Short Notice FAC interview

Dakaras

Well-Known Member
I was called today by an FEO for Thames Valley he had a cancellation and wanted to see me at 4pm :) He called at 2.30pm :rolleyes: well at least I didnt spend a week stressing over it.

Has agreed to all 3 rifles providing I have a mentor for the .243, the chap I had lined up was no good despite 20 years + open certificate he has a 22-250 and the FEO suggested a .243 holder would go down better.

Anyway quick call later and a new mentor was sorted. He has said that he will recommend an open cert on the rimfires day one so fingers crossed.

Thanks to Dougie (Remmington 700) for the mentoring
 
I was called today by an FEO for Thames Valley he had a cancellation and wanted to see me at 4pm :) He called at 2.30pm :rolleyes: well at least I didnt spend a week stressing over it.

Has agreed to all 3 rifles providing I have a mentor for the .243, the chap I had lined up was no good despite 20 years + open certificate he has a 22-250 and the FEO suggested a .243 holder would go down better.

Anyway quick call later and a new mentor was sorted. He has said that he will recommend an open cert on the rimfires day one so fingers crossed.

Thanks to Dougie (Remmington 700) for the mentoring

This statement only goes to prove what an utter mess and deliberate incorrect impositions made on new firearm certificate applications.
What difference dos a .224 ( 22-250) make compared to 6m (243) calibre rifle make absolutely none.
 
hi.

well the only difference that one can see is that if a registered fac holder is mentoring/ accompanying someone it would be better suited for that individual to have the same calibre rifle licence..?? NO
i dont see a big issue with that senario... just my thoughts.

f.
 
hi.

well the only difference that one can see is that if a registered fac holder is mentoring/ accompanying someone it would be better suited for that individual to have the same calibre rifle licence..?? NO
i dont see a big issue with that senario... just my thoughts.

f.

I would disagree with that statement totally

Especially as I was mentored 35 years ago with one of the most renown of deer stalkers who uses nothing else other than 22-250 cal on roe deer in Scotland and I myself also use that Calibre along with .270

To many impositions me thinks
 
More non-law making by those who have no real place in law doing so.:rolleyes:
Absolutely correct Finnbear and when these type of conditions are implied they should be stamped on firmly before it gets out of hand. Challenging those impositions should be made by refusing to accept the condition.


The problem here and no disrespect to the postee it appears that he is a novice in respect to centre fire weapons and also firearm certificate applications so its easy pickings for the police to impose such conditions as you dont know any better.

If it had been me I would have said you have got my application and I have stated for what reasons I need them if you dont like it in any way refuse it in writing and I give them 14 days notice ,failing which we will put it in front of the Court. End Of
 
Last edited:
i dont see a big issue with that senario... just my thoughts.

I think the imposition of any mentoring condition by some forces is an issue that needs sorting out. Either it's a requirement or it's not, and as it happens it's neither a legal requirement nor does it appear aywhere in the guidance. At the moment it depends entirely where you live in mainland UK as to whether or not they try and force that one on you and sadly more and more people appear willing to accept it, which of course makes it harder for applicants that follow.

BTW. If you read the article on page 15 of the current SACS magazine it appears that they as an organisation are willing to take them on over this one.

http://www.sacs.org.uk/Sacs/Current Magazine.pdf
 
Maybe they missed the bit about finger on the pulse? This nettle really does need ripping out of the ground, not just gently grasping, & how many posts have been placed on here in this regard?, selective blindness has set in in some places!, sorry if this is turning into a rant, but what else can we do if the so called organisations for shooters won't get off the fence?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This sort of thing really winds me up. I agree that it should be stamped on, the police are supposed to uphold the law not make it up!!!
 
I think the imposition of any mentoring condition by some forces is an issue that needs sorting out. Either it's a requirement or it's not, and as it happens it's neither a legal requirement nor does it appear aywhere in the guidance. At the moment it depends entirely where you live in mainland UK as to whether or not they try and force that one on you and sadly more and more people appear willing to accept it, which of course makes it harder for applicants that follow.

BTW. If you read the article on page 15 of the current SACS magazine it appears that they as an organisation are willing to take them on over this one.

http://www.sacs.org.uk/Sacs/Current Magazine.pdf

The reasons that they are putting it on is simple In the Act it states I believe the Cheif Officer of Police may put on a certificate Conditions as to protect and safeguard the public.

Whilst I do believe personally that novices should be mentored and this is good practice so both the public are not at risk and also they gain experience, I do not believe it to be proper that its a condition of a firearm cert grant.

If you was a farmer for instance and held shotguns for years and had wild boar or foraging deer on your land it would mean under a blanket new application you would need to have someone with you to comply with the law.

