Certificate streamline.

[gixer1]

So as not to derail the chaps thread on a 3 year renewal -

What measures would you take to simplify the FAC/SGC application or renewal process if it were up to you?

I’ll start off -

1) Remove moderators from FAC’s.
2) Remove the need for variations when changing one rifle for another of the same chambering.
3) Enforce that GP’s must participate if the applicant is with their surgery - I.e.- they are signing to say they have no markers/illness that would give reason for concern and that they would notify the police if any arose during the life of the certificate.

 

[VSS]

Sounds about right.
Plus AOLQ as standard.
And sort out the mess that is "open / closed".

One thing that's often mentioned in discussions like this - and which I'm not in agreement with - is 10 year certificates. I wouldn't want to see them go longer than 5 years.

 

[Malxwal]

Point 3, definitely. Compliance with legal requirements should not be subject to whimsy.

 

[GlennUK]

Add shooting at targets when a calibre is obtained primarily for stalking.

My recent variation says i can zero on ranges, but does not mention shooting at targets, so I am not allowed to spend a day shooting at targets either on a range or any other land, reading the licensing conditions as written.

 

[Donkey Basher]

As 1 to 3 above but also:

Employ staff who have a knowledge of their subject matter & ensure they are given proper training & required to undertake CPD so that they stay current on the subject - this should ensure they are able to quickly & effeciently deal with the vast majority of situations presented to them. Then pay them a realistic salary to ensure that once trained they see the role as a career & not just a low paid admin job or short term top up for an early retired officer.

 

[shakey jake]

Point 3 who pays for the gp extra work? Cost rise to us or from general tax?

 

[TonyC]

Point 3 who pays for the gp extra work? Cost rise to us or from general tax?

-perhaps make it a legal requirement of doctors but with a fixed cost, no need to mess with NHS contract then.

To recap suggestions:

1) Remove moderators from FAC’s.
2) Remove the need for variations when changing one rifle for another of the same chambering. (think they do this already in NI so principle established)
3) Enforce that GP’s must participate if the applicant is with their surgery
4) AOLQ as standard.
5) Drop "open / closed"
6) Add shooting at targets when a calibre is obtained primarily for stalking.

Maybe one of the shooting organisations should take these points to one of their regular meetings (possibly with the APCO lead on firearms). Sensible suggestions which would make life easier all round and possibly lead to police licencing efficiencies

 

[Apthorpe]

1. Get rid of the ridiculous and burdensome (to the police) system some forces use of "approving" land to be shot over ....or even to be shot over with different calibres. That is wholly unnecessary and achieves nothing.
2. Get rid of applications and renewals altogether. Pay an annual subscription to fund the police oversight, and have certificates which last until e.g. 70 or 75 like car licences. The police could then spend their time almost entirely on those aspects which improve safety rather than spending the overwhelming majority of the time on bureaucracy.
3. Have users log their variations and update their details directly on the system, with automatic pre-approval of normal variations and numbers of firearms. There is no need at all for the quantity of manual data entry which must still be occurring.

 

[west_meon]

Add shooting at targets when a calibre is obtained primarily for stalking.

My recent variation says i can zero on ranges, but does not mention shooting at targets, so I am not allowed to spend a day shooting at targets either on a range or any other land, reading the licensing conditions as written.

Ref the targets, I was told by West Mercia that you can shoot at targets on a range for PRACTICE or ZEROING, but may not COMPETE! Quite why they want to differentiate between the two baffles me, but .....

 

[Malxwal]

Ref the targets, I was told by West Mercia that you can shoot at targets on a range for PRACTICE or ZEROING, but may not COMPETE! Quite why they want to differentiate between the two baffles me, but .....

Truly ridiculous, I'd love to hear their justification for that condition.

 

[Jura]

Unfortunately they are introducing more hoops for us to jump through.
My wife is a British citizen who was born in France.
She has lived and worked here since we were married and has held firearms certificate for over thirty years; however, after applying for her renewal 3 months ago she received a telephone call last week saying she must apply for a French ‘Acrocheck’ before her renewal would be granted.

“New Firearms regulation dating from 2020 whereby any person born in a foreign country and having lived there for more than 10 years would need this Acrocheck check to be completed before the FAC could be renewed”.

