Are BMA and doctors FAC suitability letters going overboard?

[Dave-G]

I've just heard from someone in Cornwall who doesn't do forums or social media.

He has had his FAC renewal 'doctors letter' marked as unsuitable for FAC because he's thought to be delusional having declined all the Covid jabs because he doesn't trust the pharmaceutical industry or government shenanigans being revealed all over the place.

He's since discussed the issue with said doctor and presented him with accounts about how much Pharma skulduggery has apparently been exposed by umpteen lawyers, doctors and scientists and something about a 'Hope Accord' (way over my head but found on Google) proving his suspicions at least hold some water.

The doctor has subsequently agreed to remove the unsuitable note and issue a revised letter on receipt of another £60 fee.

I'm thinking his doctor is maybe P'd off about his practice not getting money for his jabs - (that they might have paid for). 

Thoughts please gents and I'll send him a link to this topic.

[Lloyd90]

32 minutes ago, Dave-G said:

I'm thinking his doctor is maybe P'd off about his practice not getting money for his jabs - (that they might have paid for). 

Thoughts please gents and I'll send him a link to this topic.

I think the idea that the doctor is “out to get him” as alluded to above is paranoid. 
 

As someone who often assesses people’s mental health etc, people with mental disorder are very very very often into conspiracy ideas, theories etc. 

 

If someone is skeptical about vaccines (certain ones sure, all vaccines, you’d have to be stupid)… that doesn’t make them a conspiracy nut. 
 

If someone went out of their way to look up “studies” and other sources which they claimed against pharmaceutical companies, went out of their way to book a GP appointment in clinic, then turned up to “present this info” to the GP, I would also have serious concerns about their mental state. 
 

What a very very odd thing to do. 
 

Does your mate think doctors are stupid or something?
 

Everyone knows there’s been pharma scandals etc, same as there are scandals and malpractice in almost every profession or industry. 
 

You have to ask what his agenda was by doing that? Did he think the GP would be amazed at his finding from google? 
 

 

I personally know people who are vaccine skeptics, that’s fine, but going out of their way to present anti vax info to a medical professional is an odd behaviour. 

[Dave-G]

23 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

I think the idea that the doctor is “out to get him” as alluded to above is paranoid. 
 

As someone who often assesses people’s mental health etc, people with mental disorder are very very very often into conspiracy ideas, theories etc. 

 

If someone is skeptical about vaccines (certain ones sure, all vaccines, you’d have to be stupid)… that doesn’t make them a conspiracy nut. 
 

If someone went out of their way to look up “studies” and other sources which they claimed against pharmaceutical companies, went out of their way to book a GP appointment in clinic, then turned up to “present this info” to the GP, I would also have serious concerns about their mental state. 
 

What a very very odd thing to do. 
 

Does your mate think doctors are stupid or something?
 

Everyone knows there’s been pharma scandals etc, same as there are scandals and malpractice in almost every profession or industry. 
 

You have to ask what his agenda was by doing that? Did he think the GP would be amazed at his finding from google? 
 

 

I personally know people who are vaccine skeptics, that’s fine, but going out of their way to present anti vax info to a medical professional is an odd behaviour. 

Are you really suggesting he should have just accepted that refusal to have the covid jabs should cost him his ticket? Maybe I explained it wrong but there was no prior discussion with the doctor about the issue before the letter to the FAC team.

How else would you suggest he challenges the doctors letter that would lead to a refusal and loss of his guns other than to check his facts a bit - and there HAVE been MSM topics about the covid jabs having been suss.

The 'doctor out to get him' part is my thoughts about the militant BMA, not his. There have been several posts on here about doctors not wanting to approve FAC's

Edited Saturday at 21:58 by Dave-G

[enfieldspares]

I had the actual covid and after one day of flu like symptoms spent the following nine wondering why I didn't at all feel as if I was going to die like that Mr Johnson told us we would. A few weeks later and because it was "demanded" by my work place I had the Astra-Zeneca injection which I did not wish to take but there was no Pfizer offered. Just Johnson's A-Z which was British and best and all that spaff, guff, and bluster and propaganda.

