Police request to remove a photo from facebook for renewal

[JimmySticks]

Has anyone experienced this before?

Had a phone call today to let me know that my FAC/ SGC renewal has just been processed and renewed, all good. It was then mentioned that I have a photo uploaded to my facebook page in 2016 of me holding a shotgun. I was told 'we don't like people putting up pictures that might advertise that they are licence holders', and could I please have a look and take it down?

The only picture I can find from 2016, doesn't show my face, and is a photo (from behind) of me shooting at clay on the 'have-a-go' clay line at the Game Fair. Hardly advertising that I either do or don't own guns, its a public event that many people who don't own guns go to and have a go shooting at. Although I accept that the general public probably won't recognise that.

This wasn't mentioned at my last renewal in 2021 so seems a bit odd to bring it up now.
I have plenty of other shooting related photos up on my page of me at clay grounds etc... they have not been brought up.

I did point out that shooting is a legal hobby and my FB is locked down tight due to the nature of my work, so only people who know me can find me. I'm not publicly 'findable'.

I was told that viewpoint is understandable, but they'd still rather I remove the photo.

I don't really care either way, I'll probably do it just to avoid an argument, got plenty of other things to spend my emotional energy on right now!

Is it not really a big deal, or is this the thin end of the wedge of over reach and control?

Anyone else had similar?

Jim

 

[Flash G 74]

Hello, You have been granted a renewal but what about next time they might ask again ? They do have the upper hand, If it were me although i do not have any pics on Social Web sites i would remove it ,

 

[VSS]

So how about all the people selling venison through Facebook, Instagram, websites, etc?
And the people who feature on things like Fieldsports Channel?
Are they going to stop all that?


While I strongly believe that we must take care over the nature of the photos we post online (eg, no blatantly offensive unnecessary gore, plenty of positive conservation stories, plenty of food photos) in order to portray a good image, we do not need to hide what we do.
In fact, I would go so far as to say we should be promoting what we do.
I'd tell them respectfully that you always take care not to post anything offensive, and that you wish to portray a positive image of fieldsports to your restricted circle of followers, and leave it at that.

(But it is also true that some shooting folk do post some really dumb stuff online, that does none of us any favours).

 

[Rake Aboot]

Absolute rubbish

If this is true , then it’s simply garbage that needs to be ignored .

And it needs explaining to them why it’s being ignored as well.

 

[lotuseater]

All the popular stalkers on Youtube going to have to close their channels if this becomes a precedent. Ludicrous.

 

[finnbear270]

Just deny their “Request”.

 

[rocketdogbert]

It depends how much aggro you want to cause over a single photo.
In principle, you’re right, hold your ground, but at any point they can revoke your FAC/SGC and then you’ll need to go through the whole appeal process at your cost, and all the while you’re firearms will be being at best stored incorrectly, at worst bashed about. And you won’t have access to them, and likely they’ll tell you that you can’t use anybody else’s either

 

[Deermanagement]

Just look up anyone’s name associated with competitive clay shooting, from national to international shooters. You’ll have a job finding one profile not showing them using guns. In most cases they want the public exposure

 

[Dickie]

One to punt on to whatever shooting org you belong to, no wonder the costs are going up if they sit and trawl through everyone's social media on grant, renewal or variation.
Does that mean in the future no images on here and no gun pictures on for sale adverts?

 

[Greenmist]

No legal basis to do this, however, why not set your profile to private, that way no one who isn't a friend can see the photos

 

[Freeforester]

It would be interesting to learn the number of firearms thefts from legitimate ‘higher profile’ FAC holders where the weapon/s are proven to go on to be used in a crime, which might be the matter they are ‘aiming’ to er, reduce.

 

[AGR]

One to punt on to whatever shooting org you belong to, no wonder the costs are going up if they sit and trawl through everyone's social media on grant, renewal or variation.
Does that mean in the future no images on here and no gun pictures on for sale adverts?

Not just social media. My friend lived abroad for a year some 30 years ago, something that is now included in the application, and he had to provide a document from the relevant embassy to show no criminal activity.

 

[Bo Diddley]

No legal basis to do this, however, why not set your profile to private, that way no one who isn't a friend can see the photos

His FB is locked down tight because of his work, it's a job to find him... all in post #1 ... I'm not on FB so have no idea what it all means...

 

[JimmySticks]

No legal basis to do this, however, why not set your profile to private, that way no one who isn't a friend can see the photos

It is. It's completely locked down. Not even friends of friends can find me, I'm supposed to be undiscoverable

 

[Greenmist]

His FB is locked down tight because of his work, it's a job to find him... all in post #1 ... I'm not on FB so have no idea what it all means...

My fault for skimming through the post

 

[Razzdogg]

Personally i would just remove it for the easier life but as above they have no legal basis to force you too and they cant legally revoke your certificate on that basis and they know that but as you say is it worth the mental energy?

Will they stick a note on and your next variation be more hassle than it needs to be?

Unless you are advertising and have something to gain from promoting images with a firearm id just play ball for convenience although i disagree with the sentiment

 

[Morkai]

Do you think the FLO would ask the British Olympic team to not appear on tv....

I bet most houses are harder to get into than some of the RFDs on the industrial estates where its just a corrugated clad wall and a glass cabinet full of guns.

Ridiculous.

 

[Dunwaters]

Why not formally ask them why they are making the request?
I’d love to know what the rationale is, and who has decided that photos of licensed firearms owners legally using their guns is unacceptable.
Sounds like something that your representative bodies might be interested in addressing.

 

[Klenchblaize]

Perhaps a polite and subtle way of letting you know "we are watching"?

Orwellian it may be but you'd need to be seriously naive to imagine the Home Office and Police Authorities aren't monitoring all forms of social media and no doubt with the assistance of AI.

K

 

[Morkai]

Perhaps a polite and subtle way of letting you know "we are watching"?

Orwellian it may be but you'd need to be seriously naive to imagine the Home Office and Police Authorities aren't monitoring all forms of social media and no doubt with the assistance of AI.

K

More like they specifically looked because of the renewal. Just think how under resourced the police are in terms of licensing as it is. Not to mention not investigating burglaries etc.

Even with AI, someone has then got to look at it and make a decision.

Seeing the home office is using something 75% of their resources on Islamic Extremism, Dave at the clayground would be very far down the list.