Should police land checks be scrapped?

[Sonicdmb73]

I have checked with a colleague in BASC's firearms team, given it's a generic query in the context of the article, and some feedback as follows:

On a 'closed/restricted' cert, you can only shoot on land which has been deemed acceptable by the Police. Your FAC may mention a primary piece of land, but you can still shoot elsewhere, if you can ascertain that the other land has been similarly signed off. The condition would likely read along the lines of “X rifle shall be used for Deer and any other legal quarry, at Smith’s Farm or land over which the licence holder has lawful authority to shoot and that has been deemed suitable by the Chief officer” etc. etc.

If a certificate holder has this 'restricted' certificate, it essentially prevents them from shooting in a jurisdiction where land is not checked. For example, if a cert holder plans to go stalking in Scotland, they need an 'open' certificate.

There is further context here:

Firearm certificate ‘open’ conditions

Conditions are a method available to police to regulate the behaviour of certificate holders. We explain what this means in practical terms.

basc.org.uk

Rifles, Calibres and Land: Advice for Firearms Enquiry Officers

A broad overview of advice and guidance related to key terminology and designed to assist police firearms enquiry officers

basc.org.uk

Hope that helps and if you are after specific advice best to contact your FEO and/or your shooting organisation.

So effectively putting a prohibitively obstructive restriction on use by nature of a postcode lottery.
For example my Son is a relatively new FAC holder. We live within easy travelling of good stalking in Scotland but he cannot use his own rifle. Yet he could use mine (or an estate rifle) and legally not be under direct supervision. As in the Law doesn't require you to be actually stood within arms reach, to be in the presence of the FAC holder who's rifle you're using.
You end up either missing out or having an argument with your FLD to get it altered. I know for a fact it was policy not to give "Open Ticket" until renewal on the old three year certificate. The three year wait was applied certainly till recently (if not still).

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Does BASC know if west Yorkshire, the met, and Wiltshire are just issuing un conditioned (with regard to land deemed suitable)FAC's on application or whether they are using historic records for new issues?

As per the article in the OP, BASC is aware that Police Scotland, North Yorkshire, Wiltshire and the Metropolitan Police Service have all scrapped land checks and BASC is encouraging other forces to follow suit.

 

[Dalua]

As per the article in the OP, BASC is aware that Police Scotland, North Yorkshire, Wiltshire and the Metropolitan Police Service have all scrapped land checks and BASC is encouraging other forces to follow suit.

Have they also stopped applying (and importantly, perhaps, started removing) territorially-restrictive conditions?
If they've actually just stopped checking land, and even if none of their own FAC-holders is territorially restricted, then FAC-holders from other constabularies who still have territorial restrictions will be in the same situtation in those English constabularies as they would be in Scotland - which is not particularly convenient.

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Have they also stopped applying (and importantly, perhaps, started removing) territorially-restrictive conditions?
If they've actually just stopped checking land, and even if none of their own FAC-holders is territorially restricted, then FAC-holders from other constabularies who still have territorial restrictions will be in the same situtation in those English constabularies as they would be in Scotland - which is not particularly convenient.

I have had some feedback for North Yorkshire from a colleague, in that the force does not check land for own cert holders and they move to open condition straight away. However if another force requests land in North Yorkshire to be checked they will do it. This is unlike Scotland where they will not check land at all. I don't have info for the other forces.

 

[Sellars]

As per the article in the OP, BASC is aware that Police Scotland, North Yorkshire, Wiltshire and the Metropolitan Police Service have all scrapped land checks and BASC is encouraging other forces to follow suit.

I read the article and wondered when did Police Scotland ever do land checks to allow them to then scrap them? Perhaps land checks were trialed in between my renewals though, I've never heard of any being done in Scotland.

 

[Liveonce]

I have had some feedback for North Yorkshire from a colleague, in that the force does not check land for own cert holders and they move to open condition straight away. However if another force requests land in North Yorkshire to be checked they will do it. This is unlike Scotland where they will not check land at all. I don't have info for the other forces.

Kent have apparently also moved to open conditions straight away, FEO informed me the other week.

 

[suffolk maverick]

Interesting timing for me- just had “safe shooter assessment” after 3.5 years of FAC to open up my ticket. Asked for some land to be cleared and they said they don’t do it any more, moving towards clearing the shooter, all arranged and done in person in less than 2 weeks. Suffolk. FEO suggested it was being done nationally.

 

[south-nofolk-stalker]

Interesting timing for me- just had “safe shooter assessment” after 3.5 years of FAC to open up my ticket. Asked for some land to be cleared and they said they don’t do it any more, moving towards clearing the shooter, all arranged and done in person in less than 2 weeks. Suffolk. FEO suggested it was being done nationally.

What’s a safe shooter assessment?

Never heard of it l!

 

[Dalua]

...moving towards clearing the shooter...

My understanding is that ever since the introduction of the FAC in 1920, this was meant to be done before grant.

 

[Mr. Gain]

A friend is expecting to receive his FAC shortly (Thames Valley Police) having had a positive interview last week, and has been told his conditions will allow him to shoot on any land for which he has permission AND that has been cleared for the cartridge in question.
I thought land clearance had been scrapped as a poor use of resources. Has anyone with a TVP FAC been in the same boat recently, and if so, how were TVP on clearing land (database? visits?)
Apologies if this has been covered, but we're on p.7 of this thread and there's a lot to read!

 

[ContinShots]

I read the article and wondered when did Police Scotland ever do land checks to allow them to then scrap them? Perhaps land checks were trialed in between my renewals though, I've never heard of any being done in Scotland.

