has anybody ever fought the police, re conditions etc

[Orion]

This is utter nonsense, within the context of the main purpose of the firearms act it makes no difference at all which of these rifles you used to shoot a fox, where is the good reason issue? Obviously if you were carrying your .243 in expectation of a deer and saw a fox you would shoot it and if you were only intending to shoot a fox you would be carrying the .223. i.e. you have "good reason" for both. atb Tim

Tim,

I'm with you 100% in what you say, but we have to be careful when mentioning 'good reason' in relation to firearms.

As detailed at length in the HO Guidance, 'good reason', (land availability/bookings, presence of quarry species etc.) must be shown for the initial grant of the FAC or firearm, including those obtained later under variation. Any further use, i.e. additional quarry species or, as they put it, 'reasonable eventualities', should be allowed but do not have anything to do with that primary 'good reason'.

You might ask why I am making the point, and the reason is that I am aware of FLDs that have tried to use the 'good reason' argument to deny a shooter the use of a lawfully held firearm because he already had another suitable rifle for the same quarry species.

Case in point: Mr X is unfortunately under a very restrictive FLD and has a .270 on open ticket for deer/fox/vermin. He puts in a variation for a .308 for boar overseas and is granted it. He also quite reasonably wishes to also use the .308 on deer in the UK as he now has invitations to shoot reds. One would think that this shouldn't present any problem whatsoever but he is refused! The reasoning for this bonkers decision put forward by the FLD is that he now has to provide 'good reason' for the .308 to allow it to be used on deer, and as he already has a .270 for that purpose he can't demonstrate the 'good reason' requested! A few choice quotes from the Guidance later and they relented, but it does illustrate how having to show 'good reason' at any stage other than the initial grant might be unwise.

 

[Irish Bob]

As the courts have held (R v Cambridge Crown Court ex parte Buckland, 1998) that there is no right of appeal against the imposition of conditions (as opposed to a refusal to grant or renew a certificate) chief officers will wish to be cautious in imposing conditions that might amount to a constructive refusal to grant or renew a certificate, that is additional conditions that would make possession or use so difficult as to be redundant in practice.

The condition has to be reasonable. I have just looked at this, I was going to mention the Wednesbury point (reasonableness) but it is already set out there in the following link.

www.basc.org.uk/.../04DDFD91-A9AA-45E4-9344064E62F3689D


Dorset police do not mention the Wednesbury point in their review of the position!

 

[Scots_stalker]

The reason I ask is because I've put in a variation for another 22. I was told on the phone that they won't grant me one as they dont like granting 2 rifles of the same cal. But after speaking to sacs I was told its neither here nor there what they like. The law states that if I provide good reason it should be granted

 

[Paul at Fechan]

but from what your flo says you now have the perfect reason to apply for a 17 hmr!
!WIN!

 

[DazT]

prepare your case, detail exactly what you want and why giving all possible reasons for the FEO to get it off his desk.

I've always done this with applications/variations/renewals - i try to give as much information as i can. Sometimes resulting in 6 or 7 pages of A4 including:
Full details on home security/cabinets/ammo storage, permission/syndicate information + maps, firearms experience and previous certificates held, information relating to calibre and ammo variations applied for ........

I have always found that the renewal/variation has gone through quickly without any conditions imposed.

Strathclyde are very good at what they do ........... normally

Daz

 

[mereside]

Brian put in for both cals but state ones going to be set up different to the other ie one for night time shooting and one with a day scope . changing from one scope to the other is not practical and wastes time and money , just give them both cals a good reason for possessing two of the same , i did it with 270's set up for woodland /hill , atb wayne

 

[Scots_stalker]

I've already got a 22 bolt action. I've applied for a 22semi auto as a dedecated night vision rifle

 

[MJ75]

This is utter nonsense, within the context of the main purpose of the firearms act it makes no difference at all which of these rifles you used to shoot a fox, where is the good reason issue? Obviously if you were carrying your .243 in expectation of a deer and saw a fox you would shoot it and if you were only intending to shoot a fox you would be carrying the .223. i.e. you have "good reason" for both. atb Tim

Too true. And that's why I have fox on my .22LR, .243 and .30-06. My FEO added fox to the rimfire when I said I shoot on ground where I have rights to kill fox, but felt the little rifle would only be powerful enough at close range. He agreed and added it without me asking for it.

 

[timbrayford]

Tim,

I'm with you 100% in what you say, but we have to be careful when mentioning 'good reason' in relation to firearms.

As detailed at length in the HO Guidance, 'good reason', (land availability/bookings, presence of quarry species etc.) must be shown for the initial grant of the FAC or firearm, including those obtained later under variation. Any further use, i.e. additional quarry species or, as they put it, 'reasonable eventualities', should be allowed but do not have anything to do with that primary 'good reason'.

You might ask why I am making the point, and the reason is that I am aware of FLDs that have tried to use the 'good reason' argument to deny a shooter the use of a lawfully held firearm because he already had another suitable rifle for the same quarry species.

