Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: AOLQ Query

  1. #1

    AOLQ Query

    So my FAC finally arrived and despite discussing with my FEO that it would read AOLQ it say's the following which I cant quite get my head round. How would I go about raising this query correctly ? Contact the FEO direct as tbh I have a connection to shoot goats and boar and also cant quite fathom why I cant level a fox with my 270 either. But as its just arrived and I have been quite harassive up until this point to get it but would like to do it right so I dont want piss them off. Just seems weird I can buy ammo for shooting anything ( as I read it) but I cant shot anything bar fox and deer.

    5. Expanding Ammunition - ( a&B)
    The certificate holder may possess, purchase or acquire expanding ammunition, or the missiles of such ammunition, in calibre .270 and 22/250 ammunition authorised by this certificate and used only in connection with : -
    (a) the lawful shooting of deer & )b) the shooting of vermin, or in connection with the management of any estate, other wildlife.

    6. Quarry - Fox - (Novice-Closed)
    The 22.250 Rifle and .22/250 Sound Moderator and ammunition shall be used for the shooting fox and for zeroing on ranges, or land deemed suitable by the chief officer of police for the area where the land is situated and over which the holder has lawful authority to shoot.

    7) Quarry - Deer - (Novice - Closed)
    The .270 Rifle and .270 Sound Moderator and ammunition shall be used for the shooting deer and for zeroing on ranges, or land deemed suitable by the chief officer of police for the area where the land is situated and over which the holder has lawful authority to shoot.

  2. #2
    That's what you get when police FLDs feck around with things and start making up their own conditions.

    Why not just quote the condition as stated in the HO Guidance appendix 3 and ask them to include AOLQ as per?

    Also have a look at 13.9 in there - it states that no further 'good reason' is required for additional quarry species and therefore AOLQ should be applied.
    Last edited by Orion; 09-11-2016 at 16:14.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Orion View Post
    That's what you get when police FLDs feck around with things and start making up their own conditions.

    Why not just quote the condition as stated in the HO Guidance appendix 3 and ask them to include AOLQ as per?

    Also have a look at 13.9 in there - it states that no further 'good reason' is required for additional quarry species and therefore AOLQ should be applied.
    Its totally bizarre. I just called up to query it and they said and I quote " We do not issue AOLQ under Lancashire for Novice conditions". TBC
    Last edited by Rasputin; 09-11-2016 at 17:22.

  4. #4
    Yeah, speak to BASC about it.

    There is a whole load of stuff in the HO guidance about conditions, setting unnecessary conditions that are tantamount to constructive refusal and all sorts.

    Basically it boils down to they should give you the generic primary species good reason (deer/fox in this case) plus AOLQ, on land deemed suitable and where you have permission, unless they have a good public safety reason not to give you that condition!

    I'm on my first FAC and got .308 plus mod, expanding ammo, deer/fox and AOLQ plus the usual closed certificate. Cant see any reason to deviate from the HO guidance unless there is a valid public safety concern!
    "If you're shooting badly, you need a new gun. If you're shooting well then you deserve a new gun."

    Self confessed Schultz and Larsen addict.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by stubear View Post
    I'm on my first FAC and got .308 plus mod, expanding ammo, deer/fox and AOLQ plus the usual closed certificate. Cant see any reason to deviate from the HO guidance unless there is a valid public safety concern!
    +1 (but, for me, fox falls under AOLQ)

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasputin View Post
    Its totally bizarre. I just called up to query it and they said and I quote " We do not issue AOLQ under Lancashire for Novice conditions". TBC
    Let's hope they will be in a position to justify that particular piece of nonsense when the Policing and Crime Bill receives Royal Assent!

    107 Guidance to police officers in respect of firearms
    (1) The Firearms Act 1968 is amended as follows.
    (2) After section 55 insert—
    “55A Guidance as to exercise of police functions
    (1) The Secretary of State may issue guidance to chief officers of police as
    to the exercise of their functions under, or in connection with, this Act.
    (2) The Secretary of State may revise any guidance issued under this
    section.
    (3) The Secretary of State must arrange for any guidance issued under this
    section, and any revision of it, to be published.
    (4) A chief officer of police must have regard to any guidance issued under
    this section
    .
    (5) Before issuing guidance under this section, the Secretary of State must
    consult—
    (a) the National Police Chiefs’ Council, and
    (b) the chief constable of the Police Service of Scotland.”

