FAC mentor

[eldon]

I was just reading the post that Martin put up introducing himself.

Although I was aware of this mentoring approach from some police forces, I was not aware of how widespread it is.

 

In order to get people up and running, we the members of the forum could offer beginners assistance.

Now I know this may not be for everybody but I for one would be willing.

 

This is a genuine offer, If you have such a condition or anticipate one I would be willing to act as a mentor for any sensible persons?

I am based in yorkshire but obviously travel is possible.

 

Pm me if you need assistance.

[baldie]

I did this once for a friend, but to be honest, i am dead against it. There is nothing in the firearms act that mentions mentors, this is AGAIN the police making law up as and when it suits.....its completely illegal to refuse someone a ticket because they dont have a mentor, and if we do it, we are helping it to eventually become law.Its just the same as forces demanding dsc1 etc, thats not bloody law either, all you require is the correct land, and some deer.Look how many folk this "law on the hoof "has caught out, and to be honest, the BASC are the worst bloody culprits for helping them....but call me cynical, but they probarbly run dsc courses.

Another boiler of my piss, is that college that is now advertising "firearms" courses, and " lamping courses" with written credentials at the end of it? Oh aye? and who did they deem the great expert to set the standard i wonder? This is just a money making scheme, but the dangerous part of it is, the police will see it, and start withholding tickets unless people take the "test".... dont help them along.

I,m not having a pop at you Eldon, far from it mate, i can see you genuinly want to help beginners, and thats also my policy, but i wont help the police enforce their "opinions" on newbies..

Its a great shame we dont have an effective organisation that would challenge these constabularies in court, basically the basc dont have the minerals, and just roll over every single time.

Rant over, i,m off to kick the cat.

[eldon]

Like you say the BASC do seem lacking when it comes to looking after our corner.

Thats why I'm not a member, same insurance discount price join SACS same or should I say better but without the baggage.

 

I agree with not wanting to set ourselves any precedents but some folk may be forced or already in that position so the offers there.

 

When you first enter this minefield it is awkward to point out to the chief constable that he hasn't read the rules properly...

 

Why can't we just have one set of rules and static goalposts

[baldie]

Your quite right mate, and its easy for us to preach to a newbie " not to take any that which promotes growth and vigour" etc etc, when all they want to do is get their ticket, without any trouble or hold ups......i quite regularly forget that. Thats what the police rely on though. What we really ought to do, is help them to get their tickets, by talking to their flo,s and "reminding" them about the LAW, and the fact they are public servants, and paid by the very people they are harrassing. If they arent willing to give a man a .243 without my say so as a mentor fine....i,ll take him out BUT, when i,ve brought him up to speed, and taken the responsibility, they can bloody well give him a fully open ticket.

[Ronin]

+ 1 Baldie

 

Bang out of order

 

(not you Eldon )

[Guest 308Panther]

Baldie,

Give the the cat a boot for me too.

I could not agree with ya more.

 

Eldon,

Not takin a shot at you...so please dont feel that way.

I applaud you for standing up and wanting to help the next guy out,

 

But this is really a bad idea.

 

By offering mentor services and adding your signature to the paperwork

you have just opened the door for a lawsuit against you.

You have just become responsible for every shot the underling takes

for the rest of your life...and the rest of his life.

 

I am sure some people here have heard about lawsuits where

a criminal gets his hands on a firearm,shoots a store owner (or such like)

during the robbery...Store owner dies and the family then sues the

firearm manufacture for making a gun.....Because after all it was the gun

that killed the store owner.The criminal didnt do it.....The gun made him do it.

 

Laugh at the scenerio because it sounds silly, right ?

 

Its happening. Today. Now. and Its Real.

In some states they had to make a law to protect

the Gun Manufacture from these type of suits.

 

I dont,wont, cant and call me blind if ya want too,EVER

forsee your Government doing that much to protect you.

 

By offering services to mentor...its much the same scenerio.

 

Some people are going to think...Ok. I'll offer mine as well,

But I want to be compensated for my time. Pay Me.

ok....So now whats a fair price?And when does the payments stop?

 

I think the person that is trying to aquire the priviledge of firearm ownership

would be much better off taking that card and handing it back to the Officer

and saying....You sign it.Its a guideline.

 

Look out cat.....

 

308Panther

[Orka Akinse]

Baldie +1 for you mate an never a truer word typed.

 

I too was asked once by Sth Wales Police to "Sponsor" someone. I told them to get stuffed, if they have a problem with the applicant they should refuse his ticket and write to him with the precise details as to why they had refused and detail who the deciding officer was.

 

They refused and issued the ticket.

 

Why?

 

Because most FLD know the square root of F&*k all about firearms have their own agenda and consider law abiding firearms ownersw as nothing more than legalised crims and they don't want you yto have them.

