Go with the FLO or or just say NO?

[tFl]

Not my experience on both occasions that I have had reason to contact BASC.
I have contacted them when I have known things were wrong and all they have done is confirm that whatever I contacted them for was wrong and told me to stand up for myself.
I get the impression that BASC don't want to get too involved with the little things that affect us but only want to tackle big things that will make the press and so make them shine.
There is always the 'ways and means act' that can be used against you if you get a name for yourself as a Barrack Room Lawyer or in plain speak, a trouble maker.

This is risible, nobody told you to stand up for yourself. they gave you sensible advice for an applicant to follow. BASC would get nowhere if they had to make applications on behalf of its members

 

[EMcC]

Wow that would be a first if BASC did make applications on behalf of it's members, a bit impractical but it would keep them busy.
In my case a general enquiry ref the procedure taken when considering reloaders ammunition allowances would have sufficed methinks.
Alright you didn't tell me to 'stand up for myself' in those words but the information given was just the procedure for me to take, which was known to me anyway as it is almost common sense.
If you think I didn't follow the procedure, at least to it's first stage, you couldn't have credited me with any sense at all.
In fact I told you I had already written in to them, so part one of the procedure was already in motion.

 

[tFl]

Wow that would be a first if BASC did make applications on behalf of it's members, a bit impractical but it would keep them busy.
In my case a general enquiry ref the procedure taken when considering reloaders ammunition allowances would have sufficed methinks.
Alright you didn't tell me to 'stand up for myself' in those words but the information given was just the procedure for me to take, which was known to me anyway as it is almost common sense.
If you think I didn't follow the procedure, at least to it's first stage, you couldn't have credited me with any sense at all.
In fact I told you I had already written in to them, so part one of the procedure was already in motion.

well i am glad BASC reaffirmed your knowledge of the statutory procedure, why did that deserve a forum bashing? So if your waiting a response from police to see whether they will grant or be capricious before engaging BASC.... Why should that be so bad as to cote BASC off on a forum. Its akin to complaining about RAC before theyve arrived to try and fix your car.

 

[CWMMAN3738]

Having read the advice given is it not possible to contact your FEO for a chat as it sounds to me that you would like to avoid confrontation on this issue for a few reasons. Be firm but fair & listen (or appear to) to what the FEO has to say & his reasons and then explain your point the advice you've been given and your choices explaining what you could tolerate & what you would not in line with the guidelines showing a knowledge of the relevant requirements & guidelines & see what comes of it, you may be surprised at the outcome even if a compromise, if not you have lost nothing and can proceed with more direct action.

 

[timbrayford]

Having read the advice given is it not possible to contact your FEO for a chat as it sounds to me that you would like to avoid confrontation on this issue for a few reasons. Be firm but fair & listen (or appear to) to what the FEO has to say & his reasons and then explain your point the advice you've been given and your choices explaining what you could tolerate & what you would not in line with the guidelines showing a knowledge of the relevant requirements & guidelines & see what comes of it, you may be surprised at the outcome even if a compromise, if not you have lost nothing and can proceed with more direct action.

+1 Sensible advice. atb Tim

 

[Tackleberry270]

Having read the advice given is it not possible to contact your FEO for a chat as it sounds to me that you would like to avoid confrontation on this issue for a few reasons. Be firm but fair & listen (or appear to) to what the FEO has to say & his reasons and then explain your point the advice you've been given and your choices explaining what you could tolerate & what you would not in line with the guidelines showing a knowledge of the relevant requirements & guidelines & see what comes of it, you may be surprised at the outcome even if a compromise, if not you have lost nothing and can proceed with more direct action.

I prefer a letter for a few reasons. You can carefully phrase every point and keep a record of it. You can address it to the head of the department but it can be read by all that need to consider what you have written. Sometimes organising a meeting you can feel like you have wasted your time if you get a clerk who hasn't got the authority to implement any of what you are asking for and/or doesn't have the knowledge or understanding needed.
Other than that a well prepared for meeting with the right person can be a very good thing.

 

[scubadog]

Well after my intial conversation with someone at BASC fre arms dept who advised me to "say no" I decided to email them to see if
they could send me an email with the points that the chap on the phone had raised. Theese guys no this stufff inside out and
generally have a good way of putting things that are both correct and diplomatic.....or so i thaught.

