New firearms licensing statutory guidance for chief officers of police

The No1 App in Europe for Hunting Area Management - MyHunt
cjm1066 said:
Who has a record of the speed awareness courses I have attended, certainly not me.

So a guessing game for FAC renewal???
Click to expand...

can you not do a freedom of information request to the Police to get all information they hold about you?
honestly do not know if you can or cannot.

I would just put down what you know, then end it, to the best of my knowledge, or some such wording.
 
It is surprising that having been given the opportunity simply to make stuff up and give it the authority of statue law that the HO is now using that power to oblige the (presumably delighted) police to apply overreaching-type measures of the kind which have upset Mr Harriman?
If we want a chance to keep the restrictions on lawful firearms ownership 'proportionate and evidence-led', then we need at least an outside chance by getting stuff like this debated in parliament, rather than just pushed across from a desk in one anti-gun citadel (The Home Office) to a desk in another (the police).

If I may, I will quote myself from two related threads:
From June 2016 Not BASC Bashing

David BASC said:
You will see that some clauses in the bill will ensure the ho guidance / must be followed by the police
Click to expand...
Will that not have the unfortunate effect of giving a document composed by Home Office civil servants an authority similar to statute?

I hope the ambiguities and non-statutory assertions found in the current HO guide are removed before any such clause is passed.


And a more-recent one: Nov 2021 Home Office Firearms Guidance

I'm not sure whether I'm being more than usually obtuse, but I'm not sure that I understand what's going on here.

When 'statutory guidance' was first suggested some time ago, I seem to remember pointing out that giving the two most powerful enemies of public firearms ownership in the country the power to produce 'guidance' which had the authority of statute law might in the long term prove problematic for the shooting public.

My main concern was that the disadvantages of the superficially-desirable goal of 'improved consistency' between FLDs might well be made abundantly clear if the improvement in consistency were to be achieved by forcing all forces to apply the law with uniformly-increased inflexibilty mandated by 'guidance' with power of statute.

However, what we now have appears to be the horribly-named and not altogether-accurately redrawn 'Guide on Firearms Licensing law', which replaces a document which we all thought the FLDs should have been 'having regard to' anyway (for why otherwise did it exist?) as well as the 'FIREARMS LICENSING: Statutory Guidance for Chief Officers of Police' to which they really do now have 'to have regard'.

It is interesting to note that many of the problematic areas (e.g. which calibre for what, 'discretionary' conditions) which gave rise to idea that 'greater consistency' would improve things are still found only in the more-easily-ignorable document.

On the whole, I'm not sure how it's going to help at all in its current form, but I can see how it might in future easily be used to do the opposite.
 
One thing the "guidance" gives us is that if your licencing dept. goes off-piste in their dealings with you and you are au-fait with the guidance ,then you have some comeback with which to reply.

However, the sole decision maker on such matters rests with the Chief Constable (as delegated) and there's no real recourse to be able to challenge any decisions, with the exception of taking things to the crown court. It's possible that a shooting organisation you might be a member of could fund that, but that's, in most circumstances very unlikely and it would otherwise cost a great amount of money, in effect making that an impossibility for most. In any case, crown court schedules are choc-a-bloc so who knows how long you'd wait for a hearing? Criminal cases take around a year to get to trial and add on to that the year it takes for the police to deal with your application/renewal in the first place, you could grow old waiting for an outcome and any deer you want to take will have dies of old age. Some sort of arbitration service would be the answer. But I doubt there's a will for that.

A country-wide firearms licencing service might be the answer, but that could be a double-edged sword of course.
 
Liveonce said:
can you not do a freedom of information request to the Police to get all information they hold about you?
honestly do not know if you can or cannot.

I would just put down what you know, then end it, to the best of my knowledge, or some such wording.
Click to expand...

You can make a request for PNC data. Although they can hold back what they consider sensitive or prejudicial. That is done through ACRO.

To check force level info (paper records, local computer systems), you need to contact your local force direct. Caveat about prejudicial information applies here too.
 
Another example of over reach is FEOs, many of whom do not know which end of a barrel the bullet comes out; now coming to a MRR to assess the range

They can’t explain what standards they are using; nor what competency their FEOs possess

Nor to what extent they will be held legally accountable for those they pass that are unsuitable; nor the financial consequences for those they fail or hold up due to lack of timely effort

I am still waiting (since 1st May) for a condition to be placed upon my FAC for my MRR

Had it not been for BASC I’d not have had any response from D&C

It really is amateur hour !
 
Hi

#4 Liveonce - a Subject Access Request (SAR) will bring up what the Polis have on record for you, but, yes, but not 'local records' which may be withheld as indicated above.

L

PS - always useful to have to hand.
 
One or two of the more excitable regulars on SD, who have been boasting that they will disobey certain proposed legislation if and when it comes in, may care to note Section 2.52, Social Media Checks: "...if there is any indication of a possible propensity to violence, illegality or emotional volatility [my emphasis], these should be considered by the police when considering whether the applicant is fit to hold a firearms certificate."
 
Whitefront said:
One or two of the more excitable regulars on SD, who have been boasting that they will disobey certain proposed legislation if and when it comes in, may care to note Section 2.52, Social Media Checks: "...if there is any indication of a possible propensity to violence, illegality or emotional volatility [my emphasis], these should be considered by the police when considering whether the applicant is fit to hold a firearms certificate."
Click to expand...

blimey no one will get a certificate, what ever happened to innocent before proven guilty 😊
 
So if anyone has put there renewal in say 2 or 3 months ago and is being processed won't be affected my this
Only renewals after the 5th August is that correct
 
Fx .25 said:
So if anyone has put there renewal in say 2 or 3 months ago and is being processed won't be affected my this
Only renewals after the 5th August is that correct
Click to expand...
I suspect anything that is reviewed from now forward will be subject to the new guidelines so if they’ve not looked at it yet you’ll be assessed according to them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Northern Ireland fee increases
Replies
4
Views
361
6.5shooter
6.5shooter
BASC Firearms Licensing support
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
jall55
J
Firearms licensing on the agenda at BASC and FELWG meeting
Replies
15
Views
1K
cjm1066
C
BASC warns Minister against shotgun–firearms licensing merger
6 7 8
Replies
150
Views
9K
Bowland blades
Bowland blades
Licensing for Knife Sellers or Importers
2 3 4
Replies
63
Views
3K
Stuart Mitchell
Stuart Mitchell
New Avon Arms
Back
Top