 

There is no basis for the requirement in law and so they are exceeding their authority and should be stopped.

 

"It is my belief I am safe at driving everywhere at 50mph" I am exceeding my authority (sometimes by speeding) but guess what? It wont wash in court and neither will this!

 

Now, wheres that bloody cat when I need to kick it.

[Redfox]

The important thing in this is They are asking a member of the public to take responsibility for someone with a firearm, there is no law which allows for this.

More importantly for the " Mentor" once you take this responsibility, what is going to be your defence and worse financial position when this novice shoots the farmers prize bull by accident?. Or if he has an AD and a passing motorist slumps dead over the wheel before careering into the local tesco, spar shop etc and kills another half dozen?. Or Finally you tell them he is now ok and he does any of the above or loses his marbles and shoots a college full of kids?.

You are not insured by any of your insurances for this, you would be held responsible for his actions as you are the "experienced person" training him and signing him off.

I will help anyone and am happy to informally take someone out and show him the ropes any time, but I am not going to stick my head under a potential guillotine for any Police force to pull the trigger cord on me.

Do not believe this is not possible it most certainly is, ask your solicitor and he will tell you to have nothing to do with it.

The only people who might be prepared to take it up is the Shooters Rights Association if they are still going.

Redfox

[Vermincinerator]

I am totally against any compulsary training in order to get a FAC, but like it or not it is already here.

When you join a target rifle club as a probationer you undertake mandatory training in the safe handling and use of firearms, which is a compulsary part of gaining membership.

Once your membership has been granted you can apply for a firearms licence.

The police will then grant the FAC safe in the knowledge that you have undertaken somekind of training.

This is how it was when i started in 1982 and i presume it still is now.

What of the person who applies for a 243 to shoot deer or a 22-250 to shoot fox's on land that he has permission on, who has never handled a rifle before??

IMO it would be totally irresponsible for the plice to give this person a licence to go purchase and use such a rifle having had no training in the safe handling and use at all

IMO some form of competance training must be undertaken before a firearms licence is granted but mentoring is the wrong way to go about

This is a very delicate area.

 

Ian.

[Orka Akinse]

Vermincinerator

 

This could start a good debate however this is a public forum and I am not about to give the anti's or the police more fuel to slap down the law abiding citizen going about his or her lawful business suffice to say:

 

Statistically you are more likely to be killed in the UK by a hammer than you are a legally held firearm, I excluded suicides for obvious reasons.

 

Where in the hell do you go to learn how to use a hammer????

 

As a comparator, the car kills more on our roads that legally held firearms by a considerable order of magnitude, the drivers have all taken a home office derived driving test and yet, spookily, people still die, wonder why that is???

 

There is factual and imperical data to support there is no need for training in the use of firearms. I am all for support and assistance but I will oppose with grit, determination & vigour the right to pursue my lawful interests without undue hinderance by the authorities who by and large do not know what they are talking about and by putting in place excessive hurdles that their peers and betters have decided have no place in law. What right do they have to make it up as the go along anyway? They are public servants doing a job they are not on a crusade to the dark side. Why else was the idiots guide "The home Office Guide to Firearms Law" drafted and issued? It was created so that the FLD's across the country could apply the law equally, fairly and iterpret it accurately so as to get away from what was a postcode lottery that has sadly failed by and large. Perhaps they need reading lessons first???

 

So to support you opinion Verm, where's your authority or data to support your arguement?

[Redfox]

They do interview you and ask what training/ experience of firearms you have before granting access to centrefire rifles. Many people start off with rimfire rifles and move up to cf after a period of time. Military service involves weapons and safety training and is usually acceptable, as is experience gained with someone experienced like a stalker or keeper, the old national stalkers certificate involved safety and safe handling and was acceptable. deer stalking has various training facilities available and so is not usually a problem, but vermin shooting and night shooting is rapidly becoming an issue.

I agree Ian compulsion is not nice but in most European countries you have to study and pass an exam before the certificate is granted and with the ridiculous amount of health and safety law, insurance etc we are very close to having the same here.

I dont totally disagree with there being basic weapon and shooting area safety being taught and tested so long as it is sensible, available and at reasonable cost.

Redfox

[craigyboy]

The way my Fac worked when I just started shooting was at first I was only allowed an air rifle, then a shotgun, then a .22lr and then centrefire, they work you in progressive stages, its highly unlikley you would ever get a centrefire right off the bat and a .22lr would be questionable to get on your first application, its a slow process but it helps you learn as you go along, they also take you around the land when you apply for .22lr/centrefire asking you where you think is a safe shot etc, in a club its different you just apply and you get, but for vermin control its a slow build up to get to the big stuff, I have been shooting from a very young age with my dads guns but I only applied for an FAC 6 years ago and it took 4 years just to be allowed to apply for my own centrefire rifle, luckily I still had my dads rifle to use.

[Vermincinerator]

Redfox,

thanks for clarifying matters mate, i was unaware of some of the facts you mentioned.

 

Ian.

[baldie]

I think most shooters end up at firearms after airguns/shotguns etc, but there will always be some that dont.I dont know the answer, but i do know, that if this poxy government hadn,t banned hunting with dogs, they wouldn,t now be seeing the meteoric rise in shotgun/fac applications. Nowt wrong with that of course.............i have to eat.

[Vermincinerator]

Orka,

 

"So to support you opinion Verm, where's your authority or data to support your arguement?

 

WOAH! Where are you coming from mate?????

 

Ian.

[craigyboy]

I am slightly confused now, what did you say Ian?????????

[stag1933]

I think it is only a matter of time before some form of compulsory training is foisted upon us possibly through the EU.

Some in our midst are bloody dangerous and unfit to have firearms anyway.

One of our local Fox shooters boasted that he had shot a Fox off a wall top at 300 yards with a lamp.

We also had an individual who shot a Belgian Blue cow whilst lamping, currently he holds the record of stupidity and gross incompetence.

 

I have had my FAC since 1951 and as yet have had no serious problem but I no longer lamp Foxes as my sight is impared .

I can still see the reticule centre clearly in daylight and hold my own in the best company, long may this continue.

 

I have however taken up the challenge over the years as tests have popped up as a personal thing and not as a perceived neccessity.

I did the NSCC in the early 80s and have since got DSC1 and DSC2, and also was accepted as an Accredited Witness for DMQ.

Today qualifications are essential to obtain leases on some properties.

 

A Happy and Prosperous New Year to you all from `stag1933`.

 

[Guest martin]

As it was my thread that started this off,I just thought that I would say,that I have held a shotgun certificate for some30+ yrs,and,an FAC with a rimfire and an air rifle(28 ft lbs) for approximately 8yrs.I was also in the TA shooting team,so it isn't as if I have had no experience of firearms at all.

[Redfox]

Martin that makes it all the more ridiculous, doesnt it?

Stagg is still well up to the job believe me, he can still put many of us young or not so young pups to shame.

Had a quick scout round and the SRA is still going strong here http://www.the-shooters-rights.co.uk/index.htm

Might rejoin , I was a member for a good number of years, just let it lapse.

Redfox

[Guest 308Panther]

Martin,

This is a discussion that may have been long overdue.

So dont feel like your the blame for it.

While you are definatley no stranger to a trigger....

There may be members here that are new to it.

 

Many people in the UK feel that the 2nd Amendment and our NRA

are the do all and end all to keep the Anti's at bay.

Although they do help...

 

Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

2008 is going to be a real interesting year.

 

We have several candidates on the Ballots that are as Anti as a person

can get.

 

Many many times our NRA has used the UK and its Holdings as an example

for what could happen to us.

 

And to be real....It is happening to us. One Senate or House Bill at a time.

 

Recently, I was offered a job in Hawaii, on the Island of Oahu.

That States own gun laws are severe enough to make California's a playground.

 

After moving there I would have 72 hrs to bring in every firearm I own...along with

all the paperwork,Reciepts and anything else that confirms I am the owner.

Serial numbers would be recorded and ran in the database.

Long guns are registered.

As are handguns.

I would have to sign a medical history release form....Giving the PD of Hawaii

the permission to inspect my medical history to see if I am qualified...

If I was a wartime vet diagnosed with PTSD I would be disqualified.

Alcohol Abuse treatment....Disqualified.

A DUI/OUI would disqualify me.

(This is for the guns I ALREADY and LEGALLY own now)

 

To hunt I would have to take Hawaii's Hunter Safety Course even tho I have one

for the State of Wi. and have held one for over 30yrs.

(Starting to sound familiar?)

Public Hunting land is in/on Base and in some places I would be required to

Hire a guide.

Accessing the land requires submitting a request form to the Base no less then

14 days in advance.

 

I would be fingerprinted and checked against FBI Database.

Certain calibers are banned.

Mags that hold more then 10rds for a rifle are a misdemeanor.

Mags the hold more then 10rds for a pistol will get you a Class C Felony

1 yr in jail and $1,000 fine.

 

For defending myself and family from bodily harm that resulted in a Firearm Homicide

for the bad guy ...I would be arrested and jailed until the investigation cleared me.

Open Carry or wearing a pistol in public is a Class C felony.

Concealed Carry allowed if the Police Chief feels you are threatened enough.

 

In Wisconsin...

 

I can Open Carry...but if another person complains about it,

I would be issued a Disturbing the Peace Ticket.

Background check on long guns and handguns.3 day "Cool Off" wait on handguns.

