FAC Caveats

[Fdt]

I was wondering if anyone has had similar experiences to what I am facing at present and thought I'd share them.

The background is I'm reapplying for my FAC after allowing it to lapse in 2011. Until then I had an open ticket and I also had target shooting through my club at the time, where I qualified as an RCO. All well and good. I got rid of my guns and until a couple of years ago, that was that.

I started shooting shotguns again and had no real difficulty (apart from the standard delays in certificate grant) in sorting that out. I rejoined a couple of rifle clubs and became a full member of both last year and, at that time, got my Safe Shooter Card from the NRA. I had done a stalking course with a national body back in the 90s but as I can't track that down, I thought I'd also do a DSC1 just to get myself back up to speed and have been out with a couple of stalkers locally.

So what's the issue? On a call with my FEO he mentioned that he didn't feel DSC1 was enough in their view and wanted references to prove I am a safe shot in the field. I have no issue with that in principle but as far as I'm concerned the DSC1 is exactly designed to fulfil that requirement. It's not an issue for me to provide these references as I've been out with a couple of people locally. My concern falls with what may have been a throwaway comment amounting to "if you don't provide references then you'll require a mentor if when you go shooting". The implications as I see it are:

1. Why is DSC1 not enough and what else should there be? DSC1 isn't compulsory, are they jumping straight to DSC2?
2. If DSC1 isn't enough, have they told DMQ et al?
3. What is a mentor and how is this qualified? DSC1 and FAC?

It's likely that this is just my FEO being challenging but I thought it was worth sharing. None of the points are an issue for me personally but they would definitely be an issue for someone getting into the sport.

I'm seeing him next week and I will be asking questions and making contemporaneous notes in case I have an issue with the grant.

 

[kes]

First, there is nothing to say you need ANY deer qualification to start stalking.
Second, the FEO cannot refuse on the basis of you not being 'thought' to be a safe shot in the field, especially with your history.
Third, if you had a deer calibre before you gave up and stated your intention to buy stalking this time around - you might need a couple of receipts using an estate rifle first. Deer land would be a cert.
You should get a .308 conditioned for range virtually without question, assuming you meet the range conditions and are a member. You have history.
If you are a member of insipid international, BASC or one of the other orgs., get them to follow this up, its wrong headed, not in the Guidance and should not be allowed to stand for the sake of others as well as yourself.
Also, politely refer your request and your history, including any old FAC to his/her manager with a request to review the decision before your representative organisation is involved and GET THE REPLY IN WRITING !

Good luck - although you wont need it.

 

[Apthorpe]

I was wondering if anyone has had similar experiences to what I am facing at present and thought I'd share them.

The background is I'm reapplying for my FAC after allowing it to lapse in 2011. Until then I had an open ticket and I also had target shooting through my club at the time, where I qualified as an RCO. All well and good. I got rid of my guns and until a couple of years ago, that was that.

I started shooting shotguns again and had no real difficulty (apart from the standard delays in certificate grant) in sorting that out. I rejoined a couple of rifle clubs and became a full member of both last year and, at that time, got my Safe Shooter Card from the NRA. I had done a stalking course with a national body back in the 90s but as I can't track that down, I thought I'd also do a DSC1 just to get myself back up to speed and have been out with a couple of stalkers locally.

So what's the issue? On a call with my FEO he mentioned that he didn't feel DSC1 was enough in their view and wanted references to prove I am a safe shot in the field. I have no issue with that in principle but as far as I'm concerned the DSC1 is exactly designed to fulfil that requirement. It's not an issue for me to provide these references as I've been out with a couple of people locally. My concern falls with what may have been a throwaway comment amounting to "if you don't provide references then you'll require a mentor if when you go shooting". The implications as I see it are:

1. Why is DSC1 not enough and what else should there be? DSC1 isn't compulsory, are they jumping straight to DSC2?
2. If DSC1 isn't enough, have they told DMQ et al?
3. What is a mentor and how is this qualified? DSC1 and FAC?