I then had three days of irregular heartbeat, palpitations, night sweats such that the bedsheets were soaked. So I called my GP, from work, to report this reaction. I was told to stay where I was, notify my works first aid, and that he had called an ambulance on 999 as it was likely I was having a stroke. Ambulance comes, blue and twos, and off I go to the local coronary dependency unit. 

Get there have all the tests and then the deputy registrar of the unit comes and introduces himself. "You've not had a stroke you've had a severe reaction to Astra-Zeneca. You are not the first. You won't be the last. You'll need to now book a heart scan through your GP."

So I book the scan. Have it done and when the results come am at work. My GP says I need to come and see him. I ask when, as I am at work. He tells me, in the strongest terms "Now." So I go and get told that the A-Z has given me myocarditis. A-Z and Boris Johnson. I'd be banned from P/W if I expressed the words I feel about both.

So IMHO this friend of DAVE-G is far from delusional. He was in fact wise to have refuse Johnson's cut price poison. Now in fact AFAIK A-Z is banned for any further use? I, alas, have the misfortune to be wise after the event.

Edited Saturday at 22:45 by enfieldspares

[Lloyd90]

53 minutes ago, Dave-G said:

Are you really suggesting he should have just accepted that refusal to have the covid jabs should cost him his ticket? Maybe I explained it wrong but there was no prior discussion with the doctor about the issue before the letter to the FAC team.

How else would you suggest he challenges the doctors letter that would lead to a refusal and loss of his guns other than to check his facts a bit - and there HAVE been MSM topics about the covid jabs having been suss.

The 'doctor out to get him' part is my thoughts about the militant BMA, not his. There have been several posts on here about doctors not wanting to approve FAC's

Perhaps I mis read it or you didn’t explain it clearly. 
 

Did the doctor add notes of being unfit for a shotgun licence BEFORE your friend turned up at the surgery presenting his evidence / reasons why he didn’t want it? 
 

Or did he do this only after the note was added, simply because he hadn’t had the vaccine? 
 

If the latter then I will gladly apologise and suggest that Doctor is simply an idiot. They are in all professions sadly. 

[Dave-G]

1 hour ago, Lloyd90 said:

...

Did the doctor add notes of being unfit for a shotgun licence BEFORE your friend turned up at the surgery presenting his evidence / reasons why he didn’t want it?

....

This, only after reading through the doctors entry in the letter about refusing the jabs. The doctor tagged him delusional, it was a complete bombshell as it had not been discussed. We/he knows that some doctors simply don't support shooting and it now seems at least that one tried to block a renewal.

He then spent hours on Google and other sites, finding all sorts of actions proposed or taken about the jabs then went to debate/argue/challenge the doctor with his findings. I'm thinking the doctor realised he couldn't get away with opposing the FAC renewal on those grounds and agreed to remove the unsuitable/delusional entrance to his medical record. My friend could then reapply with the usual fee for the corrected letter.

Its quite well known D&C are in disarray after the Plymouth shortcomings and would very likely refuse the renewal rather than hear my friends case and take a chance. 

I'm wondering if this might be an emerging trend supported by the BMA and if any others have had similar issues. 

Having gone back to read my first entry I can see I jumped the gun with this bit: because he doesn't trust the pharmaceutical industry or government shenanigans being revealed all over the place. I'm slightly dyslexic and sometimes get a bit jumbled, my word processor wouldn't have helped there. Sorry about that.

Edited Sunday at 00:35 by Dave-G

[TIGHTCHOKE]

How very odd, he can't be the only sceptic with regard to the vaccines.

Does he belong to any of the shooting organisations? and maybe seek their help.

[quentyn]

without trying to start a vax / anti vax discussion, i suspect that the previous interactions that he had with the medical professionals regarding if he should or should not have had the vaccination may have been the cause. Having spoken to some people who were very vocally anti vaccination i am not sure if i would want them to have firearms. Note that if you make the judgement that you dont want it due to the risk of complications - fine. But the ones who were cutting down 5g masts and claiming that there were tracking chips in the vaccine were delusional and possibly unsuited to be trusted with firearms.  

[Dave-G]

21 minutes ago, quentyn said:

without trying to start a vax / anti vax discussion, i suspect that the previous interactions that he had with the medical professionals regarding if he should or should not have had the vaccination may have been the cause. 

