No surprise

[ColinD]

EL I can't argue with your mind set, and coming from the Fire and rescue you know that there's no such thing as a accident, it's an incident (RTI for example) there's always someone at fault, or so it seems that's the way insurance works nowadays

But and here's the but incidents do happen, so please get some third party cover just incase , it ain't that expensive, mine even covers my shooting equipment for accidental (ops) cover

 

[Salopian]

I think we may be digressing a little ?

No doubt in my mind that firearms grant needs a good spring clean and the ACPO or APCC&CC need to start thinking smart and get on the case properly .

Who remembers the debacle that we now have with Health surveys instigated by Lincolnshire Police and a band wagon jumped on by every Police Licensing authority now even though it is not a LEGAL requirement? This has clogged up the grant system no end leading to GP's refusing to conform , Licensing Authorities refusing to grant , who is the unfortunate one in this scenario ? You a taxpayer that is funding the Police whilst they twiddle their thumbs and say we need more money and more resources. No you don't , you need to obey the letter of the law like law abiding licence holders do , and get on with your job.

If you read the online survey it is actually political garbage written by an untrained monkey. But we do need representation and we do need a voice .

 

[bostonmick]

Don't get the link between this and stopping gun crime, which is what we're discussing here. I personally don't have insurance for mine and don't particularly feel a need to, but I don't see how either having it or not will stop a lone wolf committing such attrocities. If someone is going to do that sort of thing, NOT having insurance won't be any guage of who has a gun and is responsible or not more than having the licence they need before they even buy it, assuming it's all above board in the first place. If it's all hooky and bought off a bloke in an alley for scrupulous reasons, nothing is going to police that other than the police.

It was more to do with the suggestion of cpsa involvement.i am not a fan of them although a member but that is purely for the insurance that comes with it to hopefully protect others in case of an accident.shows consideration for others

I think we may be digressing a little ?

No doubt in my mind that firearms grant needs a good spring clean and the ACPO or APCC&CC need to start thinking smart and get on the case properly .

Who remembers the debacle that we now have with Health surveys instigated by Lincolnshire Police and a band wagon jumped on by every Police Licensing authority now even though it is not a LEGAL requirement? This has clogged up the grant system no end leading to GP's refusing to conform , Licensing Authorities refusing to grant , who is the unfortunate one in this scenario ? You a taxpayer that is funding the Police whilst they twiddle their thumbs and say we need more money and more resources. No you don't , you need to obey the letter of the law like law abiding licence holders do , and get on with your job.

If you read the online survey it is actually political garbage written by an untrained monkey. But we do need representation and we do need a voice .

I think you might find it was durham that started the doctors reports and lincolnshire jumped on their bandwagon.i am in lincs and did a renewal without gp report while durham were insisting

The current system is a mess.the home office issues guidance only to be interpreted however each force feels fit.the gp thing was introduced by forces with no discussion or agreement by the gmc.there needs to be rules one of which should be if you were found guilty of violence of any kind or as in the case of plymouth anger issues you will not hold firearms full stop.bit as i said earlier as some members of the force have been found to be at fault that should be an end to it as it was not a system fail but a human one.

 

[Jan Powell]

Who remembers the debacle that we now have with Health surveys instigated by Lincolnshire Police and a band wagon jumped on by every Police Licensing authority now even though it is not a LEGAL requirement? This has clogged up the grant system no end leading to GP's refusing to conform , Licensing Authorities refusing to grant , who is the unfortunate one in this scenario?

I’ll refer you back to my previous post for the answer to this question:

The Home Office provides ‘guidance’ to police forces when it comes to firearms licensing implementation. Each interprets this as they see fit.

 

[ColinD]

And therein lyes the problem, time the HO made the rules and not guidlines and then everyone would be singing from the same hymn book.

It's the same as a central data place for all FAC/SGC holders, that still hasn't materialized has it

 

[Jan Powell]

It's the same as a central data place for all FAC/SGC holders, that still hasn't materialized has it

Yes it has. It’s called the National Firearms Licensing Management System. It’s been in existence for years.

 

[MartynB]

If you read the online survey it is actually political garbage written by an untrained monkey. But we do need representation and we do need a voice .

100% agree , it’s been written to guide the non clued up along a very specific path . You could almost think the authors have started with the answers they want and then worked backwards . 

 

[bostonmick]

Yes it’s has. It’s called the National Firearms Licensing Management System. It’s been in existence for years.

Obviously not working then.firearms could be run on definite rules could be administered from a central point local police still do the visits and check guns but unlike now everyone would know what the rules were and work to them.if all the vehicles and driving licensing can be done from a central point dvla with millions of pieces of data on file i am sure the 500k or so of certificate holders would not be unsurmountable.

I think we may be digressing a little ?

No doubt in my mind that firearms grant needs a good spring clean and the ACPO or APCC&CC need to start thinking smart and get on the case properly .

Who remembers the debacle that we now have with Health surveys instigated by Lincolnshire Police and a band wagon jumped on by every Police Licensing authority now even though it is not a LEGAL requirement? This has clogged up the grant system no end leading to GP's refusing to conform , Licensing Authorities refusing to grant , who is the unfortunate one in this scenario ? You a taxpayer that is funding the Police whilst they twiddle their thumbs and say we need more money and more resources. No you don't , you need to obey the letter of the law like law abiding licence holders do , and get on with your job.

If you read the online survey it is actually political garbage written by an untrained monkey. But we do need representation and we do need a voice .

I sent an email to not only my mp but also to the lincs police and crime commissioner expressing my thoughts on how when the police made errors in this case the shooting public are to be penalised for being law abiding.now as far as i was aware this survey that is out at the moment was started by some pcc's but the reply i got back stated the pcc could not have any input into police procedures and could not make any changes.well why then are they spearheading this latest nonesense.

 

[Jan Powell]

Obviously not working then.firearms could be run on definite rules could be administered from a central point local police still do the visits and check guns but unlike now everyone would know what the rules were and work to them.if all the vehicles and driving licensing can be done from a central point dvla with millions of pieces of data on file i am sure the 500k or so of certificate holders would not be unsurmountable.

I think you misunderstand how the system works. The NFLMS is nothing more than a certificate holders database that all police forces have access to 24/7. Licensing is solely a matter for the host force who interpret the Home Office guidelines as they see fit.

There’s several good reasons why police forces rather than a central agency make licensing decisions. Certainly there’s scope for streamlining the procedure but fixed rules as far as licensing management is concerned probably wouldn’t benefit the sport or many certificate holders.

 

[bostonmick]

I think you misunderstand how the system works. The NFLMS is nothing more than a certificate holders database that all police forces have access to 24/7. Licensing is solely a matter for the host force who interpret the Home Office guidelines as they see fit.

There’s several good reasons why police forces rather than a central agency make licensing decisions. Certainly there’s scope for streamlining the procedure but fixed rules as far as licensing management is concerned probably wouldn’t benefit the sport or many certificate holders.

Maybe there are reasons.but look at the current system.if a chief constable is anti shooting then your chance of getting a certificate becomes somewhat of a postcode lottery.as far as i could see when i last looked police sent a request to your gp for medical report and pay any cost if no response in 21 days it should be taken as no problem and process the application.now quite how that can be interpreted as tell the applicant to get a report in advance and pay the cost i cant see.of course all the while this situation continues our organisations sit on their hands and do nothing and some have vast amounts of members cash sitting in their accounts why is it not used to defend us.every time there is an incident with a gun the first cry before anything is known is ban guns or tighten the rules well at this rate we will be tightened out of existence. 

 

[Jan Powell]

Maybe there are reasons.but look at the current system.if a chief constable is anti shooting then your chance of getting a certificate becomes somewhat of a postcode lottery.as far as i could see when i last looked police sent a request to your gp for medical report and pay any cost if no response in 21 days it should be taken as no problem and process the application.now quite how that can be interpreted as tell the applicant to get a report in advance and pay the cost i cant see.of course all the while this situation continues our organisations sit on their hands and do nothing and some have vast amounts of members cash sitting in their accounts why is it not used to defend us.every time there is an incident with a gun the first cry before anything is known is ban guns or tighten the rules well at this rate we will be tightened out of existence. 

I kind of see what your saying but I think your being a little dramatic. There’s no great conspiracy, either on the part of chief officers, firearms licensing departments or the Home Office to deny us certificates. They’re trying to interpret the guidelines in such a way as to ensure public safety whilst allowing the shooting industry to function.

Anyway, that’s enough from me as this is starting to feel like work and I get enough of that during the week!

 

[Robden]

I kind of see what your saying but I think your being a little dramatic. There’s no great conspiracy, either on the part of chief officers, firearms licensing departments or the Home Office to deny us certificates. They’re trying to interpret the guidelines in such a way as to ensure public safety whilst allowing the shooting industry to function.

Anyway, that’s enough from me as this is starting to feel like work and I get enough of that during the week!

Jan, are you, or your other half, current or ex job?

 

[ColinD]

Yes it has. It’s called the National Firearms Licensing Management System. It’s been in existence for years.

But not working as it should, different forces can't see others data so I have been told

https://data.gov.uk/dataset/666e2263-ee6d-4ffc-82e1-c815793a2845/national-firearms-licensing-management-system

 

[Wonko the Sane]

I think you misunderstand how the system works. The NFLMS is nothing more than a certificate holders database that all police forces have access to 24/7. Licensing is solely a matter for the host force who interpret the Home Office guidelines as they see fit.

There’s several good reasons why police forces rather than a central agency make licensing decisions. Certainly there’s scope for streamlining the procedure but fixed rules as far as licensing management is concerned probably wouldn’t benefit the sport or many certificate holders.

I have mentioned many times that allowing the lowest echelon of the legal system to "interpret" the law is a recipe for disaster.  That applies to any area and you know absolutely that the vehicle and building codes are not "guidelines" to be "interpreted" by some local *expletive deleted*.  Gun owners, the shooting community, and the orgs are doing themselves AND the public a great disservice, and occasional damage, by not demanding defining law and not some BS who knows WTF guidelines.

JMO of course but the US is rife with lax or no enforcement of extant reasonable and rational gun laws and the result is easily seen.