Possible trouble with FEO

[silent_varmintor]

Hi guys,

 

 

I don’t often post rants but this one has got me a bit annoyed to say the least. 
 

my FAC is due a renewal at end of March and my FEO sent out paperwork to get this dealt with ASAP due to back logs. At the moment I have a 6.5x47 rifle and newly aquired .22LR bolt action last September. 
 

I now have my eye on a .22 semi auto and didn’t see this as an issue at all as my previous FAC I had both bolt and semi on my ticket and had these in possession. I spoke to my FEO about it and putting in a variation which from my previous experience normally had taken a week from start to finish. In my area, Aberdeen, he told me this is no longer as fast as this as they all have to go to Inverness and this may take longer than the renewal. So taking that on board I agreed that I would just put the request for the .22 semi on my renewal paperwork. 
 

then I got the questions about good reason to want another “ weapon “. Personally I hate that term and I just prefer firearm. I know it’s technically correct however, it is personal preference I suppose. So I gave my reasons with one of them, more likely the semi will be a dedicated night rig, semi is better in highly populated areas of rabbit warrens ect. These are the same Reasons I gave on my first FAC and not an issue at all. Then I get asked questions about ammunition usage and being able to justify the requirement based on ammo usage, which I had to remind 3 times that I have only aquired this Sept last year. Then I get told that he will need to look into my ammunition allowance and that it may need to be reduced. I have 600 for each 6.5 and .22. I asked why as if it was a problem it would have been picked up on the grant of this FAC. I told him that my previous FAC I had 1200 for .22 which he replied with, that’s far too much and every FEO is different with different opinions. 
 

we got talking about other things and the 6.5x47 and then the belter came out, “ is your 6.5 a centerfire ? “ 

😳😳 was my face !!! 
 

it may be apparent that this FEO is new to this. If I don’t get this second .22 granted and forced to drop any ammo allowance then I will be appealing this straight away. 
 

I know it’s only a rant but any thoughts lads ? I know there shouldn’t be any issues with my second .22 but has anyone else had issues like this and being forced to drop ammunition allowances before ? 
 

craig 

 

[Popsbengo]

4 minutes ago, silent_varmintor said:

Hi guys,

 

 

I don’t often post rants but this one has got me a bit annoyed to say the least. 
 

my FAC is due a renewal at end of March and my FEO sent out paperwork to get this dealt with ASAP due to back logs. At the moment I have a 6.5x47 rifle and newly aquired .22LR bolt action last September. 
 

I now have my eye on a .22 semi auto and didn’t see this as an issue at all as my previous FAC I had both bolt and semi on my ticket and had these in possession. I spoke to my FEO about it and putting in a variation which from my previous experience normally had taken a week from start to finish. In my area, Aberdeen, he told me this is no longer as fast as this as they all have to go to Inverness and this may take longer than the renewal. So taking that on board I agreed that I would just put the request for the .22 semi on my renewal paperwork. 
 

then I got the questions about good reason to want another “ weapon “. Personally I hate that term and I just prefer firearm. I know it’s technically correct however, it is personal preference I suppose. So I gave my reasons with one of them, more likely the semi will be a dedicated night rig, semi is better in highly populated areas of rabbit warrens ect. These are the same Reasons I gave on my first FAC and not an issue at all. Then I get asked questions about ammunition usage and being able to justify the requirement based on ammo usage, which I had to remind 3 times that I have only aquired this Sept last year. Then I get told that he will need to look into my ammunition allowance and that it may need to be reduced. I have 600 for each 6.5 and .22. I asked why as if it was a problem it would have been picked up on the grant of this FAC. I told him that my previous FAC I had 1200 for .22 which he replied with, that’s far too much and every FEO is different with different opinions. 
 

we got talking about other things and the 6.5x47 and then the belter came out, “ is your 6.5 a centerfire ? “ 

😳😳 was my face !!! 
 

it may be apparent that this FEO is new to this. If I don’t get this second .22 granted and forced to drop any ammo allowance then I will be appealing this straight away. 
 

I know it’s only a rant but any thoughts lads ? I know there shouldn’t be any issues with my second .22 but has anyone else had issues like this and being forced to drop ammunition allowances before ? 
 

craig 

 

Are you a member of a Scottish Office approved target shooting club ?

[silent_varmintor]

No I’m not mate. I was in the past but not anymore. 
I wasn’t a member of any shooting club when I got my first FAC and got both bolt and semi .22 either. 

[Popsbengo]

So what did you give as 'good reason' for 1200 rounds of .22LR?   You'd never get 600 centre fire for stalking/varminting in Staffordshire in my experience.  You may have had an easy local FEO and now you have one nearer the normal standard - just speculating as I have only experience of three forces;  West Midlands, Cheshire and Derbyshire.

[silent_varmintor]

That particular FEO didn’t ask or question the 1200. It was what I put down and it got granted. 
 

i will take that onboard regarding the ammunition allowance however what about the second .22 ? What’s your opinion on that ? 

[phoenix]

I'm with the Aberdeen office and one for day use, one for night use is a standard "good" reason for having 2 rifles of the same calibre.

If you are refuse, then appeal, because you will win.

This is just the normal variation in attitudes among FEOs - some of them just don't like guns and they try every trick to reduce the number of guns and ammo held by the public

600 rounds of 6.5 may be a bit much unless your are a competition shooter

600 rounds of 22 rimfire should not be a problem - I have 1300 on my ticket

 

Cheers

 

Bruce

[silent_varmintor]

Hi Bruce,

 

good to hear from you mate, long time no speak, hope all is well. 
 

ok so maybe the 600 CF allowance seems high now your the second person to mention this so this I am willing to accept if gets reduced. 
 

in terms of the second .22 I am glad to hear this and also glad to hear that appealing is well worth it if refused. 
 

I do also have authority to purchase a .243 which I had since the grant however, my 6.5 does everything so I did say that I would happy to swap out the authority for the .243 for the .22 semi which the FEO did seem to be pleased about. 
 

when all this restrictions are eased off a bit I’d love to come back up to the garage and hear your thoughts on current thermal and NV again if possible ? 
 

thanks

 

craig 

[Popsbengo]

52 minutes ago, silent_varmintor said:

That particular FEO didn’t ask or question the 1200. It was what I put down and it got granted. 
 

i will take that onboard regarding the ammunition allowance however what about the second .22 ? What’s your opinion on that ? 

I can't see any justification to refuse you a semi-auto;  you have demonstrated a good reason in my opinion.

I'd re-approach the FEO and see what he's actually planning to do,  we have an FEO here that likes to put pressure on to see if the person has really thought through their request - if you stand your ground you may find he will agree in the end.

[terryh]

As Per PbG, politely ask 'why' and then be prepared to give sensible and reasonable answers.

Sort of think 600 rounds of CF ammunition for stalking is a bit hard to defend, when expanding bullets were listed separately yes, now not so much.

T

[Dellboy]

The cosest ive personally come to that kind of thing was when i asked for spare cylinders for a muzzle loader (i wanted 2 asked for 3)  i was told no by my feo  so asked for a 357 lbr  which he agreed to  i then said i would just buy some speed loaders  .. i got the cylinders  well 2  . 

[GT3_richy]

Pretty much as others have said, my experience (albeit in TVP) is that getting much over 250 allowance per calibre for centrefire ammo needs a very good argument if you're not target shooting. Two calibres with different good reasons should be no issues, I have 2x 6mm, 2x .17 and a .20 and .223 which are very similar, lightweight all day carry deer gun v heavy ambush setup, day optic v dedicated NV or thermal gun etc.

600 sounds reasonable for r/f ammo without a target condition too, I think I have 600 on mine, so I can buy a new brick before the previous runs out.

As Bruce says, some FEOs just seem to be on a mission to take as many firearms from us as possible...others hand them out like sweets....be reasonable, follow HO guidance and seek assistance from a shooting body if necessary, I dont think you're asking for anything unreasonable.

And yes, their insistence on using the word weapon really gets my goat, TVPs email autoresponse used to read "If you are notifying us of an acquisition or disposal of weapon/s please accept this email as an acknowledgement of receipt." - its firearms licensing, not weapons licensing! 🤬

 

[Popsbengo]

I can't be fussed with weapon verses firearm terminology;  all firearms can be weapons but not all weapons are firearms.  The anti-lobby aren't going to be influenced by this one way or the other.

Anyone from a military background will be very familiar with using 'weapon' to mean rifle et-al.  If you use a rifle to kill a deer it's a weapon isn't it?  Perfectly reasonable use of English.  

For politeness and sensitivity to some peoples feelings I try to stick to using 'firearm' in RCO briefings but find I often fall back on drilled in habit and start calling them weapons - even the NRA can't make its mind up, using both terms in their literature.

[SMLE]

1 hour ago, Popsbengo said:

I can't be fussed with weapon verses firearm terminology;  all firearms can be weapons but not all weapons are firearms.  The anti-lobby aren't going to be influenced by this one way or the other.

Anyone from a military background will be very familiar with using 'weapon' to mean rifle et-al.  If you use a rifle to kill a deer it's a weapon isn't it?  Perfectly reasonable use of English.  

For politeness and sensitivity to some peoples feelings I try to stick to using 'firearm' in RCO briefings but find I often fall back on drilled in habit and start calling them weapons - even the NRA can't make its mind up, using both terms in their literature.

Now come along Pops...... what were we taught on the RCO course......? 😀

The difference between firearm and weapon in my opinion is intent.....

[Popsbengo]

7 minutes ago, SMLE said:

Now come along Pops...... what were we taught on the RCO course......? 😀

The difference between firearm and weapon in my opinion is intent.....

it was a long time ago in a distant universe.....