rbrowning2 Posted January 29, 2020 Report Share Posted January 29, 2020 1 hour ago, panoma1 said: rbrowning2, I give up on nothing! If the Police, the medical profession and the government (through the Home office) decide to support and recommend the introduction of draconian control/medical involvement over gun licensing (bearing in mind parliament, through MP’s make law)........on what grounds would BASC or anyone else ask, let alone receive permission for a Judicial Review? Shooting interests can not impose their will on others unless we can identify a case to take to law....this is why WJ have been effective.........they identified a case and DEFRA threw the towel in.....allegedly on advice that they couldn’t win! Do you think it wise for BASC to take a case to law, if the legal advice is.....you can’t win? Judicial review (JR) is the process of challenging the lawfulness of decisions of public authorities, usually local or central government. Legal advice they have never published and is just one QCs opinion. I,e decision not to align with HOG2016 best practice. But hey ho let’s just continue to lay down and take what ever is thrown at us by the police until the process is so painful and expensive in years to come nobody wants to bother so slowly slowly the ownership of firearms dies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted January 29, 2020 Report Share Posted January 29, 2020 1 minute ago, rbrowning2 said: Judicial review (JR) is the process of challenging the lawfulness of decisions of public authorities, usually local or central government. Legal advice they have never published and is just one QCs opinion. I,e decision not to align with HOG2016 best practice. But hey ho let’s just continue to lay down and take what ever is thrown at us by the police until the process is so painful and expensive in years to come nobody wants to bother so slowly slowly the ownership of firearms dies. What exactly is the “lawfulness of decisions of public authorities usually local or central government” you wish BASC to launch a JR to challenge? Have these public authorities made any unlawful decisions? The issue of medical involvement is not finalised....it may be being imposed by the police piecemeal, in certain places, it is certainly in contravention of agreed Home office Guidance.....but I don’t think being in contravention of Guidance is unlawful? The issue of GL’s?..........Surely there will only (possibly?) be a case for a JR, when DEFRA try to introduce any new GL terms which are unlawful....not just because we don’t like em!............DEFRA are the meat in a sandwich...WJ on one side, shooting interests on tother! Don’t get me wrong, if it comes to a fight, I’ll be there......but I’ll fight to win....I’ll not fight to be the gallant loser! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbrowning2 Posted January 29, 2020 Report Share Posted January 29, 2020 Re not following guidance somebody did post on one forum that the government department was found to have been unlawful for not following something to do with immigration guidance, so if that was correct I guess yes anything is possible. think if you look at mark avery’s blog they (WJ) already consider the current GLs unlawful so time will tell. fight no we don’t fight we own firearms and the powers that be know that hence we are where we are, after all the likes of WJ have nothing to lose it’s not even their money. shoot straight, RB, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbrowning2 Posted January 29, 2020 Report Share Posted January 29, 2020 Panoma1, blimey that did not take long Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted January 29, 2020 Report Share Posted January 29, 2020 1 hour ago, rbrowning2 said: Panoma1, blimey that did not take long Yep! No surprise there! As you say, it’s not their own money and they have nothing to lose!.......But........they can only win if they can prove what they claim to be unlawful.....and if they do who’s fault is it? DEFRA’s......it’s their (DEFRA’s) job to ensure the GL’s are issued in compliance with the appropriate legislation.......it has nothing to do with shooters acting unlawfully! We are only acting in compliance with the GL’s, as written! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbrowning2 Posted January 29, 2020 Report Share Posted January 29, 2020 ..it has nothing to do with shooters acting unlawfully! We are only acting in compliance with the GL’s, as written! I hope so, shooting lawfully, we do not need any own goals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted January 30, 2020 Report Share Posted January 30, 2020 19 hours ago, panoma1 said: What exactly is the “lawfulness of decisions of public authorities usually local or central government” you wish BASC to launch a JR to challenge? Have these public authorities made any unlawful decisions? The issue of medical involvement is not ...it may be being imposed by the police piecemeal, in certain places, it is certainly in contravention of agreed Home office Guidance....but I don’t think being in contravention of Guidance is unlawful? Don’t get me wrong, if it comes to a fight, I’ll be there......but I’ll fight to win....I’ll not fight to be the gallant loser! You are spot on. I think some posters need to read the Government consultation on the matter...........https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/statutory-guidance-to-police-on-firearms-licensing to appraise themselves of what is/has actually happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbrowning2 Posted January 30, 2020 Report Share Posted January 30, 2020 But even the title is an oxymoron which is it statutory or guidance 😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted January 30, 2020 Report Share Posted January 30, 2020 There is a difference between Guidance and Statutory Guidance - see the letters here it may help unravel the terminology (or not!) https://basc.org.uk/medical-procedure-consultation-to-be-launched-shortly/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougy Posted February 1, 2020 Report Share Posted February 1, 2020 (edited) So my renewal is due in November this year 2020, I now hear that i require a Dr to inform the Firearms department that i have no underlying medical condition that will affect my right to own a firearm, for what i have/had lawful permission to use on the land and quarry it was intended for years The question im asking anyone is, in particular BASC, How on earth can a Dr who has no idea who i am when i visit, well i have been once in over 10 years, so there is a very very small chance they may know me !!! Yet the firearms department expect the Dr to say if im fit or not ! to own a firearm !!!!!!!! I wish i had of studied harder at school and become a Dr, at £50 for 15 minutes reading medical records (or in my case 5) its down right ludicrous, and to be honest something i would have expected ALL of the shooting organisations to put a stop to. Will they ever see that joining together as ONE will be far better than what we have now as half a dozen or so groups who just seem to whisper our needs. And to add to this, if i had of been sectioned under the mental health act I would have recieved a formal letter stating that i am no longer suffering from said illness. So I ask this question to every single firearm license holder, how many have a certificate off the medical profession stating that My bet is very very few IF any. Edited February 1, 2020 by Dougy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clangerman Posted February 1, 2020 Report Share Posted February 1, 2020 one organisation is bang on the money dougy and direct action is needed eco clowns brought the capital to its knees and made every news channel in the world with a tent house hold names from a piece of nylon now tell me direct action is not the way to go Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted February 1, 2020 Report Share Posted February 1, 2020 29 minutes ago, clangerman said: one organisation is bang on the money dougy and direct action is needed eco clowns brought the capital to its knees and made every news channel in the world with a tent house hold names from a piece of nylon now tell me direct action is not the way to go You win nothing unless you get public support! Do you really believe a campaign of direct action and disruption by people that kill things, will get public support? More like get you a night in the clink, followed by an appearance before a magistrate, in the morning! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clangerman Posted February 1, 2020 Report Share Posted February 1, 2020 5 minutes ago, panoma1 said: You win nothing unless you get public support! Do you really believe a campaign of direct action and disruption by people that kill things, will get public support? More like get you a night in the clink, followed by an appearance before a magistrate, in the morning! that’s the price of freedom i’m afraid me you or others may be casualties but if we do nothing we already lost the fight better to go down swinging than not fight back Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted February 2, 2020 Report Share Posted February 2, 2020 (edited) 15 hours ago, clangerman said: that’s the price of freedom i’m afraid me you or others may be casualties but if we do nothing we already lost the fight better to go down swinging than not fight back A war consists of many battles, it’s who is standing at the end that matters! The time for **** or bust is when you have the advantage! There are no prizes for the gallant losers! Edited February 2, 2020 by panoma1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clangerman Posted February 2, 2020 Report Share Posted February 2, 2020 1 hour ago, panoma1 said: A war consists of many battles, it’s who is standing at the end that matters! The time for **** or bust is when you have the advantage! There are no prizes for the gallant losers! i now see david’s position direct action will and does work but basc can’t call on troops so scared of losing their firearms they won’t fight my grandson will not say i can’t own firearms because my grandad wouldn’t fight for me to own them because he wanted to keep his own no wonder slackman is laughing he has nothing to fear from hot air Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbrowning2 Posted February 2, 2020 Report Share Posted February 2, 2020 David, thank you for the link and the nick hurd letter. Q1 would not the statutory guidance only become statutory by an act of Parliament. lot of wishful thinking in Mr hurts letter without the changes to the GPs NHS contract. It appears he expects all GPs to engage in the process as an act of goodwill. he states “Government and with partners, so that there is greater transparency over the fees and so that inappropriate pricing can be challenged.” so Q2 has BASC given the information that is now available re the fees, challenged inappropriate pricing? Is that not open to a JR? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted February 2, 2020 Report Share Posted February 2, 2020 On 29/01/2020 at 15:08, David BASC said: There is no law preventing doctors from charging for services outside of their NHS contract, nor anything stopping a Dr charging nothing or £500 for this service,or indeed from refusing to help at all. Hence BASC setting up a low cost alternative for members who's Dr either will not comply or who wants to charge high prices While this will no doubt be of some assistance to those who have Gp's who for reasons of ignorance of the sport of shooting or the ways of the countryside. I fear there will be a lot of shooters having to make arrangements for their guns as it can take weeks if not months for some surgeries to pass on records. This is surely an infringement of our human rights. I take it from your earlier statement that basc will continue to strive on our behalf to counter this means another strongly worded letter being sent out. We have nothing to fear with this kind of support behind us. 🙂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted February 3, 2020 Report Share Posted February 3, 2020 Apologies for the delay in responding, no Statutory Guidance can be made though a Statutory Instrument rather than a full parliamentary hearing Yes we have made an issue of the daft range of fees that are charged, and as seriously, the fact the doctors can refuse to get involved, the BMA have even published guidance on this on their website, what doctors charge for their out of contract work is not open to a JR I believe. Yes BASC will continue to strive on behalf of shooters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbrowning2 Posted February 3, 2020 Report Share Posted February 3, 2020 (edited) 54 minutes ago, David BASC said: Apologies for the delay in responding, no Statutory Guidance can be made though a Statutory Instrument rather than a full parliamentary hearing Yes we have made an issue of the daft range of fees that are charged, and as seriously, the fact the doctors can refuse to get involved, the BMA have even published guidance on this on their website, what doctors charge for their out of contract work is not open to a JR I believe. Yes BASC will continue to strive on behalf of shooters. Thank you for the reply, so have you asked mr Hurd or who ever it many be now in that job how we are supposed to challenge the fee as per his letter. Without the suitable “checks and balances” processes in place how can the HO allow the police to continue ignoring HOG2016 just who are the police accountable to? Edited February 3, 2020 by rbrowning2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted February 3, 2020 Report Share Posted February 3, 2020 There is the rub , the HO have no influence over GP's, nor do the police, HMIC are also frustrated at the lack of consistency and compliance with the HOG, its not just us shooters! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbrowning2 Posted February 3, 2020 Report Share Posted February 3, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, David BASC said: There is the rub , the HO have no influence over GP's, nor do the police, HMIC are also frustrated at the lack of consistency and compliance with the HOG, its not just us shooters! Never doubted that the HO had no influences over GPs or that the Police do. But the Home Secretary has control over the police, should She not be responsible for telling the police to comply with HOG2016? Until all the issues are resolved like the GPs contracts. Just seams the tail, police are waging the dogs head, HO. All just so disjointed no joined up thinking. Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for the Home Department, normally referred to as the Home Secretary, is head of the Home Office. The remit of the Home Office also includes policing in England and Wales Edited February 3, 2020 by rbrowning2 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.