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

I don't disagree that the fee's for the next year are not worthy of causing a fuss. But it's the open ended full cost recuperation term that leaves us open for whichever govt gets in to hike the prices to an inconceivable level are what's bugging me...

TattooedGun wrote:I don't disagree that the fee's for the next year are not worthy of causing a fuss. But it's the open ended full cost recuperation term that leaves us open for whichever govt gets in to hike the prices to an inconceivable level are what's bugging me...

Agreed, it is the principle of them being able to set the prices to what ever they like in future with little to no consultation.

do they actually NEED consultation now? or currently, could they just change it?

Oh I agree an open ended full price recuperation term with little to no consultation is not acceptable which is what brings me back to the hyperbole over the NRA and BASC. In the end they are the big players in our sport and they do have a seat at the table currently as do groups like ACPO, GCN, LACS and MAG. Would you rather we left it just to the latter groups, don't get me wrong the NRA and BASC do have some questions to answer over how they represent us but they are who we have and I don't see that changing any time soon.

As I said if future rises can be steered towards keeping within the rate of inflation we won't be priced out of the sport, we need the NRA and BASC at the table however much they have failed us in certain areas or we leave it to a vociferous group of anti's.

As Alpha1 amusingly points out one tub of N140 costs more than a renewal!

As Alpha1 amusingly points out one tub of N140 costs more than a renewal!

Nothing amusing about it its a fact.

My concern is its not the price of the certificate that puts people of getting involved with the sport its the everyday price of shooting that's the killer. People just can not afford to take up shooting its just to expensive a hobby.

I may be very much in the minority here but I happen to think that BASC have dealt with the whole situation of increased licence fees rather well here in the circumstances. I don't know about the NRA or any of the other shooting organisations but certainly from what I have read BASC have done the best they could to ensure the fairest outcome for something that was inevitable and over which no one other than the Home Secretary has any control under the previous system.

I am inclined to agree. An increase in fees is actually fair - you pay for your driving license, and you pay a fair charge which reflects the cost incurred in the processing. I don't have a problem with it - shooting isn't cheap, and the cost of the license as it stands, or after this change, is OK. The punitive increases that ACPO wanted, however, are another thing - then we are being punished for being law-abiding. I am glad they were told where to stick that one!

Mr_Logic wrote:I am inclined to agree. An increase in fees is actually fair - you pay for your driving license, and you pay a fair charge which reflects the cost incurred in the processing. I don't have a problem with it - shooting isn't cheap, and the cost of the license as it stands, or after this change, is OK. The punitive increases that ACPO wanted, however, are another thing - then we are being punished for being law-abiding. I am glad they were told where to stick that one!

Hardly being told where to stick it mate. Also the open ended ability to raise the price very year is going to be the stealth killer!

acpo wanted 200+ and they rather definitely didn't get that...

What's to say in the next few years they won't!?