So BASC respond to me (good comms, cant fault em) Saying that the FLO has no right to implement named mentor but as I have no experience then
i have no choice!

ERRR thats not what you said on the phone! So now I have decided to ignor BASC. Im not knocking th company as i think they do a great job of being the "voice for shooting" though it appears to me that the voice for advice is one of confusion!

So I will meet my FLO, listen to his points, raise my argument and then probably just bend over and take it for an easy life.
Named mentor it is most liley to be then!

 

[tFl]

SCUBADOG

Thats not what you were advised.

The police can insist on a mentoring condition even thoguh ACPO advcie is not to use them. The police have absolute discretion to add conditions even if they are unreasonable to you and I. There is no appeal against this, however there is an appeal process when you apply for changes to be made and they then refuse.

Home Office guidance requires applicants to have experience of firearms, the police will need to see some baseline experience before grant. What BASC would have explained is that the mentoring condition should not be applied because they have concerns (above rifle safe handling experience) with species welfare e.g. the case where a fox shooter with .223 for 10 years suddenly needs a mentor because he wants to shoot a Muntjac and the police think it vastly different.

Are you seriously suggesting the police should issue a rifle to anybody without any experience in shooting??

 

[scubadog]

SCUBADOG

Thats not what you were advised.

The police can insist on a mentoring condition even thoguh ACPO advcie is not to use them. The police have absolute discretion to add conditions even if they are unreasonable to you and I. There is no appeal against this, however there is an appeal process when you apply for changes to be made and they then refuse.

Home Office guidance requires applicants to have experience of firearms, the police will need to see some baseline experience before grant. What BASC would have explained is that the mentoring condition should not be applied because they have concerns (above rifle safe handling experience) with species welfare e.g. the case where a fox shooter with .223 for 10 years suddenly needs a mentor because he wants to shoot a Muntjac and the police think it vastly different.

Are you seriously suggesting the police should issue a rifle to anybody without any experience in shooting??

Errmm sorry but who are you and how would you know that was not what I was advised?
You wouldn't perhaps be someone from BASC representing with a new user identification so that you could make representation for the company without expressing an interest would you?
I hope not - that would put BASC far far down in my expectations.

Im not even going to warrant you with a response until you can explain "How you know" that the information given to me was different!

 

[tFl]

I advised you as a BASC employee.

People forget we look on forums to see how our advice can be distorted, especially when BASC has refused to give in to their pre-formed opinion. Often we are asked to agree with things we cannot, the law also prevents this on most occasions. The alw also rpevetns us from acting also, but nonetheless BASC is castigated for being unhelpful.

See my answer to your PM

 

[bewsher500]

may be missing something here but as I read it:
1) you have some stalking with a mate who would be happy to mentor
2) you have some paid stalking with a guide
3) you have the potential to go stalking elsewhere with other experienced shooters

so
1) you have effectively named your "main" mentor and I am making the assumption that he would be the one the FLO would put on your FAC
2) and 3) Is the FLO suggesting that your mentor (above) would have to attend your paid stalks as well as any other stalking?!?

if you are happy to always be shooting with someone else then I would suggest that they keep a list of "mentors" that you would be shooting with the exception of paid days where realistically you could be going out and using an estate rifle.

they can't ask for you to gain significant experience and then limit you to one mentor when you have more than one piece of ground

 

[scubadog]

I advised you as a BASC employee.

People forget we look on forums to see how our advice can be distorted, especially when BASC has refused to give in to their pre-formed opinion. Often we are asked to agree with things we cannot, the law also prevents this on most occasions. The alw also rpevetns us from acting also, but nonetheless BASC is castigated for being unhelpful.

See my answer to your PM

I was not aware that BASC have a policy that makes it acceptable for my personal communications with them are discussed on a internet forum.
Is it only me that finds this unacceptable?

