Mandatory training for firearms enquiry officers in England and Wales

[Conor O'Gorman]

A nationally-accredited training programme will be rolled out across all 43 firearms licensing departments in England and Wales. The College of Policing has been provided with a £500,000 fund to implement the training course that will be mandatory for all firearms enquiry officers, caseworkers and decision makers. It is expected to be rolled out in 2024. The training programme will be combined with a new Authorised Professional Practice (APP) that has been produced by the College of Policing.

Click here for a press release

Click here for more information

 

[Miki]

Can we see a copy of the couse notes and the final exam questions ? ... I haven't had a good laugh in ages

 

[Vulpes]

I'd quite like to see the content of the APP document to see how it aligns (or doesn't) with the Home Office Guidelines.

 

[enfieldspares]

And more fuel to the fire to demand "full cost recovery" from FAC, SGC and RFD holders no doubt.

£500,000 ÷ 43 = £11,000 per force or constabulary.

And no guarantee those "new normals" they'll be told to enforce will as be "commonsense" and helpful as in some forces.

For those with fair and reasonable FEO and licensing departments this may well turn out to be far from being to our benefit!

As they say "be careful what you wish for". The law of unintended consequences.

 

[Vulpes]

And more fuel to the fire to demand "full cost recovery" from FAC, SGC and RFD holders no doubt.

£500,000 ÷ 43 = £11,000 per force or constabulary.

And no guarantee those "new normals" they'll be told to enforce will as be "commonsense" and helpful as in some forces.

For those with fair and reasonable FEO and licensing departments this may well turn out to be far from being to our benefit!

As they say "be careful what you wish for". The law of unintended consequences.

I think on this occasion the funds are actually good value when we consider that there are 565,929 people who hold a firearm and/or a shotgun certificate in this country. (source: Statistics on firearm and shotgun certificates, England and Wales: April 2020 to March 2021)

Using the above number it's 88p extra per person for this initiative, if it ensures Police Forces apply Home Office Guidance then it's well worth it in my opinion.

 

[bottletopbill]

One set of rules for every force to go by so less confusing for shooters and police we will know were we all stand

 

[paul o']

Way Back when we used to sort out training and gun handling and a whats what in Essex as they were interested in identifying the needs of shooters and how to feel out the pee takers ! .
this stopped after the pistol ban but it was a good way to meet the team and for them to understand what guys were talking about when on the phone .
Oh we did it for free no cost to the tax payers

 

[Tf223]

And more fuel to the fire to demand "full cost recovery" from FAC, SGC and RFD holders no doubt.

£500,000 ÷ 43 = £11,000 per force or constabulary.

And no guarantee those "new normals" they'll be told to enforce will as be "commonsense" and helpful as in some forces.

For those with fair and reasonable FEO and licensing departments this may well turn out to be far from being to our benefit!

As they say "be careful what you wish for". The law of unintended consequences.

those costs will not include the cost of attendance - with probably a cost of £40 per hour with on costs, travel, hotels, subsistence claims etc.
As mentioned later on 88p per SGC, or maybe even doubled with other costs - if that’s the price to pay for consistent application of the guidance in the interests of public safety then so be it.
Not forgetting of course that having trained/competent officers preventing incidents and issues like in the Plymouth shootings, through correct and consistent application of the act and guidance, is in our direct interest.

 

[Dalua]

if that’s the price to pay for consistent application of the guidance in the interests of public safety then so be it.
Not forgetting of course that having trained/competent officers preventing incidents and issues like in the Plymouth shootings, through correct and consistent application of the act and guidance, is in our direct interest.

Running a lot of things together there: for example 'consistent application of the guidance' does not necessarily have anything to do with 'the interests of public safety'.

The main theme here, though, is public safety. Shooters should not be forking out disproportionately for public safety, since by definition it benefits shooters just as much, or as little, as it benefits every other member of the public.

 

[Bowland blades]

Lets be fair if industry failed to actually train new staff then the bosses would be stood up facing manslaughter charges when it all went wrong and some poor person ended their days on earth
Sound like a dammed good idea but how shocking it wasn't already the case !
I mean think , must be 30 years since fork lift drivers had to be qualified - yet an FEO hasn't needed to be ?

 

[spanj]

One set of rules for every force to go by so less confusing for shooters and police we will know were we all stand

I admire your optimism. Chief Cons with their god complex’s will soon introduce their own spurious bents

 

[bottletopbill]

Shooting organisations should be pushing for this to protect us and the police.

 

[Dalua]

I admire your optimism. Chief Cons with their god complex’s will soon introduce their own spurious bents

Or, as I keep pointing out to consistency-fetishists, the new 'standard interpretation' will be an amalgamation of all the current most-pointlessly-restrictive practices from across country.

 

[Stevie/P]

Deleted

 

[mealiejimmy]

Why only England and Wales?
The same firearms law applies to Scotland, so there;s no reason why FEOs in Scotland should not be trained to the same standard.
Having said that I expect to hear that the excuse for long delays in renewals and first grants will be that a particular force does not have enough trained FEOs

Cheers

Bruce

 

[potshotpat]

If on the training program, they're only using one text book and not 43. They'll be half way there.

 

[Apthorpe]

I think on this occasion the funds are actually good value when we consider that there are 565,929 people who hold a firearm and/or a shotgun certificate in this country. (source: Statistics on firearm and shotgun certificates, England and Wales: April 2020 to March 2021)

Using the above number it's 88p extra per person for this initiative, if it ensures Police Forces apply Home Office Guidance then it's well worth it in my opinion.

Do drivers pay extra to teach traffic police the basics of their job?

No scheme will ensure police forces apply Home Office guidance because there is a systemic inability to prevent them even committing serious criminal offences, and there is no functional accountability (which may be its own can of worms).

 

[Tf223]

Running a lot of things together there: for example 'consistent application of the guidance' does not necessarily have anything to do with 'the interests of public safety'.

The main theme here, though, is public safety. Shooters should not be forking out disproportionately for public safety, since by definition it benefits shooters just as much, or as little, as it benefits every other member of the public.

Aye - but one basic principle in the case of the vast majority of licensing regimes in England is that cost application/grant covers the cost of regulation of that regime.
I don’t see why firearms licensing would or should be treated any different with that regard, after all you could apply the same argument to alcohol, taxi, gambling, animal licensing, etc etc…

 

[timbrayford]

Should have happened in the 1990s after Dunblane instead of the 100 year cover up and ridiculous handgun ban. As for costs let us all remember that firearms licensing exists as a general crime prevention measure to protect the public by restricting lawful access to guns by crooks, a benefit enjoyed by all citizens.

 

[Dalua]

Aye - but one basic principle in the case of the vast majority of licensing regimes in England is that cost application/grant covers the cost of regulation of that regime.
I don’t see why firearms licensing would or should be treated any different with that regard, after all you could apply the same argument to alcohol, taxi, gambling, animal licensing, etc etc…

You absolutely shouldn't make any comparison with the licensing you mention.

Notwithstanding the name, FLDs are not mainly about licensing; but rather their job as required under the Firearms Act is assessing fitness of applicants for certificates (FAC, SGC) of fitness to exercise a right in law to possess and use firearms. This is not a benefit to the applicant, as they already have the right in law of own and use firearms: the extra step of certification to excercise that right is a benefit to the applicant only insofar as the applicant is also a member of the public.