Here we go.

[HantsRob]

11 minutes ago, PJ M said:

The Police already make a profit from processing licences and if like me you pay council tax then you are paying for their services twice over.  And lets face it they do very little else for their money these days.

I don't see why, once issued a Shotgun licence shouldn't be for life. There is no reason whatsoever why it should have to be renewed every five years. You don't have to renew your driving licence every five years and we have seen quite recently how much carnage a car can cause when used in anger!   

 

I feel a lot of anger in that post, and frustration. I believe you are incorrect on several issues. 

With regards to covering cost of all elements of the licence processing, including overheads, they are not running a profit. Also the deficit is then covered by the council tax. What the full recovery process is suggesting is that everyone else doesn't have to pay for your licence application and renewal. In the world of business and finance, they are not profiting as it stands today. I would however agree for simple renewals that this would absorb some of the overhead costs for complex cases, and to pay towards issues that result in revocation, storage etc. Whilst you may argue storage is free or covered elsewhere, overhead allocation will say otherwise.

Whilst you may not see a shorter than life term is appropriate, there are very few things that are ever issued for life. There are many documented reasons why every 5 years is a potentially good idea, and if you look at the revocations every year that are missed by BAU activities, it's a very good idea. I think the better argument here is that BAU should report better, which would then negate a 5 year period.

Your comment about your driving licence is partly valid, you don't renew it every 5. But you are forced to do it every 10. Or, when you turn 70. By your own comment, maybe driving licences should either renew more frequently, or we need more driving tests to prevent such carnage a car can cause when used in anger?

 

In short, your comment is talking about treating the symptom, but not the cause.
For example: If we could have Doctors and Police working on tangible reports/evidence on ill health, safety concerns, and Police involved occurrences, we could negate the need for shorter and costly licence re-checks, rather than them only appearing on the 5 year check.

Finally, the mandated doctors checks should have negated many of the concerns around reporting ill health and unsuitability, however this is not working efficiently if at all. If that system worked as intended, it could have meant we could leverage our shooting organisations such as "the voice of shooters" (other organisations are available) to fight for longer certification. 

 

Sometimes the wrong argument is presented, and whilst we fight around symptoms and not causes, we will get no-where.

HantsRob's 5 penneth. FWIW.

[Scully]

1 hour ago, PJ M said:

The Police already make a profit from processing licences and if like me you pay council tax then you are paying for their services twice over.  And lets face it they do very little else for their money these days.

I don't see why, once issued a Shotgun licence shouldn't be for life. There is no reason whatsoever why it should have to be renewed every five years. You don't have to renew your driving licence every five years and we have seen quite recently how much carnage a car can cause when used in anger!   

 

As far as I’m aware the Police don’t make profit at all, from anything. They are funded in the most part by Central Government via allocated grants, unless I’m mistaken. 
The idea of a 10 year license was mentioned some time ago, and I first recall it while in discussion with a BASC rep’ at the time ( Mike, whose surname escapes me. He was a retired copper. If anyone can recall his name I’d be very grateful ) when the inclusion of a GP’s report into the licensing procedure was first mooted, that BASC would push for a 10 year ticket as a compromise. As we all know it didn’t happen, but with the advent of ‘flags’ in a persons medical record, I can’t see what the problem is.  

[enfieldspares]

On 31/12/2024 at 19:35, Graham M said:

Another way to cut down on all of the "Arsenals" in the country 

It is only when these "arsenals" are owned by "sad loners" that they become a concern. You never see newspaper headlines "arsenal of weapons owned by happy family man".

Edited Friday at 19:41 by enfieldspares

[Scully]

Mike Eveleigh! Nice bloke; as frustrated as much as I with all the nonsensical and agenda driven carp we’re dished out and helpless to  do anything about but accept. 
His name has just been sent to me by a very helpful PW member.