terrier1
Well-Known Member
They are going to need that 8 million to keep BASC going because the amount of members they are going to lose over this.
BASC response to Firearms Licensing Guidance Consultation
- Thread starter Conor O'Gorman
- Start date
Benelli m2
Well-Known Member
Unless you're a bigger pig than me sound like you are
Connor, you obviously have not read any of my past posts, no problem, few do.
I have been advocating the latter for nearly four years - find a few posts.
Although how you propose to achieve a fundamental review of all firearms laws is a bit beyond me and probably all of your political allies, given the support they have provided so far on medicals.
Has someone at BASC done the economics of the current charge as income and estimated the number of firearms holders and thus those staff needed to maintain even the current level of police 'service'? I suggest no-one wants a more (possibly much more ) expensive service and for that to be 'welcomed'.
I am certainly not in favour of taking the responsibility from the police at twice the current rate for grants/renewals, so some prior reassurance on that point would seem logical or the pursuit of a better current system if it would be hideously more expensive, in preference. Although the latter is now a distant dream given the fiddling on ten year licences which failed.
I would also suggest asking one, (albeit two smaller) question(s) is not the best way to redress the balance scales at this time or any other - look to your organisation first.
Are you fit and capable for a tough fight in the future ? show some teeth and success and I will ask to rejoin. The same will now be true for many current, soon to be ex members and ex members.
Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
Which AGM did you attend and what was your motion?
Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
Would you support a campaign for a fundamental review of firearms law for a new consolidated Firearms Act as the outcome; and for firearms licensing to be taken away from the police and administered by a dedicated body designed solely for that purpose?
terrier1
Well-Known Member
Yes as long as BASC has nothing to do with it.
You expect me to answer 'yes' or 'no' and you wont even publish a word of the legal advice you were given on medicals ? Stroll on.
Your post is arrogant, or do you expect everyone to immediately give unqualified answers when you demand them ?
Read my past posts then - the answer you want is yes, but only if it improves the service for all and reduces the cost for young entrants to stalking/shooting and maintains the current cost (without medicals for current shooters stalkers. I also want to maintain the right NOT to be visited by the police without warning, without warrant and to NOT have my character questioned just because I do not have the right that every citizen in the land rejoices in.
Are you worried about membership ?
Yes or No ?
Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
Why?
Would you estimate the cost of this transition please? Who would fund it?
And as a current BASC member, will you publish the legal advice for members to see, (yes or no as you put it)?
Dear Conor. I have no confidence in anything you say or do. I have asked you to resign. I have also seen the childish repeat question you are putting to various forum members. In my opinion you are the least credible of the shower which are the self-serving BASC. I was promised a meeting with the PO for the South East at the Game Fair. It has not materialised. A phone call is not a meeting. You are failing in your job and you are failing 150,000 BASC members. You are the last person at BASC that I believe capable of achieving anything. There is nothing you can say to me which will restore my faith in BASC. There is nothing I wish to hear from you other than you have resigned. You have accomplished nothing in your time at BASC. Please go now.
I believe one force already has an outside agency being used G4?
I know we are all very frustrated by the way we are, I would suggest being persecuted and bullied by the police especially with regards to the medical screening, but the fundamental problem is the 1968 act and the part where the chief office has unbounded discretion to satisfy themselves that we are fit and proper individuals to be allowed to own firearms.
It is easy to criticise BASC and yes they have made errors in the past and are not as dynamic as we would like in their media communications or always look to react after the horse has bolted, but fighting among ourselves is I believe not the answer. In reality lobbying MP is probably the only way to get change.
We hear very little if anything from some the other organisations e.g CPSA and when we did it was their legal expert suggesting if your GP does not engage in process change GPs and when did one of their staff ever join a forum to openly discuss with the forum members?
We want the police/laws to change but is it not time that all the various shooting organisations put aside their own agendas and actually seriously considered Merging in to one super organisation representing all of shooting and with 732,233 firearm owners then add to that the air gun owners we could have an organisation with a million plus members now we have a unified voice.
But why would they all join, simple fund it differently give every firearm owner and anybody who buys an air gun owner “free” membership yes they can then buy insurance appropriate for their needs.
Then fund the free part by adding say pound or two to the price of a thousand cartridges and 50p to a tin of air gun pellets. Let the manufacture/importers of cartridges and air gun pellets forward the money, money they would get back from the shops and us. Have a trade membership fee as the GTA can also be part of the super organisation.
Yes VAT issues etc need sorting out but surly it is not impossible to do.
