New ACPO letter revised after talks with BASC

[phaedra1106]

Anyone who has read the re-issued letter put out by ACPO and the CA will be aware of the concerns raised regarding its implication that any visit made by police could be random and not specifically intelligence led. BASC were working with ACPO regarding the original letter and the re-issued version was put out while they were still in talks with ACPO.

Posted on Pigeon Watch by David (BASC)

"BASC were concerned that previous comments in the letter currently circulating had implied that visits could be random. With other shooting organisations particularly those which are members of the umbrella group the British Shooting Sports Council we have sought clarification and a new and clearer letter.

BASC has worked to ensure:

· Any unannounced visit must be intelligence based – they cannot be random.
· That the home owner is given a clear and reasoned explanation for the visit
· That none of this restricts the home owner’s right to refuse entry.

All BASC members on email will receive the new copy and it will also be on our web site, I will post a link tomorrow, but as I am out of the office all day it may not be until the evening, never the less of course I will be more than happy if any of you want to post the link as soon as its live.

David"

There's now a new letter from ACPO (dated 11-11-2014) which addresses the original concerns and corrects the issues raised by BASC.

A copy of it is available here, http://basc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2 ... 101114.pdf

[dromia]

Thought it was the countryside alliance that sorted this out at Downing street a week or so ago along with the stopping of the shop an FAC holder hotline.

These bloody shooting organisations are as bad as the political parties when it comes to spinning a line.

Who actually got this changed?

What a bloody fiasco.

[karen]

And yet other organisations who don't claim credit when they do stuff like this get the same reaction

[dromia]

If the organisations would just be upfront and honest about who does what and when it would be lot easier for shooters to see who actually is representing them and who is doing the spin.

FFS you have work hard to obtain such levels of obfuscation and lack of clarity, it shouldn't be this difficult surely.

WE NEED ONE NATIONAL ORGANISATION TO REPRESENT US THAT IS MEMBERSHIP LED.

Why is that so difficult for them all if they truly want to help shooting and gun ownership

[phaedra1106]

Yes, the CA got involved after the first letter and released a revised version, unfortunately this was done while BASC were still talking to ACPO and the resulting CA/ACPO letter still implied vists could be on a random basis and not intelligence led only.

BASC probably should have said something when the CA/ACPO letter was released but as I don't work for them I don't know why they didn't. I thought David BASC was a member on here as well as the PW forum but I can't see him in the members list. The thread on PW can be found here, http://forums.pigeonwatch.co.uk/forums/ ... -and-acpo/

[Gaz]

This is unbelievably petty by BASC. Compare that letter to the one here http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/09 ... ce/?page=1

The only changes I can see are that the CA logos have been clipped off the top of the original, and the deletion of the word "largely" (as in, it's gone from saying "largely intelligence led" to "intelligence led") from page 2 of the letter.

This changes nothing in practice. All BASC have done is get the same letter issued without the CA logos so they have something to send BASC members about the hotline being scrapped without losing face.

[dromia]

How pathetic can you get, competing over the woes of shooters. What a disgraceful carry on.

From what I see BASC, NRA and the rest roll over initially and offer compliance advice. The CA gets stuck in and negotiates changes and the abolishment of the hotline. A week later BASC claim the same victory from "their" negotiations which amounts to the changing of one word.

What I can see from this is that a pro active approach works, it may not always get results but it lets the powers that be know that shooting representation is not dead. BASC, The NRA and anyone else needs to stop being appeasers, have more confidence in the cause, take the gun ownership agenda to the government in a responsible way, and fight the battles not just the ones they think they can claim spin from.

As organisations they are contemptible, I still have respect for the hard working individuals in these organisations that deliver for gun owners every day but I'm sorry but the bodies you belong to are rotten and this can only be from the top down, your achievements seem to be inspite of who you work for not because of them.

I shall be watching the Countryside Alliance with interest as I am thinking that they would be a the best place for me to put my membership fees

[meles meles]

*Takes note*

[karen]

How pathetic can you get, competing over the woes of shooters. What a disgraceful carry on.

From what I see BASC, NRA and the rest roll over initially and offer compliance advice.

etc etc etc. aaarggh

But you don't KNOW what the NRA and all the rest have done so your attack on them is again out of order.

Now I don't know either what they did but I'm positive they did something - just because they don't shout it from the rooftops and "claim spin" from it does not mean they weren't involved in some way.

Obviously nothing I can say is ever going to change your fixed views on the NRA so not sure why I'm wasting my time

[ovenpaa]

Karen you are quite right, we do not know what the NRA and the rest have done.