Registration required if bought thru a dealer.

Private sales do not require registration.

 

To hunt,anyone born after 1973 or 1976 (cant remember)requires a Hunter's Safety Certificate.

Previous to that birthdate is Grandfathered in...I took mine before it was law...Because Dad thought it was a good idea....Just like everyone thought at the time.

 

Now its law.

 

A DUI/OUI looses my drivers license...Not my firearm ownership status.

 

And for Home Defence? Just make sure the body doesnt fall outside the threshhold,

Even if it requires grabbing the bad guy and pulling back in.

 

The very same 2nd Amendment protects me in both states.

 

But there is a real big differance between the 2.

 

308Panther

[eldon]

Well guys it looks like I opened an interesting debate. Naturally I agree with some points more than others but thats what this is all about.

 

Regarding the having my arse sued off, obviously each case would have to be judged on its own merits.

Experience and history would be analysed and attitude would be important, note I said sensible in the opening post.

 

So an open question to all and hopefully to the benefit of some, A new shooter wants say a 243 for fox and deer and the police force specify a mentor, what is his/her best plan of action?

[baldie]

Firstly the new .243 hopeful. Again as we,ve said earlier, its easy for us holders to spout off, but sod it, i,m going to anyway

If the applicant has land that is passed for fullbore, and has deer on it, that the home office recommend a .243 for....the police have no option but to grant it, no dsc1, no mentor, no nothing.All this working their way up through rimmies, .22 c/f,s is not legal, its the police forcing their opinions on the applicant, there is nothing in the firearms act to support these measures. What i always tell people with similar question who come in the shop, is to tell the police to put the refusal IN WRITING, then the applicant can take it further, and it usually does the trick.

Back to liability etc when mentoring. As I said, i did it once for a friend, but when i sent back the letter , effectively endorsing him as safe, i put many disclaimers in, basically saying i would not be held liable for any accidents, unsafe behaviour, or anything in the future, and he was safe and well informed at the time of writing.I told them to issue the ticket ONLY if they agreed to this, and i have a copy of the letter.

[eldon]

Hi Baldie happy new year to one and all,

 

Can't pick fault with your reply and sounds a long the same path as I was thinking. Hopefully some newbies will read it and benefit from this.

Paul

[Orka Akinse]

IMO some form of competance training must be undertaken before a firearms licence is granted but mentoring is the wrong way to go about

This is a very delicate area.

 

Ian.

 

Verm

 

You suggest in your post you are in favour of competency training. Where is the data or evidence to suggest an applicant needs competency training before an FAC is granted. Competence training doesn't make anyone safer its just like an MoT, it is only valid at the time of issue.

 

If we give in to this requirement where will it all end? The ban of hand guns was brought about by media hype and complete broccoli as far as arguements go and it has been proven without any doubt, firearms crime is increasing and guess what it aint legal firearms holders who are responsible cos they aint legal to own anymore.

 

All I am saying Verm is this:

 

Until some authority can demonstrate using recognised statistical data and/or modelling that "competency training" is/will be useful in reducing the number of accidents or accidental deaths with firearms then I will resist it being enforced upon us.

 

There is no such data, the examples I have given are factual (or were when I read them; they might need slight adjustment) and clearly demonstrate that whilst this training is educational it does the square root of nothing to prevent accidents from happening.

 

As another example; A colleague over the holidays treated a man who caused himself severe injuries from a chain saw, even tho' he'd done the course and he'd been using one for THIRTY years he still managed to have an accident and injure himself.

 

I apologise Verm if the tone of my original post seemed alarmist or aggressive, it wasn't my intention, we ALL need to work together and put an end to these unwarranted, unnecessary and I think perhaps in some instances possibly illegal barriers to new blood coming into the sport at every corner.

 

OA

[Vermincinerator]

Orka,

This was my opinion when i did not now all the facts, it has since been explained to me that experience with firearms is considered before granting of an FAC, but it was based on a hypothetical question anyway

I gained my FAC through being a member of a R&P club and as i progressed to becomng a rifle/pistol coach i came across many who should not be anywhere near a gun as their gun handling was extremely dangerous.

As you can imagine these people were deemed unsuitable by the club officials to be a member and thus gain a FAC.

Putting a rifle legally into the hands of a person who has never handled a rifle before, telling them to get on with it is highly irresponsible and is the example i am referring to.

For the totally inexperienced, some form of competance training must be undertaken before the granting of a FAC, i too dont want any kind of across the board compulsary training but i also dont want any incompetant, inexperienced and dangerous people wandering the countryside with loaded rifles and before anyone says it, yes there many who are already doing so with a FAC

 

Ian.

 

PS. Would you give a full driving licence to a person who has never driven a car before?

I dont think so!