Q : Should a regulated firearms training (similar to DSC 1) be introduced for all new applicants applying for a Section 1 Firearms Certificate
Additionally - Should all existing Section 1 ticket holders be made to go through a competency test in line with the above
H
Tests....Huh....What are they good for...absolutely....
Tests....Huh....What are they good for...absolutely....
...is this a pistol in my hand, or am I just pleased to see you ?
Re: Tests....Huh....What are they good for...absolutely....
Sure I've seen this question before somewhere. 
That would be huge task for new applications alone and in my opnion virtually unachievable if existing FAC holders were included.
Setting up the infrastructure would be problem number one, who would do the instruction and who would do the testing if the latter was required.
You can guarantee that if it was left to a government agency to take control of all this, the waiting list would be huge, there would be a drop in applications or the processing of them and someone somewhere would be thinking that they could use this as a means of reducing the number of applicants and firearms.
I have nothing against there being a requirement for some sort of introductory training, infact I think it could be a good idea, but can just see it turning into a farce.
As for existing holders, now that's even more difficult in my opinion.
If the training cost money, which it would, who will want to pay unless it is of some benefit to them, or unless it was compulsory in which case we would see a large amount of firearms being seized due to failure to qualify or more likely, bureaucratic cockups.
What would be nice, living in dreamland, is that once you've held a firearms cert for a certain number of years, you could then apply for such training as you mention, after that training you could then apply to hold a certain number of firearms within a category without all the variation lark.
So you would be granted say 2 rimfires, 2 centrefire rifles up to a certain calibre and so on. As long as you stayed within that remit, you could have what you wanted without having to apply each and every time you wanted to change.
Sorry I've wondered off a bit.
In answer to you question.
Yes and No
That would be huge task for new applications alone and in my opnion virtually unachievable if existing FAC holders were included.
Setting up the infrastructure would be problem number one, who would do the instruction and who would do the testing if the latter was required.
You can guarantee that if it was left to a government agency to take control of all this, the waiting list would be huge, there would be a drop in applications or the processing of them and someone somewhere would be thinking that they could use this as a means of reducing the number of applicants and firearms.
I have nothing against there being a requirement for some sort of introductory training, infact I think it could be a good idea, but can just see it turning into a farce.
As for existing holders, now that's even more difficult in my opinion.
If the training cost money, which it would, who will want to pay unless it is of some benefit to them, or unless it was compulsory in which case we would see a large amount of firearms being seized due to failure to qualify or more likely, bureaucratic cockups.
What would be nice, living in dreamland, is that once you've held a firearms cert for a certain number of years, you could then apply for such training as you mention, after that training you could then apply to hold a certain number of firearms within a category without all the variation lark.
So you would be granted say 2 rimfires, 2 centrefire rifles up to a certain calibre and so on. As long as you stayed within that remit, you could have what you wanted without having to apply each and every time you wanted to change.
Sorry I've wondered off a bit.
In answer to you question.
Yes and No
Effluent in many languages.
Re: Tests....Huh....What are they good for...absolutely....
what chas said regards testing
and yes the dream would be getting rid of the variation bollox
although in dreamland i would go one step further. just like land, you are passed upto a certain cal. and as long as all rifles are registered you can have whatever you like
so say you are a fox shooter and apply to be cleared for upto .243. you can then piss about trying .17, .204, .222, .223 or whatever without hassle until you find what you like
and while we're on the subject. my pet hate is ammo allowance.
my mate has asked his FEO twice to increase his .22lr allowance. he currently has 500 buy 600 hold
all he wants is 600 buy and 1000 hold. so he can keep a box minimags (100 a box) buy his subs a brick at a time and try the odd box of different ammo......he loves his .22's and just wants the freedom he SHOULD have when it was decided he was suitable to own such rifles
as he say's "what damage can i do with a 1000 rounds that i cant with 600???"..........he's got a point!
and yes the dream would be getting rid of the variation bollox
although in dreamland i would go one step further. just like land, you are passed upto a certain cal. and as long as all rifles are registered you can have whatever you like
so say you are a fox shooter and apply to be cleared for upto .243. you can then piss about trying .17, .204, .222, .223 or whatever without hassle until you find what you like
and while we're on the subject. my pet hate is ammo allowance.
my mate has asked his FEO twice to increase his .22lr allowance. he currently has 500 buy 600 hold
all he wants is 600 buy and 1000 hold. so he can keep a box minimags (100 a box) buy his subs a brick at a time and try the odd box of different ammo......he loves his .22's and just wants the freedom he SHOULD have when it was decided he was suitable to own such rifles
as he say's "what damage can i do with a 1000 rounds that i cant with 600???"..........he's got a point!
Re: Tests....Huh....What are they good for...absolutely....
If he was allowed to buy 600 and keep 1000. He can still buy 1000 in the same shop. He buys 600 then buys 400. Perfectly legal, thats if he has completely run out of .22's 
Ian
Ian
Re: Tests....Huh....What are they good for...absolutely....
indeed. but his feo will only allow him to have 500 buy 600 hold. so if he keeps a box of minimags in and buys subs in 500's its a bit of a juggling act to stay legal
all he's after is some breathing space so he can have different brands of ammo in stock and not be having to go to the gunshop every week
(semi auto target shooter mainly)
all he's after is some breathing space so he can have different brands of ammo in stock and not be having to go to the gunshop every week
(semi auto target shooter mainly)
Re: Tests....Huh....What are they good for...absolutely....
I have buy a 1000 and keep 1100. Do not know when I last bought any.
It is a load of cobblers, as has been pointed out, there is no difference in whether you have 500 or 5000.
I think it is just a case of setting rules and getting a little hitler coming out to see you that thinks he has the right to give or not give.
I am allowed to buy 200 centre fire heads. I always bought them at the Scottish Game fair from Aftab by the thousand. in boxes of 250. was much cheaper.
Its all red tape mate. It will only get worse.
Ian
It is a load of cobblers, as has been pointed out, there is no difference in whether you have 500 or 5000.
I think it is just a case of setting rules and getting a little hitler coming out to see you that thinks he has the right to give or not give.
I am allowed to buy 200 centre fire heads. I always bought them at the Scottish Game fair from Aftab by the thousand. in boxes of 250. was much cheaper.
Its all red tape mate. It will only get worse.
Ian
Last edited by SikaStag on 08 May 2013, 09:41, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Tests....Huh....What are they good for...absolutely....
to be fair our bloke is not a little hitler type. he's always been good with me. he let my mate have 2 .22lr's, just cos he wanted 2......without having to make up stuff about dedicated night vision like some
your right though, it will only go one way
your right though, it will only go one way