New fac/sgc license fees announced

[andybrock]

There shouldn't be a charge for firearms licensing the whole cost should be born by the taxpayer as the excuse for the system being in place is public safety.

But aren't we the tax payers?

[DL.]

But aren't we the tax payers?

 

Yeah we're paying for it twice!

[gbal]

DL,with respect-do you think the same applies to Driving Licences (just as much a Public Safety issue)?

 

 

Though in need of transparency (BASC's point;and the Police themselves advocated an extension of the licensing to 5 years,and ten years is still an option) IF the Police cost for a firearm licence is £196,and the charge to the shooter is considerably less,is this reduction essentially a 'subsidy'?

It is possible society might be organised quite differently,but there are problems with what the freebies should be.

 

UK citizens enjoy, basic,though not unlimited,free legal,health,political and education provision and rights/obligations. Is shooting in the same category?

 

g

[DL.]

Driving licences are necessary to stop needless road deaths being caused by people who aren't capable of being in control a vehicle.There's millions of driving licences in the UK & therefore a lot of associated cost.

 

Firearms licences are proportionately less well subscribed, so it is more plausible for the cost to be covered from the budget of the organisation that administers them,especially when considering the perceived benefit of safety to the general public.

 

It seems ludicrous to pay for a service and do the majority of the leg work to be told at the end of the process what you can and cant have! Everything should be administered as Section 2 shotgun licences are, the applicant is either safe to possess firearms or they're not. Prove to me the public safety benefits of limiting people to 60 rounds of centrefire ammo - that was what I was allowed on my first FAC!

 

The reason we're so blinkered to the system is that we haven't known anything different, but in thinking outside the box, we should be aspiring to a New Zealand style of licensing where the person gets a category not a specified list of slots to acquire.

[Dalua]

It would be difficult to interpret such increased passport costs as part of an insidious plot to reduce emigration,or deny citizens access to EEC,or holidays in the sun for a fortnight,or to hinder British trade abroad. Historically,we have been geographically diverse.

It would indeed bizarre to make such an interpretation, as there has never as far as I'm aware been the slightest hint that any such intention exists whether in Government, Home Office or Police.

 

Equally bizarre, perhaps, to deny that possibility that raising SGC/FAC fees might indeed be intended to serve the frequently-apparent desire of Home Office and Police to reduce civillian firearms ownership and use: since the fees have clearly been seen as means to that end in the past.

 

The services which you described as free to UK subjects are not in any sense free to those of us who pay tax and National Insurance; and I would further include in those services for which we pay the maintenence of public order, the law and the peace.

The administration of the Firearms Act seems to me to fall squarely into those categories, and the that act of certification as fit to exercise the right to possess and use firearms should attract anything more than a strictly nominal fee (for example, to deter vexatious applicants) seems very much contrary to the spirit of the common law.

 

This makes it quite different from a driving licence, which permits the holder to do something that is otherwise unlawful, namely drive a motor vehicle on the public highway. I can't remember how much mine cost, but at the time that fee was paid for a licence lasting 53 years and attracting no further fees or administration costs.

[hunter87]

I'd willingly pay double those prices if I got a good service with a guaranteed turnaround of two weeks for a variation, renewal etc.

I have had four separate variations come back in under seven days with the met police I cant fault them at all I just wish there was more forces that were as efficient as them.

[gbal]

Dl,Dalua (et al?) Thank you for your replies.I suspect most shooters consider the new fees reasonable,and not excessive.Anyhow,they are what we have.

It's perhaps a mistake to complicate issues with analogies,though comparisons with other licences can be helpful,but invite widening of the discussion,and often as not,some changes of position.(Were 'ID' cards going to be free-surely the best case of all could be made there?Anyhow,non issue!)

 

For example,what started as a 'principle'-that firearms licence should be free,was not continued for Driving licence-though publuc safety seemed agreed-the reason seemed to be that there are 'millions of drivers and therefore a lot of cost"-true,but principles are supposed to resist exceptions-and what remains is that there are not many shooters,so the police funds should cover the costs.Well,I don't think there is a case for shooters being 'special'-and have outlined the police view-they are effectively subsidising shooters already,very considerably (a ten year certificate would much help cost reduction ).

"It is ludicrous to pay,...and do the majority of the legwork"....the applicant cannot do most of the legwork-ie independent check on fitness to have firearms,and security etc.The 'legwork' is literally done by FLO visits-the applicant does little (I know we all can spend time deciding what we'd like,but that's a different matter)...."then be told what we can/can't have"-well,that is subject to Firearms law-which is 'neither limited by need,nor defined by desire'. But it is true you won't get a fully automatic 50 Browning machine gun!