 

[scubadog]

may be missing something here but as I read it:
1) you have some stalking with a mate who would be happy to mentor
2) you have some paid stalking with a guide
3) you have the potential to go stalking elsewhere with other experienced shooters

so
1) you have effectively named your "main" mentor and I am making the assumption that he would be the one the FLO would put on your FAC
2) and 3) Is the FLO suggesting that your mentor (above) would have to attend your paid stalks as well as any other stalking?!?

if you are happy to always be shooting with someone else then I would suggest that they keep a list of "mentors" that you would be shooting with the exception of paid days where realistically you could be going out and using an estate rifle.

they can't ask for you to gain significant experience and then limit you to one mentor when you have more than one piece of ground

All of your points are valid.
The very last line is sums up the exact problem I have.

 

[Axe]

Just get the named individual who is your mentor to send a letter to Dorset once he was witnessed you safely using the rifle on a number of outings, and stating that he / she feels the mentoring condition is unnecessary. ACPO doesnt put a time limit on "mentor" condition, i think if you really drill down then "mentor" condition isnt even an ACPO guideline, but its probably advisable to go along with the FLO and do as they ask - play them at their own game and get the mentor to sign you off in a matter of weeks.
For example, in the space of two weeks you could quite reasonably go on 15 outings with your "mentor"
If he is happy that on every occasion you handled the rifle with competently, knowledgeably and safely then no problem.


Preferences

§
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
-
=
Backspace

Tab
q
w
e
r
t
y
u
i
o
p
[
]

Return



capslock
a
s
d
f
g
h
j
k
l
;
'
\

shift
`
z
x
c
v
b
n
m
,
.
/
shift


English


Deutsch


Español


Français


Italiano


Polski


Português


Русский




alt

alt





Preferences

 

[tFl]

I was not aware that BASC have a policy that makes it acceptable for my personal communications with them are discussed on a internet forum.
Is it only me that finds this unacceptable?

Your email correspondance has not been posted on the forum, whilst your query does not contain any personal sensitive data, BASC does not publish its members problems. On the other hand anybody has a right to defend against vexatious comments, especially when they are unfounded.

It is not right that anybody can ask advice of a professional body, disagree with it, then go onto a forum and twist the situation to attack an organsiation without thinking that they wont find out.

 

[bewsher500]

Ah ... PR at its finest

 

[scubadog]

Okay here is the deal.
tfl is in fact a senior employee of BASC fire arms department.
I think it is wise that any one posting advice that they have been given by BASC are aware that BASC have a presence on this site in an official format (those with trade accounts) and also unofficial names (tFl) who are happy to attack the members for posting about the advice they were given.

I for one do not find this satisfactory. I have logged a complaint accordingly and will be removing my membership and recommending my club move their club membership to a more professional body.

 

[tFl]

Okay here is the deal.
tfl is in fact a senior employee of BASC fire arms department.
I think it is wise that any one posting advice that they have been given by BASC are aware that BASC have a presence on this site in an official format (those with trade accounts) and also unofficial names (tFl) who are happy to attack the members for posting about the advice they were given.

I for one do not find this satisfactory. I have logged a complaint accordingly and will be removing my membership and recommending my club move their club membership to a more professional body.

no one has done anything of the sort,

post #32 shows nothing of the sort.

my comments as quoted by scubadog in post #32 are thought to be personal to him, they are not. I am merely informing the forum that there is something amiss since Scubadogs posting at '#27

BASC keeps all data relavant to the data protection act confidential, we go further and keep every call confidential; however in this case the information is about police policy and available to any member. I have not disclosed any personal details. The fact that any forum member can post his query on the forum i.e. as scubadog has done at post#1 means anybody can comment on here. If BASC is attacked in the way I have seen recently....then there is a right to reply.

 

[HunterMoore]

I agree with tFI ... as usual so much anti BASC nonsense it is wearisome ...

I have been with BASC for 30 years, have hardly ever needed them, fortunately, but sleep easy knowing they are there if I do, and happy that they are working on my behalf on the bigger picture.

Tony

 

[scubadog]

BASC have every right to reply to any post's, but surely they have to declare an interest and let other know that they are replying as BASC?

I too have been with BASC for many years, with no problems. Though after the utter nonsense this one chap was sending me in private messages and emails regarding my post on this forum I have changed my opinion. If this is the calibre of their senior staff then I am deeply shocked.