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

All

The above piece of legislation is now effective. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1945/made

It introduces a new, single form to cover grant and renewal of Firearm and Shotgun Certificates and another new form for variations of FACs. The downloadable versions of the form are fairly untidy. I hope to have a clean version on the NRA website in the next few days.

It also makes a couple of changes to the procedures. References are no longer required from Club officials for Members of Home Office Approved clubs. There is a statement that your GP will be informed by letter of a successful application for a FAC / SGC.

I've read the new legislation about 3 times and I'm still spotting little wrinkles in it. I hope to have a short briefing note out in the next NRA Journal.

Iain
NRA Firearms Liaison Officer

IainWR wrote:There is a statement that your GP will be informed by letter of a successful application for a FAC / SGC.

Dear GP, or more likely reception team, temp admin staff, passing nurses, sharp-eyed patients, etc.

This named person, whose address you can access with a couple of clicks, stores firearms and ammunition at home.

Yours aye
Firearms Licensing
PS. Please save this information onto the NHS database where any of its 3 million employees can access it on the flimsiest of pretexts.



Why the hell do we bother with security, anyway?

Thanks for the post, Ian. Have I been in a cave, or has this been kept quiet? It's the first I've heard of it.

It just dropped on my desk from BSSC (who do Home Office negotiation for all the major governing bodies). I knew in general terms that the forms were changing, but wasn't aware at all that this was coming.

Iain

IainWR wrote:There is a statement that your GP will be informed by letter of a successful application for a FAC / SGC.

Really don't agree with this. I have been to my GP once in the last 13 years, they don't know anything about me; why should they be notified that I have a SGC and a FAC? Not to mention the data security aspect of it is very worrying!

ETA: Why wasn't this a public consultation? BASC doesn't represent *ALL* certificate holders.. grumble grumble...

The discussions have been going on for several years and a wide body of opinion was sought and given. It was relatively low key and benefitted from that to a large extent. The discussions sought to tidy up and clear away many of the anomalies and irregularities contained in Guidance and have been relatively successful. Attention was focussed on aspects that could be changed without needing any legislation, thereby keeping things out of the hands of politicians and leaving them to be dealt with by civil servants who could take a measured and reasonable view of matters. As an example, it was pointed out that restricting the number of cartridges one could buy was ludicrous when there was already a limit on the number permitted to be held. Rational thought prevailed, not something one could bank on when dealing with politicians. A list has been drawn up of further changes that would be useful, but which cannot be enacted without recourse to law. Those changes will be put to the Home Secretary and now have the backing of the administrators whose role it is to advise...

It's a slow process, but progress is being made. Not everyone will agree with everything, and there will always be some trade-offs but on the whole things are improving. Perhaps it is fair to say that retrenchment and consolidation may be giving way to recovery.

Gotcha! That all makes sense, and actually seems like a sensible approach even if there are some trade-offs along the way as you say.

Thanks for the explanation :)

If the trade-offs involve getting GPs to play the part of Blockwarts and break their Hippocratic Oaths, then they go too far. Not to mention the obvious security risk what with anyone in any part of the NHS being able to access your records, complete with "ACHTUNG GUN OWNER!" stamped on them.

One thing that really worries me about firearms licensing administration and so on is that the police deliberately seek to keep ordinary shooters - the people directly affected by their mad control schemes - as far away from the regulatory process as possible. Those of our NGBs who bother trying to influence proceedings don't really seem to have much impact at all.

Read the minutes of the ACPO FELWG. They really do believe that every shooter is a potential criminal and that it's their job to trip us up and criminalise us.

Ooman: the GPs are advised after the fact, not afore. They therefore cannot block, merely advise Mr Plod that in a certain case there may be grounds to review and reconsider the grant. Which way round would you prefer it to be?

Re ACPO, we'd better not comment on what our thoughts are upon a profit making company comprised of public servants who seek to make rather than enforce legislation.

My concern with this is that shooters will not attend the services provided by (what was) the NHS. Failing to seek help or advice when feeling out of sorts can eventually lead to a form of depression. A downward spiral which in a tiny number of cases, without help and intervention, could result in firearms being used to take life.
Curious how this would pan out if you turned up with your partner and asked for marrige councilling etc?

I have accessed counciling services twice whilst a fac holder, I doubt I will in future..

DM