long_range_rob
Well-Known Member
Weren’t they supposed to have a nationally available firearms register after the Dunblane enquiry?
Forged Certificates
- Thread starter Jamouk
- Start date
Knowing the age of some of the people in the club I'm a member of, I don't doubt that. But to solve the vulnerabilities in an antiquated paper certificate system, you either need to increase restrictions, or get with the times and move to something more modern.
The Internet isn't some crazy new technology, it's been around for 45 years and easily accessible by the public for at least 30 of those. I don't think it would be unreasonable to expect the bulk of people to use it, perhaps with a phone line to call into to verify a certificate for those who genuinely can't use the internet
Last edited:
Rake Aboot
Well-Known Member
I think the public need to accept that people have guns whether they like it or not.
Police failings shouldn’t have a detrimental effect on us .
Police failings shouldn’t have a detrimental effect on us .
8x57
Distinguished Member
As much as we would all like to believe it the police service is no longer a 24 hour/365 day service. There are many departments that only work limited office hours, and in some areas you even have to make an appointment to visit a police station as they don't operate a manned desk where you can walk in and talk to an officer.
Those stations that still operate a desk often have the front counter manned by volunteers who have very restricted capability or knowledge. Just contacting someone to speak to with the police (especially firearms departments) can often be a bit of a challenge. You wonder sometimes if they are deliberately avoiding communication with the public.
TringSaint
Well-Known Member
For now and until the tech gap is fixed I can see that the ‘solution’ will be to ban all licensee to licensee sales that don’t go via an rfd.
That is more likely to solve the immediate risk of someone obtaining a weapon by deception, because they will have to be in a gun shop to complete the transaction and that would likely deter a fraudster due to the risk of being caught.
It would also be a ‘working hours’ transaction so the police should therefore be able to verify the validity of the licenses - even more so if both parties have to submit a copy of their license to the rfd a week or so in advance of the transaction taking place.
Lots of hassle for us, but with our antiquated systems, what else can they really do?
That is more likely to solve the immediate risk of someone obtaining a weapon by deception, because they will have to be in a gun shop to complete the transaction and that would likely deter a fraudster due to the risk of being caught.
It would also be a ‘working hours’ transaction so the police should therefore be able to verify the validity of the licenses - even more so if both parties have to submit a copy of their license to the rfd a week or so in advance of the transaction taking place.
Lots of hassle for us, but with our antiquated systems, what else can they really do?
I think that legitimate firearms users could (and should) be doing a lot more to normalise responsible firearms ownership in the eyes of the public. There's far too many amongst us who behave like they've got some kind of sinful secret to hide, and this sort of furtive behaviour only makes the public more suspicious and nervous of us.
We need to be more open about it, I think.
The same faults are there. A forged paper certificate with the variation on, and a face to face sale??
I made the same comment on here a few years back, and was ridiculed for it.
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
I have sent this, just now, to my MP. Others are welcome to perhaps construct similar?
I hope, ask, please that you will forward this to the Home Secretary for her response, after you have read it. I am writing about concern raised this week over a forged Shotgun Certificate being used to enable a series of wicked murders and intended murders.
My comments are based on having held a Firearm Certificate since 1976 and a Shotgun Certificate since 1978 or thereabouts and having been a Registered Firearms Dealer for some twenty plus years until 2002.
The old system that existed previous to the requirement that all transactions be "face to face" was in fact more safe in preventing the acquisition of a weapon by means of a forged document. At distance a seller was always able to make a telephone call, during office hours, to the buyer's police force and check the bona fides.
With face to face, especially if bought outside office hours one presently cannot.
So what's the answer? Maybe a 24/7 contact number (which could indeed be the usual number to the relevant police force's control room) whereby on giving the supposed FAC's or SGC's unique number its validity can be confirmed?
These records can be accessed 24/7 even if the force's Firearms Licensing Department is closed after 4pm or on weekends. As anyone who has an FAC or SGC will know if they have ever been stopped by the police, at any hour, when driving their motor vehicle.
The vendor calls in and asks to verify the validity of the buyer's FAC or SGC. This is required to be done out of earshot of the potential buyer. So for example by the vendor taking the document into the vehicle they have travelled in to meet the buyer. Or by asking the buyer to wait in their vehicle outside the vendor's house.
The vendor is asked, straightaway, their name, address and their present location from where they are making the telephone call from. That may be the vendor's home, a game fair, a clay pigeon shooting ground, or indeed their car at the place where the buyer is at if the vendor has travelled to meet the buyer.
The vendor is then asked to give, simply, the unique number that is printed on each FAC or SGC and the bearer's name. The force control room will then tell the vendor the address and date of birth that the document should be carrying. And even perhaps a description of the photograph that each FAC and SGC carries of its holder. Such as "They are wearing a red shirt in the picture."
The force control room can then conform withthe vendor that this is a genuine document. If it is not because the location where the vendor was calling from was stated at the start of the call then the force control room can initiate a police response.
I hope that this is of help and use to the Home Secretary and to yourself.
I hope, ask, please that you will forward this to the Home Secretary for her response, after you have read it. I am writing about concern raised this week over a forged Shotgun Certificate being used to enable a series of wicked murders and intended murders.