It's likely that this is just my FEO being challenging but I thought it was worth sharing. None of the points are an issue for me personally but they would definitely be an issue for someone getting into the sport.

I'm seeing him next week and I will be asking questions and making contemporaneous notes in case I have an issue with the grant.

Your FEO is being a knob. I was in a similar boat a while back and had no problems at all.
1. DSC1 is not a pre-requisite for a FAC.
2. The police already believes, without reservation, that you are a safe rifle shot because they gave you a FAC in the past and nothing material has changed since then. As, of course, does the NRA.
3. A mentor is someone else who has a FAC. They're a made up requirement, but perhaps sensible for beginners. No qualification is necessary.
You sound over-qualified, if anything.


In case of difficulty, you should speak to the FEO's manager, a different FEO, or ignore them and put in the application anyway. I'd say to the FEO something like " I wanted to check this because the Home office guidance and BASC are both clear that what you're suggesting is not the case, and it would mean that the police had previously been acting wrongly which doesn't seem likely. Perhaps we're getting our wires crossed?" You could download and print off the guidance and shooting organisations opinions. While the latter aren't mandatory for the police to follow, they are considered reputable and authoritative, and at the very least should prompt a double check and rethink by FEO.
Home Office guidance exists to tell police how to behave in these regards and it does not sanction their approach. If you're a member of a shooting organisation - CA, BASC etc. - they should be very helpful.

 

[Fdt]

Your FEO is being a knob. I was in a similar boat a while back and had no problems at all.
1. DSC1 is not a pre-requisite for a FAC.
2. The police already believes, without reservation, that you are a safe rifle shot because they gave you a FAC in the past and nothing material has changed since then. As, of course, does the NRA.
3. A mentor is someone else who has a FAC. They're a made up requirement, but perhaps sensible for beginners. No qualification is necessary.
You sound over-qualified, if anything.


In case of difficulty, you should speak to the FEO's manager, a different FEO, or ignore them and put in the application anyway. I'd say to the FEO something like " I wanted to check this because the Home office guidance and BASC are both clear that what you're suggesting is not the case, and it would mean that the police had previously been acting wrongly which doesn't seem likely. Perhaps we're getting our wires crossed?" You could download and print off the guidance and shooting organisations opinions. While the latter aren't mandatory for the police to follow, they are considered reputable and authoritative, and at the very least should prompt a double check and rethink by FEO.
Home Office guidance exists to tell police how to behave in these regards and it does not sanction their approach. If you're a member of a shooting organisation - CA, BASC etc. - they should be very helpful.

Thanks, that's along the lines I was thinking. I'm going to give him a chance to speak on Monday, but as I say, make some notes at the time. It always freaks people out. He was a bit challenging when I moved here from Hants (who despite their rep, were absolutely great).

 

[Apthorpe]

It may be tactical to lay out the case first, and then let him elaborate. "I just want to start off understanding the process here.....(then lay it out)" It might be better to make it clear that you know the rules first and save him being reluctant to lose face when it becomes clear that he's wrong.
It's easier for most people to agree or disagree with something laid out for them, than it is for them to make a fool of themselves and be expected to admit it and row back.

 

[CarlW]

It may be tactical to lay out the case first, and then let him elaborate. "I just want to start off understanding the process here.....(then lay it out)" It might be better to make it clear that you know the rules first and save him being reluctant to lose face when it becomes clear that he's wrong.
It's easier for most people to agree or disagree with something laid out for them, than it is for them to make a fool of themselves and be expected to admit it and row back.

Agree 100%.

 

[Heym SR20]

I was wondering if anyone has had similar experiences to what I am facing at present and thought I'd share them.

The background is I'm reapplying for my FAC after allowing it to lapse in 2011. Until then I had an open ticket and I also had target shooting through my club at the time, where I qualified as an RCO. All well and good. I got rid of my guns and until a couple of years ago, that was that.

