It's not a shotgun 'licence' ...
- Thread starter Trapped
- Start date
Help Support Clay, Trap, Skeet Shooting Forum:
eightlittlebits
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2024
- Messages
- 59
Correct, and yet it's a firearms licensing department. Not sure it functionally makes any difference. 
You can drive a car if you have a driving licence, you can own a shotgun if you have a shotgun certificate.
You can drive a car if you have a driving licence, you can own a shotgun if you have a shotgun certificate.
You are licensed to drive a car , you are licensed to own a firearm , the certificate is the equivalent of a vehicles V5 .
Most of those involved in gun crime have neither 
Does it really matter ?
It is still relatively easy to lose it, Licence or Certificate !
Everyone calls it a license and the document functions as a license would. Despite this, there’s always always some know-it-all (usually with a nasally voice) determined to push the ‘it’s ackshually a CERTIFICATE’ line.
I’m bored of it, I will continue to call it a license - as will everyone else that I know.
I’m bored of it, I will continue to call it a license - as will everyone else that I know.
Well, sort of, but not exactly. The V5C refers to the car. So if you've got two cars, you've got 2 V5Cs, whereas if you have one of those shotgun documents, all your guns are on the one. But your point is well made.
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2023
- Messages
- 133
Martinj
Well-known member
)General Skanky
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2024
- Messages
- 119
So to mix it up just lovely, is it therefore correct English to say, you are licensed to own a shotgun because you have a certificate? 
I don't care one way or another 
Certificate or Licence........it's going to be bloomin expensive whichever way you look at it !
£125 doesn’t seem to bad.Certificate or Licence........it's going to be bloomin expensive whichever way you look at it !
Factor in the ever increasing Doctor rip off, which is fast reaching £100 !
For me, even £225 every 5 years isn’t expensive for a medical review, a FEO review and a grant. But I appreciate that everyone is different.
I am trying to justify the increased costs. My Doctors are of the 'people shouldn't have guns' brigade. However, I did eventually manage to obtain copies of my medical records (to which I am entitled) and forwarded those to the local FEO. Why should I also be required to engage a private company to complete a proforma, by someone who does not even know me, and pay for that ? WHY do the FEO's need to visit my home at the time of renewal. They (should) have details of ANY changes to my circumstances regarding my security arrangements or the number of guns that I have. In 60 years of gun ownership, there have only been 3 incidents that required an FEO to take action. 2 where they thought I still had guns that I had sold. I always keep hard copy of any transactions, so that easily proved the fault was NOT mine. The only other incident involved a 'rifle' that was not on my Firearms Certificate. As it was a Webley bolt action .410 shotgun, it wouldn't be. It is very sociable having a cuppa and a chat with the FEO, but does that serve any useful purpose ? I do not believe it does.
Looking at it logically:
Fortunately, it doesn’t matter about the doctors opinion, it’s a legal right. While they can refuse to do the review, there are other companies that do it as you say. It seems reasonable considering how one’s health may have changed in 5 years.
Neither the doctor or the third party need to know you, it’s a straight forward objective review, that looks for specific issues. The last thing we want is it to be subjective.
The visit to your house is to check to see if your circumstances have changed since it was last granted.
While I can understand why it’s frustrating, I can easily see the logic and reasoning behind it all.
eightlittlebits
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2024
- Messages
- 59
The whole idea of the marker on your medical record was that the police would already have been notified about any relevant changes to your health or medical conditions, thus would not need to do the proforma every 5 years.
The fact they seem to have made participation in even that turns the whole thing into a farce.
As I know several retired GP's, the reason they want nothing to do with the Firearms situation, is because they do not want to be held accountable, should the'wheel come off'. Portsmouth was a classic example. The blame lay fair and square with the Police. The fallout from that was then over zealous Police Officers seizing guns left, right, and centre. Taking the heat off their current situation. I was doing firearms enquiries back in the day pre Hungerford. They were done by front line Bobbies back then. The entire Firearms and Explosives team were all Police Officers. The only thing that held up grants or renewals, was the Officer dealing with it, delaying his report submission. We still had handguns back then too. A phone call to the applicants gun club secretary would usually highlight any issues with the applicants behaviour, as they saw them using their weapons. From start to finish, if took no more than 3 weeks, and the Certificate would be posted out. It seemed to work well back then, and I fail to see why it could not be the same today. Ironically, when there has been a major incident involving firearms owners going 'off the rails', their local FEO has often been aware, but action has not been taken, for one reason or another. It seems they could have been prevented, but the outcome has ALWAYS been the same, the legitimate gun owner being penalised for the actions of one mentally disturbed individual.
