The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

If the NRA and BASC are not going to fight this then we should vote with our feet as they say and go somewhere else for insurance etc.

I let my membership lapse when the RSGB decided to thro in the towel to OFCOM on many issues they should have been fighting for.
Nothing to do with shooting but same lax attitude from an "old boys network".

I will seriously consider not renewing my BASC membership in January and I will tell them why.

If the BASC cannot put their arses on the line and get proper lawyers involved to fight this they are not worth a penny. I havent seen anyone from BASC or the NRA on UK media pushing our side. They have just been telling shooters what we already know and what point is that.

Mark

More cost for shooters, where will it end?

I think UKIP will do more to help shooters than Basc

R4CER wrote:I think UKIP will do more to help shooters than Basc

I'm inclined to think that neither will do much for us - that's not a dig at UKIP but we're just such a small minority versus the uninformed greater (by number) electorate, that there's nothing to be gained by any party or politician standing up for us specifically.

To my mind the only way for firearms law to be amended to our benefit would be for the powers that be to streamline it, get rid of the bureaucracy and license the person and not the firearm - ie "Joe Bloggs has been determined fit to be trusted with firearms" - end of. I'd imagine there'd be a significant reduction in work load if variations were done away with (as in buy / sell whatever you want whenever you want), and grants would surely be speeded up if there was only the licensee being checked out (my grant to and fro'd for 4 weeks arguing about 3 22LR's, not the 3 30 cal rifles oh no - the rimfires )

In this ideal fantasy land it'd be just a short step to "well Joe Bloggs is fit to be trusted, why not full bore semi autos (hell even full auto) and handguns".

And you know what, I don't care that full auto has nothing to do with target shooting (although I could make an argument for it in practical shooting - burst fire that target, points scored for hits in "A" zone?) - if some one is safe and wants one - then why the hell not.

Well said OP. It never fails to amaze me the apathy in our shooting comunity! I give it 10 years till they've been able to price most if us out of our sport!

What scares me is two things;

1. They will try to recover the cost of the public IT system from within the fees. As everyone knows, government outsourced IT projects are, without exception, dismal failures that cost three times the agreed amount. On a good day. Did I say three? I meant thirty-three.

2. The initial changes aren't themselves that bad, but the policy of reviewing every year means they are only going to go one way, with no mechanism for looking at it again if it gets to, say, £400 for a firearm grant.

I'm off to compose an intelligent response to the consultation doc...

Just wait and see what happens if Labour get in, a price hoik will be the least of our worries...

ovenpaa wrote:Just wait and see what happens if Labour get in, a price hoik will be the least of our worries...

Jeesuz I hope they don't get in - and not just for shootings sake.

I'm hoping however that the SNP destroys Labours support in Scotland and therefore they (Labour) and the Lib Dems don't have enough seats to form a majority.

Of course, there's a chance that the Tories and UKIP can't form one either (assuming of course that no one party gets past the post) - then who knows what happens then. All four of em in power and no one in opposition - haha a "unity" government, my ar5e!

I am rather torn over this, whilst nobody likes a fee rise the simple fact is there has been none since 2001, we can't get around that. We might not like it but in this era of austerity it does us little good in a PR sense digging our heals in and saying "NO under all circumstances". We do have to be mindful of general public opinion outside of the shooting world, our shooting organisations are probably considering that angle when participating in this process. How ever much it grates we do need to be magnanimous or risk a significant public backlash.

Also I want the new eCommerce system whilst Government IT projects can be notorious for problems the benefits are now outweighing the risks. Also with tight project management and sticking to established technologies the risks can be held down, certainly I would be looking towards the successful DVLA eCommerce roll out. Is there possible synergies in reusing technology developed for the DVLA in the firearms/shotgun eCommerce system.

A strong push for ten year renewals would be good as well, it would save money as the various forces would not need to burn as much fuel driving around doing visits as issue raised in the consultation document. It would reduce the blow of an increased fee for us as well. More upfront but cheaper over ten years, that seems fair to me.

Also if they are talking annual review which actually has a benefit in that we would no-longer have this once every decade large fee rise shock. We need to make sure that are governing and support organisations are full members of that review board not just advisors so we have a foot in the door and argument to keep any future rises at or close to inflation.

I can retire in 9 years time. It's unlikely, but a possibility. Either way, as big an optimist as I am, I do not envisage spending my retirement shooting....