I'm too now thinking he may have given a nurse a brief reasoning for declining the vaccinations when first offered/pushed during the early days when there was less resistance without thinking much about it or remembering, he's slightly forgetful too.

Edited Sunday at 11:54 by Dave-G

[quentyn]

10 minutes ago, Dave-G said:

I'm too now thinking he may have given a nurse a brief reasoning for declining the vaccinations when first offered/pushed during the early days when there was less resistance without thinking much about it or remembering, he's slightly forgetful too.

i suspect that you might find the that words " brief reasoning" are doing a lot of heavy lifting... its probably not that he didnt want to be vaccinated but the way he has spoken to the medical professionals 

be curious now if he gets his FAC - whilst the "The doctor has subsequently agreed to remove the unsuitable note and issue a revised letter ..." this may have been to keep the peace - nothing stops the doctor indicating to the FEO ( in confidence) of the previous interactions and their concerns. 

[Dave-G]

30 minutes ago, quentyn said:

i suspect that you might find the that words " brief reasoning" are doing a lot of heavy lifting... its probably not that he didnt want to be vaccinated but the way he has spoken to the medical professionals 

be curious now if he gets his FAC - whilst the "The doctor has subsequently agreed to remove the unsuitable note and issue a revised letter ..." this may have been to keep the peace - nothing stops the doctor indicating to the FEO ( in confidence) of the previous interactions and their concerns. 

That's entirely feasible - and worrying, I'll update this with the result when it comes. It could get very complicated because his son who lives with him also has a FAC.

Edited Sunday at 12:39 by Dave-G

[Penelope]

On 24/11/2024 at 11:32, quentyn said:

without trying to start a vax / anti vax discussion, i suspect that the previous interactions that he had with the medical professionals regarding if he should or should not have had the vaccination may have been the cause. Having spoken to some people who were very vocally anti vaccination i am not sure if i would want them to have firearms. Note that if you make the judgement that you dont want it due to the risk of complications - fine. But the ones who were cutting down 5g masts and claiming that there were tracking chips in the vaccine were delusional and possibly unsuited to be trusted with firearms.  

 

Edited Tuesday at 13:38 by Penelope

[oowee]

I would not believe what you have been told. 

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, oowee said:

I would not believe what you have been told. 

In hindsight, I wouldnt believe now that the jab was 'safe and effective'

As far as a doctor declaring someone unsuitable for firearms, that is completely beyond their remit when it comes to the medical pro forma.
The question is 'Does the patient suffer from (or has suffered from) a diagnosed mental disorder ?'
Declaring someone unfit because they have been vocal about their opinion on vaccines is not a diagnosis, its not only unprofessional, its unethical, and beyond the scope of the pro forma.

I have experience of this from several club members, and the above has been verified by the FLM.

[oowee]

1 minute ago, Rewulf said:

In hindsight, I wouldnt believe now that the jab was 'safe and effective'

As far as a doctor declaring someone unsuitable for firearms, that is completely beyond their remit when it comes to the medical pro forma.
The question is 'Does the patient suffer from (or has suffered from) a diagnosed mental disorder ?'
Declaring someone unfit because they have been vocal about their opinion on vaccines is not a diagnosis, its not only unprofessional, its unethical, and beyond the scope of the pro forma.

I have experience of this from several club members, and the above has been verified by the FLM.

Not sure I follow what you are saying.

The OP is saying the doctors letter is marked as unsuitable.  The doctor is not asked for an opinion. The responsibility lies with the police. If the letter is 'marked' as unsuitable it would suggest that it is a decision of the firearms unit which is their role. If the doctor says he is unsuitable then it is as you say beyond the role of the basic process. 

[Rewulf]

3 hours ago, oowee said:

Not sure I follow what you are saying.

The OP is saying the doctors letter is marked as unsuitable.  The doctor is not asked for an opinion. The responsibility lies with the police. If the letter is 'marked' as unsuitable it would suggest that it is a decision of the firearms unit which is their role. If the doctor says he is unsuitable then it is as you say beyond the role of the basic process. 

Exactly.