My comments are based on having held a Firearm Certificate since 1976 and a Shotgun Certificate since 1978 or thereabouts and having been a Registered Firearms Dealer for some twenty plus years until 2002.
The old system that existed previous to the requirement that all transactions be "face to face" was in fact more safe in preventing the acquisition of a weapon by means of a forged document. At distance a seller was always able to make a telephone call, during office hours, to the buyer's police force and check the bona fides.
With face to face, especially if bought outside office hours one presently cannot.
So what's the answer? Maybe a 24/7 contact number (which could indeed be the usual number to the relevant police force's control room) whereby on giving the supposed FAC's or SGC's unique number its validity can be confirmed?
These records can be accessed 24/7 even if the force's Firearms Licensing Department is closed after 4pm or on weekends. As anyone who has an FAC or SGC will know if they have ever been stopped by the police, at any hour, when driving their motor vehicle.
The vendor calls in and asks to verify the validity of the buyer's FAC or SGC. This is required to be done out of earshot of the potential buyer. So for example by the vendor taking the document into the vehicle they have travelled in to meet the buyer. Or by asking the buyer to wait in their vehicle outside the vendor's house.
The vendor is asked, straightaway, their name, address and their present location from where they are making the telephone call from. That may be the vendor's home, a game fair, a clay pigeon shooting ground, or indeed their car at the place where the buyer is at if the vendor has travelled to meet the buyer.
The vendor is then asked to give, simply, the unique number that is printed on each FAC or SGC and the bearer's name. The force control room will then tell the vendor the address and date of birth that the document should be carrying. And even perhaps a description of the photograph that each FAC and SGC carries of its holder. Such as "They are wearing a red shirt in the picture."
The force control room can then conform withthe vendor that this is a genuine document. If it is not because the location where the vendor was calling from was stated at the start of the call then the force control room can initiate a police response.
I hope that this is of help and use to the Home Secretary and to yourself.
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
True, but there will be far fewer certificate holders and far fewer firearms when you need a good reason for having each and every one.
Ah yes I see what you mean now.
and that will improve public safety how exactly? How often is a fake certificate used? Once since 1968?
Meeting an unknown buyer in a car park to sell a gun is never a good idea, you have no idea who will turn up, local drug dealers to violently take the gun from you. legal yes, but It was a little nivea to do so at best.
Don’t think i would have sent that, bottom line is the certificates should be such that they are hard to fake, like an easy to see hologram for example as per passports.
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
We both know that “ public safety “ is merely the excuse. The agenda is to reduce the number of firearms in public hands to the absolute minimum.
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
Everything can be faked. If the reward is worth the effort. I've seen forged French ID cards that have holograms and chips that are fake.
We should be resisting any further changes to gun licensing, not embracing them or suggesting them, entry into the sport is getting difficult enough, then the cost of doing so and cost of participation, putting all s2 into s1 would see costs increase significantly and likely gun shops closing and would not improve public safety.
May as well take it to its conclusion you can own one shotgun and one rifle, keep 250 shotgun cartridges and 50 rounds for the rifle and reloading ammunition banned.
Society is now so much safer
from nutters and police failings.
May as well take it to its conclusion you can own one shotgun and one rifle, keep 250 shotgun cartridges and 50 rounds for the rifle and reloading ammunition banned.
Society is now so much safer
from nutters and police failings.
MAH
Well-Known Member
Thanks for sharing.You can now generate a "check code" for your driving license, you can give the code to someone and its good for 3 weeks, they can just go online, type the code in and check your license is valid, see what types of vehicles you can drive (HGVs, motorbikes, etc) and if you have any endorsements. My employer requires it once a year and my car insurance wanted it too this year.
View or share your driving licence information
Find out what information DVLA holds about your driving licence or create a check code to share your driving record, for example to hire a carwww.gov.uk
it's a pretty simple system, something like that would work well for firearms transactions. If you could generate a one use code, give that to the seller and they can type that code in on the gov website which checked it against the NFLMS to verify that you had a valid certificate with the appropriate open slot
An interesting system.
I can envisage an adaptation of that working well for private sale transactions in our community.
@Conor O'Gorman
Were you aware of the above DVLA system?
I'd support such a system for verification of certificate holders.
I've always been cautious about meeting people, when buying shooting related items.
I've often asked to see a photo of there certificate before I'd pay, or meet them.
Most see the mutual benefit of getting confirmation that both parties are certificate holders.
More recently, I wanted to buy a none listed item, from an individual and an online advert.
Before paying I shared a part copy of my certificate with a seller and asked to see his. However he was most uncomfortable about sharing his with me, and so that was the end of it. The sale fell through.
Whereas, if the equivalent of the DVLA System was available both parties might have been reassured all was ok.
I think it is a great idea, and intend to write to my MP to highlight it.
M
Why not aurge it the other way, there is no public benefit in the good reason for each gun on a FAC. The saving in Police resources would be significant and applied where they might produce a benefit.
shakey jake
Well-Known Member
Any thing can be faked. But should it be doable by a 19 year old in his bedroom?
If he had made a passport on his hewlet packard as well then fair enough.
The police are not fit to govern us, should be a completely seperate body
If he had made a passport on his hewlet packard as well then fair enough.
The police are not fit to govern us, should be a completely seperate body
Similar threads
