BASC - fighting your corner on firearms
- Thread starter Conor O'Gorman
- Start date
By all means pass it back, but I don't think there's anything in it that I've not raised before.
That is rather a bizarre question, given what I've just written.
The statutory fee is the statutory fee set by parliament, presumably to dissuade vexatious applicants. It seems odd to link it the administration costs of the process, to any great extent at least, as it is certification to exercise a right in law - and setting a significant financial barrier between subjects and that right would be as iniquitous as it (presumably) would be unconstitutional.
The point to keep in mind is that firearms certification is there for the good of the public and the peace - not the applicants. That should give some idea where the funding for the process, and for additions to the process such as have been deemed sensible, proportionate and cost-effective, should largely come from.
GPs themselves seem unable to agree on what a reasonable fee would be: the handful I know charge between nothing and £300. In the face of such a range, a mere layman's guess is clearly meaningless.
If the whole business had remained, as it clearly should have, as a matter between the FLDs and the GPs then none of this would have been BASC's, or my, concern until the point at which parliament was asked to raise the statutory fee - at which point the whole thing would have been properly scrutinised - as all public spending should be.
Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
I think my question is valid. You make many points with the benefit of hindsight. I am asking you a question with regard to what is ahead. So I ask again, if the statutory fee were to include GP verification costs do you have any thoughts on what a fair fee would be for that, all things considered?
BASC know who I am, I was once a member and whilst it would not have been in any way malicious, a senior member of BASC, (and others) would have made known my identity.
I am sorry I don't know Triton other than as the ruler of the sea in mythology.
Its about time we stopped all this back and forth, BASC have made many mistakes - I think I, and many others, have enumerated them.
However, I don't think saying, " we are where we are " dismisses any of the mistakes not until perhaps an apology is made ?
Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
I have already suggested that you phone the BASC membership team on Monday and apply for your membership and let us know how you get on - the number is 01244 573 030. No reply to my suggestion so far, albeit I tagged you in, and you replied to a subsequent comment from @Mickeydredd - but that's ok maybe you missed it.
However, if you need extra reassurance how about we meet up at Marford Mill next week and I will take you into membership myself and we could process your membership application together? You have said yourself previously you are not that far away. Or if next week is not good let's arrange a date when you are in that neck of the woods? It would be nice to meet up after all these years also. What do you think?
Given it has been awhile since the last fee increase, i suggest current fee plus minimum increase we can hope for and then add £50 to include GP reports, after all if the GPs that have set themselves up in business to do the GP report can do it for £50 so should they all.
Rewulf
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the reply Conor, but youve rather deftly not answered my specific questions.
Lets try again, with clarity.
Has the fighting fund been available since the LEI was cancelled, and been used for individual members legal bills.
If so, how many members were helped in 2020, 21 and 22?
I ask this because the OP which is new, doesn't cover this, and simply says 40 cases will have been administered by the end of this year.
You have stated that's 40 cases this year alone, so how many in the last 3?
I'm afraid that as I wasn't asked before anyone made these decisions, 'with hindsight' was the only approach I had available - though it was fairly contemporary hindsight, e.g.
FAC Application - Medical Condition
Hello all Big problems today guys. Recently applied for my FAC via North Wales Police. I have suffered from a stress related illness during my militany days 15 years ago so annotated it in my application. I received a letter from North Wales Police this morning with an additional letter to give...
www.thestalkingdirectory.co.uk
BASC says don’t pay medical fee
Latest form BASC re medical fees here: https://basc.org.uk/blog/press-releases/latest-news/basc-says-dont-pay-medical-fee/ David
www.thestalkingdirectory.co.uk
I don't think the statutory fee should be increased at all, really, unless it absolutely can't be avoided - in which case, by how much would be for Parliament to decide based on the principle, which I think should be applied, that certification is a public good rather than a benefit to the applicant specifically.
If it is necessary for the FLDs to approach every applicant's GP for this information, then the FLDs' budgets should be increased to allow them to pay whatever random fee the GPs decide to charge - though it might be that as a public body they could either negotiate a reasonable standard fee nationally, or hire a sessional medical practitioner to read the applicants' GP notes, just as MedCert and others do now for those whose GPs either refuse or try to soak them.
Last edited:
In truth, there are numerous 'real enemies'.
Sticking with the enemies within, I think the main ones are apathy and/or naiveté on the part of certificate-holders.
An important third, a symptom of which is the matter I've been going on about in this thread, is the apparent inability of a major organisation to acknowledge that its way of dealing with fundamental matters affecting all UK certificate-holders has been suboptimal. This is a problem because it suggests that the organisation has little capacity to learn, and so is unlikely to mend its hubristic ways.
I'll add a fourth and fifth, which would be a tendency to presume that everything any particular organisation does is indeed for the benefit of the shooting public and must be supported as a matter of dogma - even when there is clear evidence that its interventions have not worked out very well; and then to mistake constructive criticism of the organisation for cannibalism. There's no point our all agreeing on a point unless it's actually a good idea.
In my view, the only picture bigger than competent organisations with enough understanding and clout effectively to support the shooting public is a shooting public whose members are individually motivated and supported to let their reasonable and assertive voices be heard by MPs and other relevant significant persons.
These things should hang together, and BASC has an excellent track-record of informing and supporting its members (and others, of course, who may simply access their website) concerning government consultations etc, as well as tirelessly advising shooting people on how to represent themselves to MPs, deal assertively with misuses on the part of FLDs, etc. All good stuff.
However...
Last edited:
Good grief !
A simple informative post turns quickly into a pile on. With a few posts written in green ink ( anyone who has worked in print media will know what I mean)
Perhaps we could draw a line under this and get out stalking.
A simple informative post turns quickly into a pile on. With a few posts written in green ink ( anyone who has worked in print media will know what I mean)
Perhaps we could draw a line under this and get out stalking.
If the system worked as it should, the fee should only have to be paid once, at the time of the initial grant (or if moving area/GP). Any issue after that period should be raised by the GP to the police. Currently we are repeatedly paying for a flawed service.
You do realise that you're expecting people to voluntarily go outside and get cold, wet and dirty? You may be asking too much.
Where'r we goi'n then?
I don't really understand where the anti BASC opinion stems from
Some folk, who's option and friendship I value hugely, have had similar opinions
For my part - they have been a good org to be a member of
And I don't shoot grouse, pheasant, partridge or any other flying target - and would never be invited to a posh hunt
Unless I was there to clean and polish boots
Some folk, who's option and friendship I value hugely, have had similar opinions
For my part - they have been a good org to be a member of
And I don't shoot grouse, pheasant, partridge or any other flying target - and would never be invited to a posh hunt
Unless I was there to clean and polish boots
Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
As already explained several times now the Fighting Fund was launched in July 2020 and is used for many things including helping individual members with legal cases as explained clearly in the article in the OP and I hope we will have more comms on this important work and I will share those updates when they are published. If you have any more questions on any topic please join BASC and email or phone us. To be clear I am not willing to spend any more of my time answering any more of your questions on this forum.
Similar threads
