A national body.... (not the same old thread)

[lapua338]

Exactly, why should I pay for such an imposition?

In fact, I'm already contributing £184.49 to Surrey Police (to maintain law and order) through my Council Tax for 2013/14. They received £180.88 for 2012/13.

In my opinion, I've already payed for my FAC many times over.

Evidently, the Police cannot manage their budgets correctly.

[nfrancis]

Exactly, why should I pay for such an imposition?

Evidently, the Police cannot manage their budgets correctly.

Sorry -I though this was a sensible discussion.

I'll stick to the competitive shooting threads I think... :-(

[meles meles]

The discussion may have been sensible, ooman, but the precepts upon which it was based were fundamentally flawed. We should not be complicit in signing our own death warrants...

[Sim G]

What do people think a fair cost for a FAC is considering the amount of administration that goes on? Does anybody really think a tenner a year is too much?

More to the point, why do you feel that you have to pay for your FAC? Is the licensing system simply based on pounds, shillings and pence? Would a 200 quid FAC get you pistols back? Or if I paid £1K a year could I have full auto? Or what if the government decided that a FAC would actually 10000 pounds per year? How long would your sport last then? I have to have an FAC because the legislation dictates I have to. Legislation also dictates the length of time that FAC is valid for, currently 5 years. And if that is to change?

How much should the FAC or SGC be? Exactly the cost of the paper used to print it on, the exact cost of the ink to actually print it and the exact cost of the envelope and postage to send the certificate to me. Everything else, the admin, the staff costs, the PNC and SB checks, the dr's references, the whole shebang, is that which is imposed. They want it, let "them" pay for it.

Non and I mean absolutely non of the state functions relating to security or law and order should have a price attached that potentially can lead to either contracting out or pricing out of existence, whether that be private prisons, G4S security guards working in custody suites or with powers of a constable, or the "actual" cost of an FAC grant.

How about charging someone the cost of attending a burglary, or a rape? How about the total cost of a fatal RTA? That one's about a million quid! The police's function is the police's function, in all aspects that they have been given responsibility for. A pricing schedule included during every 999 call....? Chief Constable Marsh is looking at a soft option where he believes we as a sport, are not regarded by government or the public. We're an easy "target"....

Sorry -I though this was a sensible discussion.

I'll stick to the competitive shooting threads I think... :-(

It is. But perhaps one that doesn't agree with you. Reason your argument. If you can't or don't want to, then stick to your prefered threads...

[Gaz]

I think the black-and-white subterranean one is right, to a point; concentrating so much power in one set of hands could well work against us. On the flip side of that coin, a consistent national approach would be far better - and gives us the ability to challenge that approach where it inevitably steps over the mark.

My tuppence: Move all licensing over to a Section 2 model and remove the police from the administration of FACs. They say it costs them too much to run in its current form; very well, take it away from them altogether and remove the problem.

That leaves the problem of forming a licensing body and funding it. How does the money spent on licensing come to the police - is it all drawn out of the policing precept paid as part of council tax?

A new Firearms Act, moving everything into a Section 2 style system, could always create a new regulatory body and sort out provisions for funding it. Say, a compulsory annual levy on police forces that equates to the amount they claim to spend on licensing at present...

[nfrancis]

More to the point, why do you feel that you have to pay for your FAC?

Why? Because its a reasonable thing to do. The concept of paying for a service you make use of is surely not unreasonable. Anyone wanting to own guns in this country has to go through the whole shebang - its not them making us do this - its us - its me. I don't want anyone owning guns unless I can have some sort of guarantee they are reasonable people. If that costs a tenner a year -so be it.

Fine - if its £1000 a year I may just see the point in standing up and taking issue. Its a tenner a year - its no big deal. There are a thousand and one things I may choose to take a principled stance on - this just isn't one of them I'm afraid. I'd rather just pay and get on with the shooting.

If you think the taxpayer should pay without any contribution for the very specialist service required that's fine - reason your case to them. I personally think we'd have a harder time justifying to our tax paying neighbours that we have the right or privilege to play around with guns whilst not contributing to the administration process it necessitates. A process that society, my neighbours, quite rightly asks me to go through.

[Christel]

I personally think we'd have a harder time justifying to our tax paying neighbours that we have the right or privilege to play around with guns whilst not contributing to the administration process it necessitates. A process that society, my neighbours, quite rightly asks me to go through.

Why is this? What I am reading between the lines here is that you are saying that our non shooting neighbours are of the opinion that we are doing something naughty and it should not be up to them to finance it.
I know one of my neighbours uses the library a lot, I never do, why should I pay tax towards that? (Not saying I won't)

I am of the opinion that anyone who wants a FAC or SGC needs to be vetted, the rest of the process we have to go through is panic regulations and laws that does not need to be there.

[Gaz]

Fine - if its £1000 a year I may just see the point in standing up and taking issue. Its a tenner a year - its no big deal.

Clearly I've missed something basic since taking up this sport - where is the option on the FAC application form to pay by instalments?

You might as well argue buying a top of the range Rolls Royce only costs £10 a month over your lifetime. I'm sorry, you're not so much barking up the wrong tree here as standing on top of it and howling at the moon.

The problem we face at the moment is that the upfront cost of a licence, which is a significant barrier to entry of our sport, is being doubled - and if ACPO get their way, quadrupled. No weasel words about "it's only X per month/year/decade" disguises the fact that it is a non-negotiable lump sum that can only be paid in advance.

[huntervixen]

Stripping this issue back to the very basics, I think we can all agree the system of firearm licensing and overall administration just doesn't work in this country, really it's just not fit for purpose.

A thorough top down review is required to give us a solid foundation for the future of our sport......That said, I really can't see this, or any other future UK government seeding control of firearms away from the police, far too paranoid for that sensible suggestion.

Our current regs, were some can have pistols (hunters) and others can't (target shooters).......unless its a pre 1919 sec 7........Semi auto rifles above .22lr are banned as the devil's work.....but semi auto shotguns are allowed, it's all just a confusing bloody nonsense!

That said, what do other governments do with firearm control, does anyone have a system of Civilian Firearm regs that work well and we could use as a future blueprint for ours?

[Sandgroper]

Stripping this issue back to the very basics, I think we can all agree the system of firearm licensing and overall administration just doesn't work in this country, really it's just not fit for purpose.

A thorough top down review is required to give us a solid foundation for the future of our sport......That said, I really can't see this, or any other future UK government seeding control of firearms away from the police, far too paranoid for that sensible suggestion.

Our current regs, were some can have pistols (hunters) and others can't (target shooters).......unless its a pre 1919 sec 7........Semi auto rifles above .22lr are banned as the devil's work.....but semi auto shotguns are allowed, it's all just a confusing bloody nonsense!

That said, what do other governments do with firearm control, does anyone have a system of Civilian Firearm regs that work well and we could use as a future blueprint for ours?

NZ and Canada spring to mind.