    Might start to put the brake on some of the wilder excesses of FLDs up and down the country.

    http://www.parliament.uk/documents/c...ill-160414.pdf

  7. #7
    Thanks for the info will raise it with them. It just seems bonkers to have two rifles one only for deer and one only for fox and then not allowed to shoot anything else or even cross them over. I can't see the logic behind it at all but have raised a query will see what comes out of it. I do feel sorry for the licensing people because it seems to just be making work harder for them as someone obviously took the time to write those specific criteria.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  8. #8
    It's not making work harder for them. It's them making the work harder. May be you want to shoot a muntjac with the 22-250, or travel to Scotland to shoot Roe, so need 22-250 conditioned for deer.
    Perhaps you have ground where you have been specifically asked to shoot fox on site. So you want to have fox on your 270.
    Don't worry about asking for this to be put right, it's them that have inconvenienced you after taking your money and probably an age to sort things out.

  9. #9
    Just to update on this. I was called back by who I assume is the boss man. We had a very frank an honest conversation I explained why I wished to have AOLQ on the ticket and the logic behind having two rifles but not conditioned for the same thing being flawed. He agreed and we discussed shooting Muntjac of all things, it was left with us both agreeing that it would be less hassle and stress for all concerned if I could have it and even the new HO guidance stated this. I was told it is being discussed with their superiors Monday so will come back with an answer which they hoped would marry the HO guidance. If that happens then it would be perfect for all concerned. So I have to give them top marks for taking the time to call me back, explain their stance and offering a solution. It really does seem that the poor office folk are being encumbered by reams and reams of red tape and just like us would rather see a uniform structure to set things up.

  10. #10
    The problem with much of this nonsense is that sensibly nobody is willing to take the risk to challenge conditions, nor to push the limits of what they mean.
    The oddest part of the random conditions seems to be in 5. Because the condition specifies that.... "used only in connection with : -
    (a) the lawful shooting of deer & )b) the shooting of vermin, or in connection with the management of any estate, other wildlife."

    This appears to mean that you can only use the ammunition in connection with the lawful shooting of deer AND shooting vermin - something that would need a very crafty trick shot to achieve. For that condition to make any sense at all, it would have to be changed to (a) OR (b).
    Also personally I might argue that I'm not sure that the conditions 6 and 7 restrict you exclusively to what they say, but they require you to actually use the guns for the reason given. i.e. as long as you're shooting the deer and foxes (your good reason to possess), then there is no restriction on what else you can do (subject of course to good sense and other legislation).

    The AOLQ to me seems tautological. It's obvious that anyone given a licence should only use their guns legally without that having to be put as a condition on their licence. The conditions are restrictions, therefore the absence of a condition to me indicates that such a restriction does not apply.

    I would suspect that there's a strong argument that the conditions on your licence as it stands are meaningless. It seems that the need for authorisation to buy expanding ammunition has just disappeared anyway, and the other two conditions appear to only require you to shoot a few foxes and deer from time to time - which I'm sure you intend to do anyway.

    "It really does seem that the poor office folk are being encumbered by reams and reams of red tape and just like us would rather see a uniform structure to set things up." I am afraid I have zero sympathy. The Home Office gave them an uniform structure and they choose to ignore it and produce their own reams of red tape - much of which is probably not fit for purpose. Not only that, but all forces have been instructed to stick to the guidance unless there is a good reason not to. Novice shooters are not good reason to apply random conditions.

Similar Threads

  1. Aolq
    By Hussar in forum Legal Issues
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 15-03-2016, 10:17
  2. Aolq
    By willowbank in forum Legal Issues
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 21-10-2014, 22:41
  3. aolq
    By AN DU RU FOX in forum Legal Issues
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 23-06-2014, 18:24
  4. Aolq
    By Erik Hamburger in forum Legal Issues
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 26-02-2014, 21:23
  5. Aolq
    By limulus in forum Legal Issues
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 17-06-2013, 12:57

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •