acting upon intelligence. If things are serious, then they'd just come with a search warrant and with uniformed officers in attendance anyway. "Spot checks" as such would seem to be both a complete waste of time for most forces who are miles behind in their renewals anyway, plus also questionable in terms of their purpose, since by definition, at renewal time, they have already given the OK for you to hold a certificate.

 

No to spot checks. I wouldn't accept one as a matter of principle even though I have nothing to hide. A written statement giving the reason for the check would be a minimum and reasonable demand.

 

This.

[oowee]

 

This.

+1

I don't have random spot checks on my car safety, or to see if I have any undeclared lodgers in my house or anything else. It's heavy handed, unwelcome intrusion. As a free citizen I expect to be free.

Imagine a random call to check web sites you had browsed, or listening in to random telephone calls. It's not on.

[Scully]

 

I don't have random spot checks on my car safety, or to see if I have any undeclared lodgers in my house or anything else. It's heavy handed, unwelcome intrusion. As a free citizen I expect to be free.

Imagine a random call to check web sites you had browsed, or listening in to random telephone calls. It's not on.

 

And this.

[bostonmick]

No problem with them visiting me.they are welcome to check anytime.i have always found our fao's friendly and helpful.they check find nothing untoward this goes on your record can only be good.

[walshie]

But every single person they check will have nothing untoward otherwise the FAC/SGC holder would tell them to come back another time.