Its all a load of rubbish and needs addressing
 
Intersting comments thank you.

Your correct in that my experiance in the application process is novice, and my firearms experiance revolves around rimfires mostly. The block for me was the not agreeing possibly meaning a rejection of the .243. I have the land and I have the reason he couldnt disagree on that, but I dont have the experiance. It was implied the calibre could be refused if I didnt get a mentor with the same calibre.

I actually have no problem with having a mentor, Im looking forward to our trips out....It does suck however that the grant relies on it.

Thanks again for the comments

Dak
 
I agree its a difficult one to seperate maybe the probationary grant short certificate of x amount of time would ease the situation but at the moment this blanket condition is effecting all application and another point , Each and every application should be on the applicants merit Ie history of previous shooting experience such as holding prior certificates like a shotgun licience and for how long etc. I really dont know what to suggest , one thing i do know its not legal and should be challenged. There is a difference between what should be good practice and a sensible approach to whats actually law.

What if for instance prior to the applicant applying for a certificate in his own right that he was an estate worker who had shot many many hundred deer on the states holding I know of at least 2 guys in that position.

Also what if you had for 6 months prior to applying already been out with an accomplished stalker on let days and also done the respective DSC1 or even completed DSC2 on let days and a condition was imposed on you flaws in it everywhere i am afraid.

Stu
 
Intersting comments thank you.

Your correct in that my experiance in the application process is novice, and my firearms experiance revolves around rimfires mostly. The block for me was the not agreeing possibly meaning a rejection of the .243. I have the land and I have the reason he couldnt disagree on that, but I dont have the experiance. It was implied the calibre could be refused if I didnt get a mentor with the same calibre.

I actually have no problem with having a mentor, Im looking forward to our trips out....It does suck however that the grant relies on it.

Thanks again for the comments

Dak


I can understand your frustration and I wish you well, Hope all these comments hasnt deterred you from your chosen sport.
Stu
 
Not at all Stu.

Intersetingly this is a different FEO . I had a conversation with the last chap at shotgun renewal, he hadnt been to my new property in 11 years of moving here, guess it showed up on the records so when he came to see the security I had a longish conversation with him, his view was different again in some respects. He actually discouraged me from doing a DSC 1 prior to application saying it would make no difference. He also advised no point in applying for an open cert for the rimfires for at least 10 years.

He also said that I may only need one trip out with a mentor or it may take 3 months before they removed the condition that was down to the mentor (talk about pass the buck)

Part of me is tempted to challange the actual condition, whilst still taking Dougie up on his offer to mentor, the other part of me doesnt want to rock the boat as I said he has suggested a recommendation of open rimfires day one which I believe is unusal for thames valley, and something that BASC didnt think I would get when I asked them.
 
Dak, sorry to have hobnailed all over your post mate, it's just this subject is a bit of a running sore, & one that singleton's like yourself should not have to challenge alone, where is the backing from our sporting bodies?
 
Stu, there are two seperate arguements that they will try to use to justify the mentoring condition - neither of which will stand up in law.

The first is, as you mention, the public safety issue which is a red herring. If anyone is deemed to be a threat to public safety then why are they being issued with an FAC in the first place? Throughout Scotland fully open FACs are issued to first time applicants with no mentoring or other conditions attached and, AFAIK, there is no danger to public safety - so where's the problem in the rest of the UK?

The other one which was put to me was on the grounds of deer welfare, which quite frankily is laughable as the police have zero remit in that area.

If they had some of these conditions thrown back at them, or even better taken to court for judicial review, (not that they get there because the CC would back down), we might get some sense into the system.
 
Not at all Stu.

Intersetingly this is a different FEO . I had a conversation with the last chap at shotgun renewal, he hadnt been to my new property in 11 years of moving here, guess it showed up on the records so when he came to see the security I had a longish conversation with him, his view was different again in some respects. He actually discouraged me from doing a DSC 1 prior to application saying it would make no difference. He also advised no point in applying for an open cert for the rimfires for at least 10 years.

He also said that I may only need one trip out with a mentor or it may take 3 months before they removed the condition that was down to the mentor (talk about pass the buck)

Part of me is tempted to challange the actual condition, whilst still taking Dougie up on his offer to mentor, the other part of me doesnt want to rock the boat as I said he has suggested a recommendation of open rimfires day one which I believe is unusal for thames valley, and something that BASC didnt think I would get when I asked them.
Lots of conflicting advice here
Personally if I was you stick to your original application and
as previously stated tell them to accept or refuse it and take it from there.
Good Luck keep us informed either way.

Stu
 
Back
Top