Jump to content

Changes to gun licensing


Harnser
 Share

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Fellside said:

All good point HantsRob. However, it is understood that the family alerted Devon and Cornwall re his mental health concerns. The opportunity to investigate was served on a silver platter. 
 

I think we will learn more as time goes on. The truth will out as they say. 

Indeed, however the word investigate is what's important there. Hearsay is dangerous, and reliability of intel is graded also. I don't disagree that it shouldn't have raised a flag, but then we don't know if an investigation did go forth but someone in a position of medical authority said no concerns at this time. The truth will indeed out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 118
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

34 minutes ago, HantsRob said:

Indeed, however the word investigate is what's important there. Hearsay is dangerous, and reliability of intel is graded also. I don't disagree that it shouldn't have raised a flag, but then we don't know if an investigation did go forth but someone in a position of medical authority said no concerns at this time. The truth will indeed out.

Autism, ADHD and depression according to one press source (who were prepared to go on record). Also concerns raised re social media feeds etc. I sincerely hope they were investigated with rigour. However, the big (big!) question to be answered is obviously how and why he ended up retaining his ticket afterwards. 
 

I appreciate that news and media can sensationalise - but it’s not looking great for D and C. Hope that the enquiry is open and honest - so that valuable insights are gained. 
 

Not police bashing here by the way. I believe in the old adage, “the community are of the police….and the police are of the community”. However, serious underfunding is eroding that principle - and I do wonder how much resource starvation may have played its part. 

Just my thoughts for what it’s worth….?  As I said earlier - all speculation at this stage. We are little more that a bunch of gossiping grannies at the bingo hall……🙂. It’s a wait and see job now. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, old'un said:

why is that? There have been no changes to the licencing laws.

Exactly. 
I was applying for my first FAC  ( for handguns ) shortly after Hungerford, and when I took the completed form down to the local cop shop ( yes, we used to have one back then! 🙂) I was told by the local Sergeant ( a thoroughly unpleasant bully of a man ) that ‘we aren’t giving out any more licenses because of Hungerford’. I replied ‘ Well it’s not up to you is it?’ He wasn’t too chuffed ( we had history )when I asked for a receipt for the cheque I’d included. It was my guarantee that he would hand it in. 🙂

Anyhow, as Old’un has said, there have been no changes to legislation, so until there is then processing should carry on as normal and not as licensing or the police would like. 
I applied for my renewal about a month ago, I expect my tickets to be processed as normal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dave-G said:

A nephew has just applied for his FAC. He's been told to expect long delays due to what's happened in Plymouth.

Why? The only force that should perhaps have delays is D&C. High time we had a nationwide non police based licencing authority with a consistent and unbiased approach. Maybe the legislation needs to be simplified?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I were to bet on it I'd say checks on social media posts will be done as a matter of course from now on with the onus on the applicant to provide the details, I'd they don't provide them and they are found then its a sign of lack of integrity and would result in a refusal, if the content is dodgy ie causes concern then it will also be a refusal. Just a guess. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GingerCat said:

If I were to bet on it I'd say checks on social media posts will be done as a matter of course from now on with the onus on the applicant to provide the details, I'd they don't provide them and they are found then its a sign of lack of integrity and would result in a refusal, if the content is dodgy ie causes concern then it will also be a refusal. Just a guess. 

Too hard to do given all of the aliases that peops might use. Even on here peops have different user names. Think of the manpower its going to need. I wonder if we will have to pay for it all? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, GingerCat said:

You might be surprised about that. As its something I do and have done for years as part of my job I know whats involved. It will almost certainly happen.

I don't doubt it will happen but doubt it's effectiveness. Imagine the cost and the different approaches taken between the forces. Sounds to me like a recipe for more discontent than the doctors sign off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, GingerCat said:

If I were to bet on it I'd say checks on social media posts will be done as a matter of course from now on with the onus on the applicant to provide the details, I'd they don't provide them and they are found then its a sign of lack of integrity and would result in a refusal, if the content is dodgy ie causes concern then it will also be a refusal. Just a guess. 

I seriously can’t see that happening. Massive massive undertaking by dedicated staff to constantly monitor social media, requiring additional staff in each licensing authority. At what point do bells start ringing? Jokes about Pakistanis or other races? Comments about what we’d like to do with gangs of Muslim grooming gangs? Or what we’d like to happen to Tony Blair or Chris Packham? 🤷‍♂️
Everything was in place to potentially prevent this happening, and opportunities missed.
Im aware we’re examining this with the benefit of hindsight, but the criteria presently in place was put in place for exactly this type of scenario, but it was decided to go off piste for whatever reason. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No changes are needed at all. What is in place is fine. There was just a bad error or oversite but you can not cover for every eventuality. They are only trying to keep the non shooters happy at the moment and the ban guns tighten this and tighten that brigade who have no clue about guns or shooting. 

Edited by captainhastings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GingerCat said:

I'm not saying any changes are needed, I'm renewing mine currently and hope they remain the same. I did ask the girl I'm the office when they start checking social media and she said "it's going to be a nightmare for the flo's". Take that how you like. 

They wont be checking your posting on platforms like this, the police just don't have the manpower, if there’s any changes you can bet your life it will fall squarely on the shoulders of the gun owner, think I mentioned it before but its possible they could do away with your GP report and ask for a psychologist report every year, which you will have to pay for no doubt.

Admittedly that is also not fool proof but an expert in that field is more likely to pick-up on mental health issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...