Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: HASC report BASC response

  1. #1

    HASC report BASC response

    British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC) has welcomed many of the recommendations on the UK’s firearms laws made today by the Home Affairs Select Committee.

    Bill Harriman, BASC director of firearms said: “The committee’s report contains several recommendations which we think will help to secure the dual purposes of the UK’s firearms laws: to protect public safety and to allow the continued lawful use of firearms. BASC thanks the more than 900 people and organisations from the shooting world who submitted evidence to the enquiry. The volume of responses indicates the seriousness with which the shooting community views these deliberations.”

    In particular BASC welcomes the rejection of tagging every firearms certificate holder’s medical records, the dismissal of proposals to require guns and ammunition to be kept outside the home and the rejection of a reduction in the license term from five years to two. BASC welcomes the proposal to update police guidance on the licensing system and to smooth out the peaks and troughs in the flow of grant and renewal applications. BASC also welcomes the rejection of licensing for low-powered airguns and the emphasis on enforcement of existing law to deal with any problems.

    However, this is not the end of the road in terms of the political battle to secure effective law which serves both public safety and firearms users. The report highlights several areas for future debate. BASC does not agree with recommendations to impose minimum age limits on certificate applicants, in the knowledge that the current laws and police powers are robust and allow people to be introduced to the sport with increasing degrees of responsibility until they can shoot unsupervised.

    BASC firmly rejects the recommendation to apply the current complicated section one firearms licensing system onto shotguns and to increase licence fees to cover costs without firm and reliable evidence of what those costs actually are. BASC will continue to work with the Government and the police on the issues raised by the report.


    David

  2. #2
    Account Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Bonnie Scotland
    Posts
    3,447
    187 pages. So, you might want to make yourself comfortable before starting.

    http://www.publications.parliament.u...f/447/447i.pdf

  3. #3
    I have to say, if the police and HO start increasing the cost of licences then they had better damn well earn their corn. Late repsonses, unqualified views, personal views, incorrect interpretation of the law and in some instances wilful disregard for the law ought to be a thing of the past. If I have to pay more then I will demand and expect a professional service.

    RF Out!

  4. #4
    I agree Rangefinder. The law is supposed to be impersonal until guilt is proven in courts or mitigating circumstances are proffered. In the Northern Constabulary we are very fortunate, but reports which come in from other areas suggest instances of personal bias and imposition of personal interpretation amongst officers of varying ranks.
    Opinions often differ according to unknown circumstances.

  5. #5
    Does that mean the flo's will read the guidance now?

  6. #6
    You would hope so! Indeed the need for consistency was mentioned in the HASC report and come up yesterday in the debate within Parliament.

    Problem is that sometimes FLM's treat guidance as just that i.e. they are not bound by it when they don’t want to be! Hence we are left with the daft inconsistencies we all see and hear about all the time.

    David
    Last edited by David BASC; 21-12-2010 at 12:08. Reason: spelling

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by David BASC View Post
    You would hope so! Indeed the need for consistency was mentioned in the HASC report and come up yesterday in the debate within Parliament.

    Problem is that sometimes FLM's treat guidance as just that i.e. they are not bound by it when they don’t want to be! Hence we are left with the daft inconsistencies we all see and hear about all the time.


    David
    could not agree more David

    but one thing I did notice in my last renewal was the FLO's had no power what so ever in any of their recomendations,
    As it was the FLM that had the final say and could and would over rule any decision the FLO made, no matter what

    so no point the FLO even looking at the guide lines as his or her opinion or guidance is worthless according to my FLM , I was even told by my FLM, the FLO was not there to offer me guidance either, it was upto me to submit evidence for the calibre applied for and it would be looked at from there wether the FLM thought it was suitable or not,
    not the FLO
    how crazy is that

  8. #8
    Indeed, silly is not the word!

    However, this did come out in the report as I say the need for consistency , we can only wish, after all it is Christmas!

    David

  9. #9
    David, I have been waiting for a reply to questions I asked through my MP on the 23/10/2010 to James Brokenshire, the Home Office Minister responsible for firearms. I have had a letter of apology from my MP (Harriet Baldwin) in which she has said she will keep asking him for a reply as he has not replied to her question as yet. Here are my questions;

    Please can you ask him why the Government continue to fund the ACPO Firearms comittee if Constabularys both ignore and refuse to implement their guidelines?

    The particular reason I have an issue with this is the refusal of West Mercia Constabulary to use the ACPO "Any Other Lawful Quarry" reccomendation from ACPO.

    This is because of a stupid (and I use the word knowingly) anomaly; If I was out with my rifle and came across a fox taking chickens or a lamb I can shoot it (given that there is a safe backstop), but if I was to see a carrion crow, crow or magpie taking a lamb in the same field (with a similar safe shot) I would be in breach of the conditions on my Firearms Certificate if I were to shoot it. Given that it is humane, no danger to the public and safe, what possible reason can there be to condition against this course of action?

    I would love to hear form him on why Firearms Licensing Units are allowed to ignore these guidelines and flout common sense?

    I am still waiting!

    Keep up the good work!

    Seasonal greetings, ft
    Blindness to suffering is an inherent consequence of natural selection. Nature is neither kind nor cruel but fiercely indifferent.

  10. #10
    Good questions - can't wait to see the answers!

    All my very best
    David

Similar Threads

  1. HASC - update from BASC
    By David BASC in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-12-2010, 16:39
  2. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 06-11-2010, 22:43
  3. Armed response
    By ezzy6.5 in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 10-07-2010, 13:21
  4. Ingrish response
    By mickthebrick in forum Jokes & Funnies
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 22-02-2010, 16:14
  5. DCS review BASC response
    By David BASC in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 30-01-2009, 15:55

Posting Permissions

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