Question on UK fiream laws for collectors

[Beerhunter]

Nice advert Rob. See you on Wednesday?

Seriously all shooters in the UK should read GttP. So should many Constabularies and FEOs/FLMs for that matter. :-)

[OxfordAndy]

Rob, if I understand correctly then, theoretically at least, that means that one could effectively have two types of entry on an FAC? i.e:

1) Fully functional firearms of all ages that are actively in use (the minimum being three times per year for each firearm) and

2) Fully functional firearms (of WWII vintage or earlier) that are not used for shooting but are not deactivated?

This is something that has never been explained by my local FAO. In fact he has always stressed the use it or lose it aspect of the grant.

[Gingercat]

Personally I have 2 lever action carbines (.22RF and .357 calibre) as part of a local target shooting club and 7 Lee Enfields "...for the purpose of being exhibited as part of a collection. The firearms may be occasionally test fired in accordance with current Home Office guidance (paragraph 13.53)..."

I am a LERA and HBSA member and have permission to acquire 150 and possess 300 x .303 rounds on the FAC - that's with Suffolk constabulary.

So yes, perfectly feasible to be both a target shooter and collector (who occasionally shoots his collection) on the same FAC.

Kind regards
Mike

[Beerhunter]

1) Fully functional firearms of all ages that are actively in use (the minimum being three times per year for each firearm) and

That three times a year number is from Guidance to the Police. Some Constabularies are very relaxed about it but others try to enforce it as though Statute Law - which it isn't!

Second Guidance to the Police (every home should have one) clearly states: 'However failure to shoot in a year should be regarded as grounds for further enquires to be made rather than grounds for revocation of the Certificate for lack of "good reason" . It follows with several circumstances that a target shooter may rightly claim as reason not to be able to shoot that often. One of which is: 'Owners may also not want to regularly shoot old and valuable weapons thus avoiding excessive wear and tear'. I guess that your FEO/FLM hasn't pointed that out to you either' :-)

There have been times in the past when I have not been able to shoot regularly and in each case my local police has accepted that I was unable to.

Having said all that, in my opinion, this ridiculous requirement adds nothing to public safety but costs an unacceptable amount of bureaucracy and wasted police time and so, in my evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee, I have suggested getting rid of it.

[OxfordAndy]

beerhunter, thanks for the further clarification.

According to my FAO, Thames Valley (my local force) are getting tougher. The NRA sent my shooting record with my renewal last December, I believe this is now a standard practice? My FAO said in future this will bbe mandatory for all renewals and the use it or lose it guidelines wil be applied to the letter.

In the wake of two recent events in the UK, I can understand this approach.

However, with all due respect to any fellow Forum members who may be or may have been in the Police, I am never sure whether such statements are purely used for effect, are local interpretation by the individual concerned, or are actual policy. As you have mentioned, there are wide varaiations from Force to Force so why not from officer to officer?

I take the view that it is best to paly with a straight bat and take it as policy...........

[Beerhunter]

My FAO said in future this will bbe mandatory for all renewals and the use it or lose it guidelines wil be applied to the letter.

In which case, no doubt they will be applying the 'However failure to shoot in a year should be regarded as grounds for further enquires to be made rather than grounds for revocation of the Certificate for lack of "good reason" get out to the letter as well.

[enfield303t]

Would some please explain what has to be done to have a room passed as a "strong room."

Thanks

[5thBatt]

beerhunter, thanks for the further clarification.

According to my FAO, Thames Valley (my local force) are getting tougher. The NRA sent my shooting record with my renewal last December, I believe this is now a standard practice? My FAO said in future this will bbe mandatory for all renewals and the use it or lose it guidelines wil be applied to the letter.

In the wake of two recent events in the UK, I can understand this approach.

However, with all due respect to any fellow Forum members who may be or may have been in the Police, I am never sure whether such statements are purely used for effect, are local interpretation by the individual concerned, or are actual policy. As you have mentioned, there are wide varaiations from Force to Force so why not from officer to officer?

I take the view that it is best to paly with a straight bat and take it as policy..........

[OxfordAndy]

Easy for you to bang your head against the wall 5thBatt seeing as your in NZ....it's not your money, criminal record or liberty you're playing with.

I have neither the desire to lose my FAC, the considerable investment I have in rifles or my clean record nor do anything that may prejudice the interests of the sport in the UK just to test the boundaries or resolve of the Police/Home Office.

How would you proceed when your Government are actively reviewing firearms legislation in the wake of two shooting incidents and your local NRA (or similar) are advising common sense and responsibility in all dealings with the Police and public on matters of firearm ownership?

If you have a point to make - make it. Don't just post an animated icon.

[Peter Laidler]

Ouch......... that's a bit harsh Andy!