Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 41

Thread: Change to FAC laws?

  1. #1

    Change to FAC laws?

    I know everyone find that FAC laws a pain in the arse here with the restriction on the calibres you are allowed to buy and the restrictions.

    As my mind wandered today i was thinking. Would 4 rifles be enough?

    What would people think if you applied for your domestic FAC and you could have one of each:
    A rimfire
    Centrefire up to and including .243
    Centrefire .25 - 7mm
    Centrefire 7mm - .375

    You can hold one of each of the ranges at any one time but all that is required is to tell the police that one is gone and replaced by another. No 1 for 1 variations etc. So you could walk into a shop and give then your .222 and walk out with a .22-250

    Thats generally reflective of what people have on a license anyway eg i have a
    .22
    .22-250
    6.5x55
    30-06
    on my ticket but they wouldnt change the bigger 2 to 6.5mm and 30cal

    Obviously his isnt going anywhere but i was just thinking it would streamline the whole thing and make it more flexible
    Last edited by Dan Newcombe; 02-09-2010 at 16:40.

  2. #2
    Distinguished Member tartinjock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nairn, Inverness-shire
    Posts
    2,610
    I couldn't understand the system when I first wanted to change my .308 for another .308, I honestly thought it was as simple as go in with one, walk out with another so long as you notified the police...I thought then and still do that the system is putting extra burden onto a system that gets nothing back from the cost......

    Once I found this system out, I was even more hacked off that they would not put a variation (One for One)on with the clause to "Buy one, on disposal of the other" which would make sense, which meant 2 trips to the dealer some 78 miles away

    Now thankfully I am in an area where the Local FLO is on the ball, they will condition for such an event and would probably allow all of the calibers/cartridge sizes upto .375 with out question.........

    (I'm sure someone will now say that they never got what they wanted from Northern Constabulary)

    TJ
    Position and hold must be firm enough to support the firearm
    The firearm must point naturally at the target without any undue physical effort
    Sight alignment (aiming) must be correct
    The shot must be released and followed through without disturbing the position

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by tartinjock View Post
    (I'm sure someone will now say that they never got what they wanted from Northern Constabulary)

    TJ

    Tj,

    i got three points and a fine from northern constabulary in july, you could say they gave me something i didnt want... gits

    f.

  4. #4
    Distinguished Member tartinjock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nairn, Inverness-shire
    Posts
    2,610
    Quote Originally Posted by centralbeltstalker View Post
    Tj,

    i got three points and a fine from northern constabulary in july, you could say they gave me something i didnt want... gits

    f.
    Just no pleaseing some people.....
    Position and hold must be firm enough to support the firearm
    The firearm must point naturally at the target without any undue physical effort
    Sight alignment (aiming) must be correct
    The shot must be released and followed through without disturbing the position

  5. #5
    Personally I think the best way to do it would be to do a land and quarry check and the home visit and then say "right, you can have up to (whatever number the security/safe allows for) rifles up to a maximum calibre of (whatever the ground is suitable for) to shoot any lawful quarry". Then perhaps special cases could be allowed for, ie use abroad/ranges only etc if needed/proved.

    Buying and selling could be controlled in the normal manner by informing the police of any transfer. They'd soon know if you went over your allowance and your FAC could be revoked.

    That would just be too simple wouldn't it?! Just think how much money it would save in the long term through reduced admin.

  6. #6
    Account Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Bonnie Scotland
    Posts
    3,447
    Quote Originally Posted by njc110381 View Post
    Personally I think the best way to do it would be to do a land and quarry check and the home visit and then say "right, you can have up to (whatever number the security/safe allows for) rifles up to a maximum calibre of (whatever the ground is suitable for) to shoot any lawful quarry". Then perhaps special cases could be allowed for, ie use abroad/ranges only etc if needed/proved. Buying and selling could be controlled in the normal manner by informing the police of any transfer. They'd soon know if you went over your allowance and your FAC could be revoked. That would just be too simple wouldn't it?! Just think how much money it would save in the long term through reduced admin.
    I don't get this concept of a "ground/calibre-suitability" thing. A safely used centrefire is a safely used centrefire and if they're not being used safely....Well... what is the material difference between a .222 or a .375 H&H? I certainly wouldn't feel any safer being shot towards by an idiot with a .222 or even a .22rf. However, I do understand the broad concept of matching calibre to target species. That's another matter entirely. But, unless I'm mistaken, that is not what this ground/calibre thing is about. Similarly I can't see why a restriction to 4 bands of calibre choice is relevant to anything.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Tamus View Post
    I don't get this concept of a "ground/calibre-suitability" thing. A safely used centrefire is a safely used centrefire and if they're not being used safely....Well... what is the material difference between a .222 or a .375 H&H? I certainly wouldn't feel any safer being shot towards by an idiot with a .222 or even a .22rf. However, I do understand the broad concept of matching calibre to target species. That's another matter entirely. But, unless I'm mistaken, that is not what this ground/calibre thing is about. Similarly I can't see why a restriction to 4 bands of calibre choice is relevant to anything.
    Agree 100%

    Is everyone so 'conditioned' () by the strokes that plod have been pulling over the years that they are actually hoping for checks like these to be put in place?

    Keep it simple and make your wish list for something like a 'Hunters Licence' that then authorises you to have a truly open FAC with the quantity and calibre of rifles that you decide you have a requirement for, (maybe a pistol or two thrown in as well - sound familiar ). They might also then think you're enough of a big boy for you to decide where you are going to use them and what species you will humanely or (legally) shoot.

  8. #8
    Regular Poster
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Galloway south west scotland
    Posts
    490
    Hi Frank How much did thay give you, last thay took it from me!.
    What points did thay give you to ponder over?.

    Dry Powder.

    Barry Thom

  9. #9
    On the other hand, the history of firearms control in this country in the last 120 years teaches us that every time the law is changed it gets more restrictive and more expensive for the shooting public.

    We must be careful what we wish for; my position is that the Law as it stands is the best we're likely to get, and that we should strive for more sensible and just administration of it.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Orion View Post
    Agree 100%

    Is everyone so 'conditioned' () by the strokes that plod have been pulling over the years that they are actually hoping for checks like these to be put in place?

    Keep it simple and make your wish list for something like a 'Hunters Licence' that then authorises you to have a truly open FAC with the quantity and calibre of rifles that you decide you have a requirement for, (maybe a pistol or two thrown in as well - sound familiar ). They might also then think you're enough of a big boy for you to decide where you are going to use them and what species you will humanely or (legally) shoot.
    Stockholm syndrome I think!

    To the original OP, I have 3 rimfire slots + mods on my ticket. Why? Because I happen to have a need for 3 different rimfires for the disciplines I can/will shoot. Then there is a .223 for med range/small stuff and a .308 for longer/bigger stuff, plus the moderators again and another slot for a .303.... So no, 4 slots isn't enough.

Similar Threads

  1. Cameron promises public review of gun laws
    By Mannlicher_Stu in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 12-06-2010, 20:10
  2. Advise on asking for a change in FAC conditions
    By Milligan in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-05-2010, 18:11
  3. Laws going to Scotland?
    By finnbear270 in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 04-12-2009, 21:38
  4. Strange laws
    By viking in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 26-05-2009, 17:19
  5. What would you change?
    By basil in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 09-07-2008, 16:32

Posting Permissions

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