I can't comment on your experience of being limited to 60 rounds-it would not be typical currently.AS for a 'nominal fee' to deter 'vexatious applicants'-is this not an oxymoron-(cf 'nominal damages of £1 were awarded)....nominal means here 'as near zero as is possible'-if there are these 'vexatious applicants' then a much increased non returnable fee might deter (but all would have to tender it,and be refunded if successful)-no doubt some would object,but it's a throwaway idea so let's do just that.

I accept that other countries have different systems,though other than Dodge City around 1865,very few have no restrictions/fees (and Dodge had no effective Law either!) Most of us would probably not want to live in such countries.It is difficult to make direct comparisons,but since you raise New Zealand,let's have a look at the issue of the cost of a firearms licence there.

New Zealand has essentially four categories for firearms.'Standard' sporting rifles and shotguns;and three other categories-target pistols,collectors items,military semi auto.

 

The procedure briefly is :complete a firearms course and pass a safety test

Fill in application,with ID,2 referees

Pay: $126.50 for "Standard" and $204 for any 'endorsements' to cover other categories.

Get visits for security,'fit and proper person' etc.

 

$NZ=£.50

 

Now,there are some differences in what can be possesed,and the conditions (eg 'test')are probably more demanding, but there really is no case at all on costs-the NZ applicant pays fees not much different from UK,which are FAC £grant/renewal 88/62,SGC 79.50/49;and co-terminous 90/65.

NZ is for 10 years,a system that would much reduce costs in UK for whoever pays,and that is worth pursuing,as BASC are doing.

 

This thread was about 'who pays,and how much'.

You won't save much by emigrating to NZ,and the principle is exactly the same.

 

Even the most 'right wing' Americans do not extend the 'right to bear arms' to mean that the Government should provide such arms free of charge,at the point of need.The Government does,but defines 'need' as entering into US military service.So did the Swiss,until recently,though it wasn't easy to opt out.

Let's just enjoy what we have,and focus on what is reasonable (ten year license maybe?)

atb

g

[gazzar15]

Dl,Dalua (et al?) Thank you for your replies.I suspect most shooters consider the new fees reasonable,and not excessive.Anyhow,they are what we have.

It's perhaps a mistake to complicate issues with analogies,though comparisons with other licences can be helpful,but invite widening of the discussion,and often as not,some changes of position.(Were 'ID' cards going to be free-surely the best case of all could be made there?Anyhow,non issue!)

 

For example,what started as a 'principle'-that firearms licence should be free,was not continued for Driving licence-though publuc safety seemed agreed-the reason seemed to be that there are 'millions of drivers and therefore a lot of cost"-true,but principles are supposed to resist exceptions-and what remains is that there are not many shooters,so the police funds should cover the costs.Well,I don't think there is a case for shooters being 'special'-and have outlined the police view-they are effectively subsidising shooters already,very considerably (a ten year certificate would much help cost reduction ).

"It is ludicrous to pay,...and do the majority of the legwork"....the applicant cannot do most of the legwork-ie independent check on fitness to have firearms,and security etc.The 'legwork' is literally done by FLO visits-the applicant does little (I know we all can spend time deciding what we'd like,but that's a different matter)...."then be told what we can/can't have"-well,that is subject to Firearms law-which is 'neither limited by need,nor defined by desire'. But it is true you won't get a fully automatic 50 Browning machine gun!

I can't comment on your experience of being limited to 60 rounds-it would not be typical currently.AS for a 'nominal fee' to deter 'vexatious applicants'-is this not an oxymoron-(cf 'nominal damages of £1 were awarded)....nominal means here 'as near zero as is possible'-if there are these 'vexatious applicants' then a much increased non returnable fee might deter (but all would have to tender it,and be refunded if successful)-no doubt some would object,but it's a throwaway idea so let's do just that.

I accept that other countries have different systems,though other than Dodge City around 1865,very few have no restrictions/fees (and Dodge had no effective Law either!) Most of us would probably not want to live in such countries.It is difficult to make direct comparisons,but since you raise New Zealand,let's have a look at the issue of the cost of a firearms licence there.

New Zealand has essentially four categories for firearms.'Standard' sporting rifles and shotguns;and three other categories-target pistols,collectors items,military semi auto.

 

The procedure briefly is :complete a firearms course and pass a safety test

Fill in application,with ID,2 referees

Pay: $126.50 for "Standard" and $204 for any 'endorsements' to cover other categories.

Get visits for security,'fit and proper person' etc.

 

$NZ=£.50

 

Now,there are some differences in what can be possesed,and the conditions (eg 'test')are probably more demanding, but there really is no case at all on costs-the NZ applicant pays fees not much different from UK,which are FAC £grant/renewal 88/62,SGC 79.50/49;and co-terminous 90/65.

