ACPO guidance on GP involvement with firearms licensing

Night Vision Store

BASC Firearms Dept

Well-Known Member
Official Member
ACPO's lead on firearms licensing Chief Constable Andy Marsh has written to strategic firearms licensing staff about the way in which they conduct contact with General Practitioners (GP's). BASC welcomes advice that there "should not be a blanket policy of requesting medical reports simply because a declaration has been made."

BASC does not support demands for medical reports after every medical declaration. We are also opposed to fees being met by the applicant, GP involvement in the process is for the benefit of wider public safety and that cost should be met by the public purse. BASC continues to liaise with medical professionals, ACPO and the Home Office to find better solutions for certificate holders. Full details are available on this webpage - http://www.basc.org.uk/en/departments/firearms/department-news.cfm
 

jack

Well-Known Member
So if Andy Marsh's proposal that the applicant pays for medical reports, what incentive is there for the applicant to report his medical condition on the FAC application form?

If it is cheaper for the applicant not to report any condition, then why do so?

Subterfuge unlimited.

Who is leaning on whom in this, the Treasury on the police or the chief constable onto the licensing bureau?

If Andy Marsh cannot get the fee for FAC and SG applications increased to generate more revenue, then he will try something else.

From reading the NGO article about this subject in 2011 I think, it is difficult to form any other opinion than he does not understand the dynamics of the environment. By which I mean that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
 

CWMMAN3738

Well-Known Member
Correct me if I'm wrong but the incentive is that it's a legal requirement and failure to do so could be looked upon in a very bad light by your issuing force.
So if Andy Marsh's proposal that the applicant pays for medical reports, what incentive is there for the applicant to report his medical condition on the FAC application form?

If it is cheaper for the applicant not to report any condition, then why do so?

Subterfuge unlimited.

Who is leaning on whom in this, the Treasury on the police or the chief constable onto the licensing bureau?

If Andy Marsh cannot get the fee for FAC and SG applications increased to generate more revenue, then he will try something else.

From reading the NGO article about this subject in 2011 I think, it is difficult to form any other opinion than he does not understand the dynamics of the environment. By which I mean that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
 

BASC Firearms Dept

Well-Known Member
Official Member
Chaps, this is one aspect to a very live and dynamic issue. We have a meeting with ACPO/BMA/Home Office shortly and some other high level government engagement ongoing. I just wanted to get the message out there that some forces may tell you to pay your GP.

Any unreasonable requests should be reported to us by BASC members.

And yes wo-betide not declaring a medical condition, it probably wont be an issue but knowingly or recklessly witholding information will gaurantee a refusal.
 

jack

Well-Known Member
I appreciate the legal perspective, but who decides whether a health issue should be declared?

Currently the applicant declares any health issue in the interest of openness.

The bureau decides whether to ask the GP, i.e. the bureau makes the decision based on their criteria of health issues.

If the applicant then is asked to bear the costs and he reads the criteria and decides that his ailment does not come under those defined as requiring a declaration and he states no ailment on the FAC application.
The decision previously made by the bureau is now being made (at least in part) by the applicant.

Is the applicant liable if he is wrong in his assessment or understanding of the criteria or the doctor made the wrong diagnosis or mis informed the applicant?

Can of worms.

The applicant is less likley to declare health issue is it may cost him the doctors fee.
 

Labrat

Well-Known Member
I once saw the doctor about depression - about two weeks after my wife left me, over ten years ago - he gave me some pills, and I took them for about a week before throwing them in the bin and moving on.

Obviously I declared this on my FAC application, doctors letter was done by the police, everything happy, FAC granted.

Now, when it comes up for renewal, should I put it on again, or would it be acceptable to just put "as per previously declared"?
 

CWMMAN3738

Well-Known Member
Good question I'm in a similar position, I had some pills when my son died years ago but did the same got 1 months up ply took for a week or do then gave them up and dealt win it myself declared it but no problem but it's almost 20 years ago now so is it relivant now?
I once saw the doctor about depression - about two weeks after my wife left me, over ten years ago - he gave me some pills, and I took them for about a week before throwing them in the bin and moving on.

Obviously I declared this on my FAC application, doctors letter was done by the police, everything happy, FAC granted.

Now, when it comes up for renewal, should I put it on again, or would it be acceptable to just put "as per previously declared"?
 

DaveK

Well-Known Member
Now, when it comes up for renewal, should I put it on again, or would it be acceptable to just put "as per previously declared"?

All I ever put on declarations for medical issues or offences is "None since last application". It's never been questioned.
 
Night Vision Store
Top