I started shooting shotguns again and had no real difficulty (apart from the standard delays in certificate grant) in sorting that out. I rejoined a couple of rifle clubs and became a full member of both last year and, at that time, got my Safe Shooter Card from the NRA. I had done a stalking course with a national body back in the 90s but as I can't track that down, I thought I'd also do a DSC1 just to get myself back up to speed and have been out with a couple of stalkers locally.

So what's the issue? On a call with my FEO he mentioned that he didn't feel DSC1 was enough in their view and wanted references to prove I am a safe shot in the field. I have no issue with that in principle but as far as I'm concerned the DSC1 is exactly designed to fulfil that requirement. It's not an issue for me to provide these references as I've been out with a couple of people locally. My concern falls with what may have been a throwaway comment amounting to "if you don't provide references then you'll require a mentor if when you go shooting". The implications as I see it are:

1. Why is DSC1 not enough and what else should there be? DSC1 isn't compulsory, are they jumping straight to DSC2?
2. If DSC1 isn't enough, have they told DMQ et al?
3. What is a mentor and how is this qualified? DSC1 and FAC?

It's likely that this is just my FEO being challenging but I thought it was worth sharing. None of the points are an issue for me personally but they would definitely be an issue for someone getting into the sport.

I'm seeing him next week and I will be asking questions and making contemporaneous notes in case I have an issue with the grant.

All you need to do is to demonstrate that you are safe and compitent. Use as much evidence as possible, stating that you did the precursor course to DSC1 and used to stalk, and have been on several accompanied stalks recently etc etc. Put it all in a clear application with supporting evidence, and provide sufficient so that when it comes to question its just a question of confirming rather than finding out more.

If you can provide one or two good pieces of evidence, that usually suffices. If however the recipient asks for evidence - they will usually want three or four!

This makes the whole process for the FEO that much easier.

My personal view is that it is right for an FEO to be asking challenging questions before granting FAC's or letting rifles be used unsupervised. The challenge that we have in the UK is that it has been cobbled together and focuses too much on the rifle rather than the user.

 

[bullet chucker]

What stalking rifles did you use when your ticket was 'open'?
Were they authorized for Target as well.
My point being, you must have had X amount of experience to show you were responsible. SO'! what can have changed? What is he trying to establish?

BC.

 

[Apthorpe]

All you need to do is to demonstrate that you are safe and compitent. …..

My personal view is that it is right for an FEO to be asking challenging questions before granting FAC's or letting rifles be used unsupervised. The challenge that we have in the UK is that it has been cobbled together and focuses too much on the rifle rather than the user.

My personal view is that it's impertinent for an FEO to irritate an applicant with such questions when it is abundantly clear that the police have already decided he is safe, as has the NRA.
The challenge we have in the UK is an excessive focus on process, banning or licensing stuff and virtually no focus on ensuring that some brainpower, judgement, experience or knowledge is used by those supposed to apply the rules.

 

[Heym SR20]

My personal view is that it's impertinent for an FEO to irritate an applicant with such questions when it is abundantly clear that the police have already decided he is safe, as has the NRA.
The challenge we have in the UK is an excessive focus on process, banning or licensing stuff and virtually no focus on ensuring that some brainpower, judgement, experience or knowledge is used by those supposed to apply the rules.

Could n't agree more. But the OP did say he allowed his FAC to lapse - all sorts of perfectly legitimate reasons why that should happen, but equally there can well be other reasons as well.

The trouble with recent events and previous incidents where there has been improper use of licensed firearms, its not been the system per se, but rather that concerns had been raised about the individuals fitness to hold a firearm and that the police had not acted accordingly. I am not at all surprised FEO's are being cautious - their neck is on the block if anything goes wrong.

 

[finnbear270]

Just write in the first instance to your PCC, outlining your previous experience, also call into question your current FEO experience / knowledge, wait for the fall of soot.