NZ is for 10 years,a system that would much reduce costs in UK for whoever pays,and that is worth pursuing,as BASC are doing.

 

This thread was about 'who pays,and how much'.

You won't save much by emigrating to NZ,and the principle is exactly the same.

 

Even the most 'right wing' Americans do not extend the 'right to bear arms' to mean that the Government should provide such arms free of charge,at the point of need.The Government does,but defines 'need' as entering into US military service.So did the Swiss,until recently,though it wasn't easy to opt out.

Let's just enjoy what we have,and focus on what is reasonable (ten year license maybe?)

atb

g

Just because some of us are a bit paranoid about where this fee thing is going doesn't mean that there are people in the corridoors of power that would not like to do completely away with civilian gun ownership completely. Was it not Jack Straw who said he would like to turn Bisley into a car park?

That gents is what some of our MP's aspire to.

 

[gbal]

Gazz,Jack is a Straw man,especially these days.

The issue of Firearms ownership needs vigilance,agreed.But we live in a democracy.

Tactically,complaining about what are by any comparison rather reasonable fees,is not going to help.It is more likely to alienate the majority who have no brief against responsible shooting.BASC have shown that reasoned and responsible factual presentations are effective.

atb

g

[David Hancock]

Wait until they propose we have to undertake a written exam as in Canada or The Netherlands !!

 

I can hear Danny grinding his teeth on that one.

[gazzar15]

A lot to be said about the American NRA attitude in matters such as this.....Whilst we acquisce with barely a whimper their default position is No and then negotiation beyond that point (sometimes no stays no)

Whilst I do accept that things need to go up in price I am strongly against aligning a fees increase with full or even partial cost recovery.

I got burgled several years ago and our cars ,along with other stuff stolen. I would have been angry and horrified to receive a bill from the police for their services at the time.

The police provide a service that we pay for through our council tax. Why should you be singled out to pay for full or partial recovery just because you shoot ??

A matter of public safety you might argue ,but at this point I shall mention football match policing for which fans are not required to foot the bill ?

Very much a matter of public safety and the glaring evidence of what happens when the police get it wrong is currently a hot news topic 26 years after the event !!

If you add the tragedies and horrors that were Hungerford ,Dunblane and Cumbria the numbers of people killed do not come close to 50% of those killed at Hillsborough in one incident.

I am not having a pop at the police here just talking about public safety which in my book is to stop members of Joe public being hurt or worse.

How is that best served in this instance ? Will they provide extra staff to assist in providing a better service ? A service that as a general national average is poor with the odd constabulary doing a bit better.

We have chief constables adding their own interpretation as they see fit, leading to situations where you can have a certain type of firearm in one area but not in an adjacent area.

What do you think chapss??

How does that work???

[JTO]

Is replacing a long magazine FAC shotgun with a centrefire rifle considered a like-for-like variation? Other Cf rifles already held.

[dannywayoflife]

Here's one for you should criminals who are subject to police investigation be charged for the police time? That would make sense to discriminate against the non law abiding than those of us who do abide by the laws of the land no matter how stupid many of them are?

[rsc1960]

very happy with this,

 

did I miss the coterminous price ?

 

RSC

[phaedra1106uk]

did I miss the coterminous price ?

It's on the very first post, Grant is now £90, renewal is now £65

[rsc1960]

It's on the very first post, Grant is now £90, renewal is now £65

 

 

now I can see it better that I'm not on the phone but on my ipad

 

cheers

 

bob.

[eldon]

Read through this and for me the price increase is acceptable/realistic in cost but the principle is a different matter. Inflation does happen and the increases indicated could have been much worse. Typically I'm up for renewal this year after the price increases

 

I do feel there is an element of paranoia creeping in here but who can argue against the principle of potential annual rises giving other parties leverage to manipulate the numbers to suit their ideals?

 

The tv licence was an interesting comparison as I definitely for one feel this is A WASTE OF MONEY!

 

Why isn't the driving licence on a renewal programme (to create more revenue.... cough) so as to ensure public safety?

p.s. Just remembered the driving licence is probably already supported by all the road safety revenue boosters.

[Mattnall]

Why isn't the driving licence on a renewal programme (to create more revenue.... cough) so as to ensure public safety?

p.s. Just remembered the driving licence is probably already supported by all the road safety revenue boosters.

I think you'll find the driving license is.

If you have a photo card license then it only lasts for 10 years before you have to renew the picture (at a cost, of course) or there is a £1000 fine, I think. You are still entitled to drive, it is just the card that is out of date and you have to get it renewed.