Case in point: Mr X is unfortunately under a very restrictive FLD and has a .270 on open ticket for deer/fox/vermin. He puts in a variation for a .308 for boar overseas and is granted it. He also quite reasonably wishes to also use the .308 on deer in the UK as he now has invitations to shoot reds. One would think that this shouldn't present any problem whatsoever but he is refused! The reasoning for this bonkers decision put forward by the FLD is that he now has to provide 'good reason' for the .308 to allow it to be used on deer, and as he already has a .270 for that purpose he can't demonstrate the 'good reason' requested! A few choice quotes from the Guidance later and they relented, but it does illustrate how having to show 'good reason' at any stage other than the initial grant might be unwise.

I take your point but surely under the Firearms Act you can have more than one rifle for one "good reason". All too often FLO's try to interpret "good reason" as "need" which are entirely different things and certainly to my mind something that shooters need to be vigilant about.atb Tim

 

[6pointer]

I've always done this with applications/variations/renewals - i try to give as much information as i can. Sometimes resulting in 6 or 7 pages of A4 including:
Full details on home security/cabinets/ammo storage, permission/syndicate information + maps, firearms experience and previous certificates held, information relating to calibre and ammo variations applied for ........

I have always found that the renewal/variation has gone through quickly without any conditions imposed.

Strathclyde are very good at what they do ........... normally

Daz

Daz Here was me thinking you were new to deer stalking and shooting CF riflrs Daz lmfao.

 

[DazT]

Daz Here was me thinking you were new to deer stalking and shooting CF riflrs Daz lmfao.

Nope not new to shooting - been doing it for over 25 years - with AND without an FAC

 

[bewsher500]

The reason I ask is because I've put in a variation for another 22. I was told on the phone that they won't grant me one as they dont like granting 2 rifles of the same cal. But after speaking to sacs I was told its neither here nor there what they like. The law states that if I provide good reason it should be granted

I can think of several people in your region who do have 2 rifles of the same calibre
several reason I can think of to justify it and make their job easy

1)Bolt vs Semi Auto
2) dedicated NV
3) shortened barrel for "truck work"
4) magazine fed vs tube fed

number 2 is the best one IMO

 

[Scots_stalker]

I can think of several people in your region who do have 2 rifles of the same calibre
several reason I can think of to justify it and make their job easy

1)Bolt vs Semi Auto
2) dedicated NV
3) shortened barrel for "truck work"
4) magazine fed vs tube fed

number 2 is the best one IMO

cool

 

[flash222004]

When people on this thread mention 'open ticket' does it mean you can buy any calibre rifle or you can use the calibres you have anywhere you want? I was told by my FLO that I can use my Rifle anywhere that is likely to have been checked and found ok to shoot by the police. Theychecked my fathers farm and said that I would be able to shoot on it and the surrounding land aswell with permission from owners as the land is likely to have been cleared or checked in the past.

 

[247sniper]

When people on this thread mention 'open ticket' does it mean you can buy any calibre rifle or you can use the calibres you have anywhere you want? I was told by my FLO that I can use my Rifle anywhere that is likely to have been checked and found ok to shoot by the police. Theychecked my fathers farm and said that I would be able to shoot on it and the surrounding land aswell with permission from owners as the land is likely to have been cleared or checked in the past.

Basiclly mate with the Open ticket condition, it means that you are allowed to shoot anywhere you have permition to shoot. You do not have to seek aproval from the police for assesment of a peice of land. The dessision to shoot on a particular bit of land and the assesment and suitability of land lies with you.

Steve.

 

[Orion]

When people on this thread mention 'open ticket' does it mean ....................

You don't have to look far for the answer. http://www.thestalkingdirectory.co....1-FAQ-Do-I-have-an-Open-or-Closed-Certificate

 

[MONGOOSE]

Mongoose, spoke to hants last week and AOLQ apparently does not include animals above deer, which apparently are boar, goats and sheep, you could not make it up if you tried.

Just curious wether anybody else has been told that the AOLQ condition does not include animals above deer I must say its a new one on me anybody else heard or been told this?

 

[Taff]

I should say that hants will not use AOLQ either on your ticket, they have now removed fox from people who have permission to shot deer as apparently if you have deer you can shoot fox.

 

[MONGOOSE]

I should say that hants will not use AOLQ either on your ticket, they have now removed fox from people who have permission to shot deer as apparently if you have deer you can shoot fox.

Oh right so are you saying that if you want deer,boar,Billy's,sheep etc they must be named on there separately,

 

[Taff]

Yes but in the words of the FLO, when i asked for AOLQ, he said we don,t use it and if we did it would not cover boar, goats and sheep, I was tryin to get around having to get a letter of permission for boar off a friend of mine, as I was not told I would need a letter until his visit and having waited five months for my renewal, didn't, want to delay any longer.