 

[bluesako]

-perhaps make it a legal requirement of doctors but with a fixed cost, no need to mess with NHS contract then.

To recap suggestions:

1) Remove moderators from FAC’s.
2) Remove the need for variations when changing one rifle for another of the same chambering. (think they do this already in NI so principle established)
3) Enforce that GP’s must participate if the applicant is with their surgery
4) AOLQ as standard.
5) Drop "open / closed"
6) Add shooting at targets when a calibre is obtained primarily for stalking.

Maybe one of the shooting organisations should take these points to one of their regular meetings (possibly with the APCO lead on firearms). Sensible suggestions which would make life easier all round and possibly lead to police licencing efficiencies

what tony,c said above

 

[gixer1]

1. Get rid of the ridiculous and burdensome (to the police) system some forces use of "approving" land to be shot over ....or even to be shot over with different calibres. That is wholly unnecessary and achieves nothing.
2. Get rid of applications and renewals altogether. Pay an annual subscription to fund the police oversight, and have certificates which last until e.g. 70 or 75 like car licences. The police could then spend their time almost entirely on those aspects which improve safety rather than spending the overwhelming majority of the time on bureaucracy.
3. Have users log their variations and update their details directly on the system, with automatic pre-approval of normal variations and numbers of firearms. There is no need at all for the quantity of manual data entry which must still be occurring.

I actually quite like the idea of number 2, and I guess if a person wanted to they could do as much (if not more) damage with a car as they could with a gun…yet no medical checks I know of for that….

 

[cjm1066]

Allow say 3 deer rifles and 1f1 at RFD on line. Who cares if you have a 6.5 grendal or prc apart from SD members?

Incentives the Police to deliver an efficient service, or are all aspects of policing inefficient?

 

[Apthorpe]

I actually quite like the idea of number 2, and I guess if a person wanted to they could do as much (if not more) damage with a car as they could with a gun…yet no medical checks I know of for that….

You can still keep the medical records monitoring within that, it merely removes the current system of periodic extortion and obstruction which add to the police burden as well as that of the victim, I mean applicant.

 

[Greenmist]

Return to pre 1988 legislation but with 10 year tickets and moderators

 

[Greenmist]

If you qualify for an FAC, it covers you for a SGC and no need for a separate ticket

 

[timbrayford]

So as not to derail the chaps thread on a 3 year renewal -

What measures would you take to simplify the FAC/SGC application or renewal process if it were up to you?

I’ll start off -

1) Remove moderators from FAC’s.
2) Remove the need for variations when changing one rifle for another of the same chambering.
3) Enforce that GP’s must participate if the applicant is with their surgery - I.e.- they are signing to say they have no markers/illness that would give reason for concern and that they would notify the police if any arose during the life of the certificate.

As semi auto centrefires, handguns and continuous fire guns, all of which were originally permitted in the original 1920 act have now been shifted to S5 why not move the remaining S1 to S2 and do away with all that pettifogging bureaucracy that apparently makes firearms administration so expensive?

 

[nun_hunter]

Add shooting at targets when a calibre is obtained primarily for stalking.

My recent variation says i can zero on ranges, but does not mention shooting at targets, so I am not allowed to spend a day shooting at targets either on a range or any other land, reading the licensing conditions as written.

I think that depends entirely on your definition of zeroing. I have the same condition but interpret it differently to you.

I like to zero at different distances and from different positions to ensure I know my bullet drops to ensure a clean and humane kill. How many rounds does this 'zeroing' take? As many as needed until night am comfortable the rifle is zeroed. When I do this zeroing it may be on improvised targets or on a range but it's still zeroing and not just target shooting.

 

[Malxwal]

I think that depends entirely on your definition of zeroing. I have the same condition but interpret it differently to you.

I like to zero at different distances and from different positions to ensure I know my bullet drops to ensure a clean and humane kill. How many rounds does this 'zeroing' take? As many as needed until night am comfortable the rifle is zeroed. When I do this zeroing it may be on improvised targets or on a range but it's still zeroing and not just target shooting.

I see no difference in terms of conditioning on license. It seems ridiculous "zeroing" is even mentioned. It's a fundamental of safe firearm usage.