 

[25 Sharps]

Am I the only person who thinks that shooting on a range is not enough experience to say for sure you can shoot safely in the field? Because it’s not, in one situation if you obey the rules i.e. not lifting rifle above 4 degrees and not loading the rifle until you are on the firing point pretty much ALL risk is removed. Target is a known distance, backdrop is perfect to absorb the bullet and 99.9 % guaranteed not to ricochet plus generally (depending on discipline) you have plenty of time to take the shot and no decisions to make.

In the field you have often only a split second to make decision on range, angles, point of aim and ricochet risk. Totally different and a safe shooter card means you’re safe on the range, that’s it, not in the field.

DSC1 safety like most qualifications is learning to pass an exam, a very simple exam! It doesn’t mean you’ll be equipped to make the right decision in the field, unless all your deer stand in front of a soft earth bank....

2 references are required on your FAC anyway, if they state you are a safe shot and that’s enough for the FEO, what’s the issue?

 

[jimbo1984]

As stated Dsc 1 is not needed to get an fac and when it came out we were assured that it wouldn’t be used for that purpose ( quite rightly ) to be honest the ones who’ve been constantly pushing it have a lot to answer for , where does it end ? Food for thought ....

 

[Woodsmoke]

Your FEO is being a knob

Succinctly put. I agree wholeheartedly.

 

[Avianmanagement]

Am I the only person who thinks that shooting on a range is not enough experience to say for sure you can shoot safely in the field? Because it’s not, in one situation if you obey the rules i.e. not lifting rifle above 4 degrees and not loading the rifle until you are on the firing point pretty much ALL risk is removed. Target is a known distance, backdrop is perfect to absorb the bullet and 99.9 % guaranteed not to ricochet plus generally (depending on discipline) you have plenty of time to take the shot and no decisions to make.

In the field you have often only a split second to make decision on range, angles, point of aim and ricochet risk. Totally different and a safe shooter card means you’re safe on the range, that’s it, not in the field.

DSC1 safety like most qualifications is learning to pass an exam, a very simple exam! It doesn’t mean you’ll be equipped to make the right decision in the field, unless all your deer stand in front of a soft earth bank....

2 references are required on your FAC anyway, if they state you are a safe shot and that’s enough for the FEO, what’s the issue?

Are the references not just for character references? There is nothing on the form to say that they have seen you shoot.

 

[25 Sharps]

Are the references not just for character references? There is nothing on the form to say that they have seen you shoot.

So ask two people who you have known for two years and shot with to do your references and they can include something along the lines “ I have shot with Dave in several occasions and consider him to be a very safe shot in the field, blue to assess backstop and ricochet risk correctly” I had shot a lot with one of my referees at grant and he did mention safety in the field.

 

[gonzo]

Thet last few references I've given have been over the phone.
And go along the lines of:
Have you agreed to be a referee? Is there anything you need to tell me in confidence? Thanks, goodbye.

 

[CarlW]

I do feel the Jocks use the referee process more aggressively (no value-judgment) than they do in England & Wales (don't know about NI). When I referee for my Scottish friends, I generally get a call and quite a bit of investigative questioning about them. In E&W, I rarely even get a call.

Kind regards,

Carl

 

[NullMac]

The questions my referees have been asked have changed over time. Initially there were questions about experience. Now they are much more about domestic issues (other residents, marriage strains) and intemperate behaviour i.e. is someone in the house a risk, am I a risk to my wife (or the reverse) and am I a risk to the broader population. I have had people tell me they would not give a positive reference to some FAC holders "any more". So it seems like a worthwhile process to me.

I do always smile when they ask me if I take drugs though. Just before we being to think it is sensible.

 

[enfieldspares]

An interesting starting comment that exposes the fact that DSC1 proves merely, in relation to gun handling,that the candidate has passed an elementary accuracy test and nothing more. No evaluation of appreciation of safe backstop, shoot through, ricochet or anything else. But yet folk still pay money to DSC Certificate "schools" like they do to "visa agents" here in Nigeria thinking it somehow a guaranteed route to the goal of an FAC for stalking or, here, to a visa.