I know we are all very frustrated by the way we are, I would suggest being persecuted and bullied by the police especially with regards to the medical screening, but the fundamental problem is the 1968 act and the part where the chief office has unbounded discretion to satisfy themselves that we are fit and proper individuals to be allowed to own firearms.
It is easy to criticise BASC and yes they have made errors in the past and are not as dynamic as we would like in their media communications or always look to react after the horse has bolted, but fighting among ourselves is I believe not the answer. In reality lobbying MP is probably the only way to get change.
We hear very little if anything from some the other organisations e.g CPSA and when we did it was their legal expert suggesting if your GP does not engage in process change GPs and when did one of their staff ever join a forum to openly discuss with the forum members?
We want the police/laws to change but is it not time that all the various shooting organisations put aside their own agendas and actually seriously considered Merging in to one super organisation representing all of shooting and with 732,233 firearm owners then add to that the air gun owners we could have an organisation with a million plus members now we have a unified voice.
But why would they all join, simple fund it differently give every firearm owner and anybody who buys an air gun owner “free” membership yes they can then buy insurance appropriate for their needs.
Then fund the free part by adding say pound or two to the price of a thousand cartridges and 50p to a tin of air gun pellets. Let the manufacture/importers of cartridges and air gun pellets forward the money, money they would get back from the shops and us. Have a trade membership fee as the GTA can also be part of the super organisation.
Yes VAT issues etc need sorting out but surly it is not impossible to do.
Last edited:
Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
Paul is on annual leave today - if you could you email it to me to conor.ogorman@basc.org.uk then I can have a look at it. Or if you posted then I will catch up with Paul next week for a hard copy - I back in office on Wednesday.
Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
I haven't carried out any estimates of what it would cost and who would fund it. Its a good question. At the moment I am scoping for views on the principle of whether forum members would support a campaign for a fundamental review of firearms law for a new consolidated Firearms Act as the outcome; and for firearms licensing to be taken away from the police and administered by a dedicated body designed solely for that purpose. The feedback so far is mixed and that is interesting. I might run a poll with more options in due course.
In April 2018, BASC consulted Alan Maclean QC when Lincolnshire Police declared a new medical checks policy. The QC’s advice was that political action was the better route in the short term.
Why the hell not if you are proposing it !!!!!
When are we in the long term !!!!
Presumably the QC wrote it down as all QC's would, so - PUBLISH IT, or was it, as I suspect, a 'back of fag packet view' verbally to Mr Glenser?
You will note you have not answered a member's query fully (above).
I had hopes for BASC and would have rejoined if this medical mess had been sorted. I would also have encouraged others to do so. I am now more of the opinion of Terrier1 above.
Deal with the present problem with all available means NOW.
Yes that is shouting.
Are you seeing membership numbers fall ?
YES OR NO
All your points are noted but BASC is the self-styled "Voice of Shooting" but so far has only mumbled. 150000 members deserve something and I for one would join if I saw something worth joining. 130 odd staff, political support falling over itself to help but what has been achieved positively - nothing. What has been achieved negatively - I cant see a worse picture except the manager of the jewelry chain who said in an interview " we sell crap".
Orion
Well-Known Member
The problem with that is that a lack of effective and visible action in the short term will mean that there is no long term.
The HO and NPCC/FEWG are moving apace to ensure that their agendas are being realised, while the organisations fiddle providing the background music. It’s no longer enough to be reactive, you need to be seen to be proactive on behalf of shooters to ensure that they are not being treated as quasi criminals - witness the proposed ‘right’ of unannounced entry to lawful firearms owners private property, which unless granted can potentially put your certificate(s) at risk!
Your organisation has seriously screwed up in the recent past - medical evidence scheme is one example - and it’s pointless putting forward motions for root and branch reforms to firearms legislation and licensing administration, (as much as it might be desired), if you’re not taking positive action to protect lawful firearms owners right here and now.
Do something positive and select a CC who is deviating widely from HOG, do the background research and FOI checks, and at least call them out on it. You’ve got the money and legal experts to do something, (anything) - Wild Justice managed much more on much, much less!
Estimate of what it would cost to set up a new licensing agency - A great deal, take DVLA as an example and scale down
Who would fund it - You may have noticed most PCC's, CC's and politicians don't like the idea of private firearm ownership and are always looking to increase fees, I'd guess the recommendation of a publicly funded firearms licensing agency would be career suicide, opening the door for a private firm (G4S etc) to fleece gun owners
Would I like a complete new draft of sensible and fair NEW laws that are fit for purpose and replace old and existing laws. and not amendments - Yes I would
The QC's advice was that political action was better in the short term? - That doesn't answer my question, and to be honest, its a bit like the Ali incident where we were told everything was fine and dandy
Similar threads
