Page 4 of 14
Re: Unprofessional behaviour of Met FET
Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 9:27 am
by DL.
If I was an FLO I would insist that new applicants only apply for one rifle and when they could produce supporting letters from the both paternal and maternal grandmothers accompanied by a school report alongside targets to show progress would I consider allowing them to have a six month wait after paying for a variation to have a second rifle.
Re: Unprofessional behaviour of Met FET
Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 9:38 am
by Blackstuff
You forgot the drug free urine sample and customary funny handshake!
Re: Unprofessional behaviour of Met FET
Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 9:58 am
by DL.

I did forget!
Re: Unprofessional behaviour of Met FET
Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 10:11 am
by lapua338
Did the applicant write a good justification for all he requested, or just say I need all these guns because the club require me to have them?
Absolutely
Seems an odd club to me. You should gravitate towards the guns and disciplines you enjoy shooting not be told what to shoot.
Don't understand the comment. For example, you express an interest to join a .22LR small bore club. You serve your probation and full membership is granted. You turn up with a 9mm lever release and have an expectation for the club to accommodate you. You've joined the wrong club.
he has been able to borrow club guns to take part in these comps for the last year, why can he not now continue to borrow 3 guns
Why should he have to? He's committed to the club and has good reason for his own guns. It's deliberate unlawful obstruction. It's incomprehensible to me why the mindset of imposing any conditions to restrict someone's lawful activity is tolerated by so many fellow shooters.
Re: Unprofessional behaviour of Met FET
Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 10:24 am
by bradaz11
lapua338 wrote:
he has been able to borrow club guns to take part in these comps for the last year, why can he not now continue to borrow 3 guns
Why should he have to? He's committed to the club and has good reason for his own guns. It's deliberate unlawful obstruction. It's incomprehensible to me why the mindset of imposing any conditions to restrict someone's lawful activity is tolerated by so many fellow shooters.
probably because most people see it as a bit of a defense for us, while there may not be a law against it, it's a damage limitation of a sort. you prove you can have your licence, you then are granted 3-5 guns, you then use those for the next 6-12 months and then ask for more.
Ive had an FAC for over 15 years, I still wouldn't expect to put in a variation for 7 guns and have it granted.
Re: Unprofessional behaviour of Met FET
Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 10:42 am
by Kungfugerbil
Whether you (or he) likes it or not, there is an element of building relationships. I once asked for 6000 rounds of rimfire, FEO came back with "can we start with say 2.5K and review in a bit?" which seemed fine to me. On good terms with him now which I wouldn't have been if I asked for his badge and sent snottograms to his boss.
Tell the FEO you'll compromise and ask for 4 rifles and 4 moderators....then do a free one-for-one on the mods when the member starts filling his slots...
Re: Unprofessional behaviour of Met FET
Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 10:51 am
by Dark Skies
Kungfugerbil wrote:Whether you (or he) likes it or not, there is an element of building relationships. I once asked for 6000 rounds of rimfire, FEO came back with "can we start with say 2.5K and review in a bit?" which seemed fine to me. On good terms with him now which I wouldn't have been if I asked for his badge and sent snottograms to his boss.
Tell the FEO you'll compromise and ask for 4 rifles and 4 moderators....then do a free one-for-one on the mods when the member starts filling his slots...
That's an excellent compromise.
If the police are going to set arbitrary limits then the least they could do is bung in a free variation. They won't, of course, so a built in measure by the applicant takes the sting out somewhat.
I say somewhat ... no idea what Surrey's variation turnaround is like but it's months in the TVP area.
Chap in Dauntsey Guns reckons it's three days in their area (Wiltshire) - if true I'm proper envious.
Re: Unprofessional behaviour of Met FET
Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 10:56 am
by Rockhopper
At the end of the day (regardless of what the law says) if something were to go wrong it'd be the FEO who gets the flack. I'd be incredibly risk adverse if i was doing that job :-)
Re: Unprofessional behaviour of Met FET
Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:31 am
by jimbo303
Mmmm interesting situation.
I would guess, and only guess, that the Application for 7 on a first Ticket is a tad too many - regardless of the HO Guidelines, which we all know are interpreted very differently from Force to Force and FLO to FLO. I was aware of a wee rumpus in the TVP area the other year when a chap had his first renewal. He had been granted 5 slots first time around and had only filled 2 in the 5 year period. He was granted a renewal on the 2 he held but got uppitty about losing the 3 slots. The FLO and his Department felt that if he hadnt embarked on al the disciplines he had said he was doing or wanted to do within the 5 year period, then he would need to show "good reason" and submit a variation when he could demonstrate such.
I can see both sides to some extent - maybe its because my Shooting developed into different disciplines and classes over the years - to be honest as a new shooter to expect to have 7 seems a little optimistic - not least because Shooting is in my view a sport that you need to work on and develop and find your direction as well as waht discipline suits you....
My two penneth worth....
Re: Unprofessional behaviour of Met FET
Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 1:46 pm
by Mikaveli
lapua338 wrote:Before you complain too much - work out if you're actually going to buy the 7 or more you're asking for (within 12 months)
So many newbs ask for loads, then realise they'll need to spend thousands to buy everything they want straight away. 5 years later, half the slots are unfilled...
If you kick off then don't fill your FAC up, you'll look rather silly.
I suggest you read the post again and assimilate the information before posting unhelpful statements.
To maintain club ethos and integrity as a condition of membership there is an agreement to acquire appropriate firearms and ammunition to participate in all club activities. That's the "good reason". To retain full membership, members must possess the appropriate firearms and ammunition under the authority of a personal firearm certificate. It's not a "plinking" club and neither is it a "traditional" small bore target shooting club.
Historically, it was a handgun club. Following the introduction of the 1997 Firearms (Amendments) Acts, which effectively banned private possession of "short firearms", club activities have continued using pistol calibre lever action rifles (old school with no optics permitted), .22LR semi-automatic carbines, long barrelled pistols and revolvers. It is also desirable to possess iron-sighted and optic-equipped bolt action .22LR rifles/carbines for Mini Service rifle-type events.
A more "helpful" response might have been to confirm your member does intend on purchasing, and have the funds to buy the seven guns straight after the grant?
7 good (non "plinking" spec guns) could cost tens of thousands - plus glass, plus accessories. Most people don't fully account for that... especially when you start sending hundreds of pounds down range each month.
Again, if they're in a position to buy them all - go nuts. But as othes have mentioned about relationship building - if you mess your FEO about, how accommodating will they try to be in the future?