We're on the edge of an ACPO media campaign to raise fees

[Agentfunky]

Lets be honest here though, what fee hasn't increased for 11-12 years? I think we've just been very lucky (depending on how you see it) that no one has bothered to address this in so long. The problem is now its been so long since it has increased that the proposed increase is going to seem far more disproportionate than had it been gradually raised a few £ every couple of years.

I don't support in any way shape or form full cost recovery though. Firearms licensing is supposedly to protect the general public from us rampant gun maniacs :roll: As they're the ones 'reaping the benefits' they should be paying the lion share.

They need to make the system more efficient before raising any fees. There is a lot of un-necessary paperwork and duplication, as well as conditioning that can be onerous and without statute to back it up.

The process of varying a firearms certificate is also extremely cumbersome and riddled with bureaucracy, and the whole "one for one" procedure is the same.

Furthermore the legislation and guidance is often contradictory and the lack of consistency across forces is a source of frustration.

While we have recently seen some very welcome moves to bring consistency (such as the use of the AOLQ condition) there is a lot of room for improvement.

The FLOs do a good job in many cases (I certainly have no complaints about them as officers) but the systems used make the whole process rather onerous for most FAC holders and probably the FLOs as well. If we are to be charged more money, then we really should only be agreeing to such a proposal where there have been significant improvements in the overall efficiency and relevance of the licensing and regulatory process.

What I would vehemently oppose is an increase in fees simply to fund a bureaucratic process which is cumbersome, inefficient and without real benefit. To accept such an increase in these circumstances merely means the cost of administering such inefficiencies is passed onto the people who are not the cause of the problem.....i.e. us as FAC holders.

[Agentfunky]

@HantsChiefAndy: About to do interview for BBC Newcastle about gun licensing fees. No increase since January 2001 - long overdue for a review"

He can p*** right off!! 22 weeks mine took! Get it down to 7 or 8 and I'll gladly pay more. But you don't agree to pay more in a restaurant after they've just served you a massive s*** in a bun.

I wouldn't necessarily tell them to p*** off , but you make a valid point about the lack of efficiency.

[Polchraine]

We already pay for a police service through or tax and council tax. The payment is for the services the police provide to the population as a whole. I do no use the "lost property service" for example, but I still have to pay for it. If a house is burgled the owner is not invoiced for police time - it comes from a contribution that everyone makes.

So, why should gun owners have to pay anything for the service? It is part of normal policing.

[Sim G]

We already pay for a police service through or tax and council tax. The payment is for the services the police provide to the population as a whole. I do no use the "lost property service" for example, but I still have to pay for it. If a house is burgled the owner is not invoiced for police time - it comes from a contribution that everyone makes.

So, why should gun owners have to pay anything for the service? It is part of normal policing.

And that is exactly it in a nutshell.

I agree that licensing needs a review, badly. But that doesn't involve a fee increase, which is in no doubt an attempt to raise revenue in the face of massive cuts.

[Bullseye]

As most of us know, ACPO want to raise FAC fees to some stupidly high level, on the grounds that they say it costs more to administer FACs and SGCs than they receive in fees. Home Office minister Damian Green rejected ACPO's bid to raise fees from (either this month or next month, I forget which) - a solid victory for the CA and BASC ... and Chf Con Marsh, not happy at being thwarted, seems to be trying to get a campaign going to raise FAC/SGC fees.

He's due to appear on BBC Newcastle later today to publicly call for fees to be raised, and I've watched him engaging with MPs on Twitter urging them to support his campaign. I'm not (yet) monitoring other senior police firearms licensing people, but it looks very much to me that Marsh, denied his cosy backroom deal to stitch us up, is determined to get his way and isn't above trying to drum up a public lobby to increase fees.

His main line seems to be that firearms licensing receives a "huge subsidy" and that fees are "overdue" to be raised. I'm sure that BASC and the CA have a plan to counter Marsh ... but what can we, ordinary shooters, do to counter this? If ACPO manage to get a public campaign going against us, what else are they going to start publicly shouting for - moving everything to Section 1? More restrictions?

It costs £10 to obtain every bit of history on you from the police... under data protection act.

applying for an FAC etc is for the benefit for the public, not for us! the firearm department should run to make ends meet, not run at a profit business. the ACPO is running out of areas to sew pockets on to fill with more cash! its .303 proof with all that money!

The media keep saying an SGC is a "light touch" and anyone can be granted one, even a convicted thief (stealing wood from work)!!! they wanted section 2 shotgun to be scrapped and anyone with suspended sentence to fall as a prohibited person... for 5 years... back in 2010.

So I wonder what happens if they moved section 2 to 1, plus move section 5 handguns and self-loading rifles onto section 1 aswell I wonder if the media & gun control will start sound off again!

I remember when the MSER came into force and the fee on explosive certificate!! the registered store certificate when up by 10 times... and a fee on the explosive certificates about £250 for a grant for 5 years if MSER ticket held!!

[meles meles]

And to whom ought we to complain about this band of brigands (ACPO). Write to our MPs? Some oversight body ? Or are they, literally, a law unto themselves?

[Bullseye]

And to whom ought we to complain about this band of brigands (ACPO). Write to our MPs? Some oversight body ? Or are they, literally, a law unto themselves?

many police & crime commissioners are still cllr of political party like tories, libs etc... its wrong to have political parties in policing it always goes wrong...

they say being a police officer and Cllr is conflicting, but so is being top civi employees and being Cllr.

[meles meles]

Interesting non sequiter there...

[davidh195]

The thing that bothers me if it's correct is that I was told that a policeman should not express a political opinion "after it occurred in an interview for sg cert."

Could anybody clarify if there is any truth in it as it would be handy to know at the moment!.

David

[Blackstuff]

Lets be honest here though, what fee hasn't increased for 11-12 years? I think we've just been very lucky (depending on how you see it) that no one has bothered to address this in so long. The problem is now its been so long since it has increased that the proposed increase is going to seem far more disproportionate than had it been gradually raised a few £ every couple of years.

I don't support in any way shape or form full cost recovery though. Firearms licensing is supposedly to protect the general public from us rampant gun maniacs :roll: As they're the ones 'reaping the benefits' they should be paying the lion share.

They need to make the system more efficient before raising any fees. There is a lot of un-necessary paperwork and duplication, as well as conditioning that can be onerous and without statute to back it up.

The process of varying a firearms certificate is also extremely cumbersome and riddled with bureaucracy, and the whole "one for one" procedure is the same.

Furthermore the legislation and guidance is often contradictory and the lack of consistency across forces is a source of frustration.

While we have recently seen some very welcome moves to bring consistency (such as the use of the AOLQ condition) there is a lot of room for improvement.

The FLOs do a good job in many cases (I certainly have no complaints about them as officers) but the systems used make the whole process rather onerous for most FAC holders and probably the FLOs as well. If we are to be charged more money, then we really should only be agreeing to such a proposal where there have been significant improvements in the overall efficiency and relevance of the licensing and regulatory process.

What I would vehemently oppose is an increase in fees simply to fund a bureaucratic process which is cumbersome, inefficient and without real benefit. To accept such an increase in these circumstances merely means the cost of administering such inefficiencies is passed onto the people who are not the cause of the problem.....i.e. us as FAC holders.

You've got my vote and between a combination of the poor economy and police force FLD's, such as my own 'dropping the ball' i think we've got them over a barrel at the moment. Had Atherton not gone beserk and the economy not been given the 'Joan Collins special', i think we'd be looking at at least doubling of fees about now