I'm not sure if Police Scotland has ever done checks, but they completely overhauled firearms licencing in Scotland when the single force was created - which has by and large been a pretty decent thing, hence why the process runs pretty smoothly up here - and it may well be that some of the legacy forces performed land checks, while other's did not. I know there were some pretty wide variations in how the legacy forces approached firearms licensing, so it wouldn't surprise me if checks were another area where practice differed.

 

[Heym SR20]

Being in Scotland land checks are a non issue. When I was my first FAC in the 1990’s by the Thames Valley Police they didn’t do it either.

Fundamentally the police need to be confident that the FAC holder is safe to use a rifle. On a range there are range officers etc to ensure safety. Out in the fields there is nobody.

This is why things like the DSC1 are very good. It ensures that a novice has a basic understanding of safety, quarry species, rifle use etc.

I would happily trade all the bollox of land checks and all the other paraphanalia that individual FEOs make up for DSC1 become recognised as a valid qualification for issue of a first FAC - possibly with a mentor who needs to be DSC2 or equivalent, but ticket fully open once experience gained / DSC2 passed.

Sooner we have a clear bar of a level hunter education the easier and simpler the whole process.

Like all qualifications, the DSC needs to be a clear hurdle and candidates can and will be failed, especially on matters of safety and attitude. It helps no one if candidates just pay their money and get pushed through.

 

[Bowland blades]

There is no safe land in the whole of the UK - Only a safe or unsafe shooter ! At best they are able to attest the applicant has some land and can get that verified by the police ( It sounds like a lot of time wasted - if an applicant has done even a level 1 DSC that would be way better . )
Problem is few FEOs are active hunters / shooters as a deerstalker

 

[nic531]

the thing that really gets me is that the firearms departments clear the land and yet cannot see that there really is little difference say between a 308 and a 270 ... if one is safe, then realistically so is the other... so why do you have to waste peoples time to go and recheck it?

 

[Bowland blades]

the thing that really gets me is that the firearms departments clear the land and yet cannot see that there really is little difference say between a 308 and a 270 ... if one is safe, then realistically so is the other... so why do you have to waste peoples time to go and recheck it?

excuse for checking the candidate i guess ? Not that regular every day coppers know or practice much ( specialised units excepted ) they dont even get the practice rounds a regular sport shooter might shoot in a day

 

[gixer1]

They should be scrapped - serves no purpose in my opinion and they won’t cover all land.

 

[Jh1986]

Annoyingly my conditions came as accompanied/invite/paid stalking only, as I did not have my own permission. I was actively seeking permissions but at the time of application, had none. The right to shoot land cleared could have been added to my conditions, but it was not. Now I have permission, I have had to put in the permission form and await a variation of conditions (sent over to them over 2 months ago - the land having already been cleared although the police haven't responded to my request for confirmation of this).

I am checking the post box every day but still cannot shoot my new permission. I don't like poking fingers at the police (and certainly not any individual FEO - who are working within the broken system), but I really do feel that you don't have the right to complain about workload when you spend your time creating the extra yourself rather than stick to the framework provided for you.

From the view of the applicant potentially being made to cover the costs of the process, I certainly would not be happy contributing to the excess cost of a bloated workload.

Also, the only thing the applicant has to go on is the framework. How can we be understanding of a system we know nothing about. Maybe forces that want to abandon the gov framework, should be made to publish their own for all to see.

I often read the line "just speak to your FEO". I really don't feel that's appropriate nowadays. The departments seem to actively discourage contact since COVID.

 

[ContinShots]

excuse for checking the candidate i guess ? Not that regular every day coppers know or practice much ( specialised units excepted ) they dont even get the practice rounds a regular sport shooter might shoot in a day

This is one of the things that I find infuriating when politicians or other talking heads proclaim that only the police can be trusted to posses guns (particularly handguns) and that they're all 'highly trained', yet the reality is that many bog standard AFOs will have less time behind a trigger than members of target shooting clubs and, consequently, could very well be less proficient than experienced target shooters. There will probably be teenagers in NI shooting club handguns with more trigger time than most AFOs on mainland UK. The British public really are mislead so much when it comes to firearms in the UK. Lawful firearms are one of the lowest risk things to public safety there are, with kitchenware, golf clubs, cricket bats, cars, boxers, martial artists, Joe Blogg's firsts and any number of other potential risks way higher up the threat chain. I'm not saying that AFOs aren't proficient - I know a few and they're decent people who absolutely know how to use a firearm - but lawfully held firearms and those private citizens who posses them are carefully vetted, mostly highly competent, and are an extremely low risk, but the scaremongering and ignorance on show out there would have you think they're at the pinnacle of potential threats in the UK!

 

[Mr. Gain]

In the case I'm referring to, the applicant has been told his FAC will be granted, but with land-check conditions.
I could just about understand asking for a walk-around on a permission before grant, but if someone is found fit to hold a certificate, and the FLO knows they've been trained and mentored for over 6 months on several pieces of ground -and therefore know very what a backstop looks like and how to identify a footpath-, I can't see the point of putting extra hurdles in place, especially when the department already seems to lack the resources to perform its duties in a timely manner.
The certificate has yet to drop onto his doormat, so I should probably reserve judgement until the final conditions are known.
It would still be interesting, however to know if anyone else in the TVP area has encountered this.

 

[nf-fuse]

My force decided they will only do land checks with the land owner present and not the shooter.