Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Licence renewal GP letter

cymraeg

War Hero
Hi all as per the title. My old man's licence has come up for renewal and he has been told it is now mandatory to have a GPs report/letter.

The problem being he has been told by the civvy med cen that as a practice they don't do them.

Was wondering if anybody could offer some advice on his options and if it was actually mandatory?

The local constabulary is South Wales if this makes any difference.

Cheers all
 
If he’s a member of BASC tell him to give them a call. If he isn’t, always worth joining.

It’s not a legal requirement, but the various forces/constabularies do love adding in their own rules.

I’ve just renewed in Cumbria. GP gets a letter, nothing to say so ignores it, renewal goes ahead as planned.
 

HE117

LE
Is he a member of any of the shooting organisations? They may help..

The problem with all this GP nonsense is that the Police have wide authority to grant or withhold licences as they see fit. The GMC was supposed to support the scheme, but they have basically ratted on the deal..

As an initial approach, I would go back to the practice and challenge them.. all they are being asked to do is put a flag on your fathers medical record.

The whole issue is a cluster I'm afraid!
 

cymraeg

War Hero
Guys thanks for the replies and have just found the other threads with the jarrod button.

Just pouring over them now and yes he is a member of basc and awaiting a reply
 
Home office guidelines are clear about this, unless he is declaring a condition, there are no grounds for a report unless the police want one (and in which case they have to pay for it)

B5C20150-71EC-4B06-89FE-EA8FF871A405.jpeg


If police try to get around it, make a formal complaint on the basis that under Section 55A firearms act 1968, chief con stables must ‘have regard’ to SoS guidance

39C28AC6-ABE2-44DA-BB2B-C6912A0EA8C5.jpeg
 

HE117

LE
Home office guidelines are clear about this, unless he is declaring a condition, there are no grounds for a report unless the police want one (and in which case they have to pay for it)

View attachment 519836

If police try to get around it, make a formal complaint on the basis that under Section 55A firearms act 1968, chief con stables must ‘have regard’ to SoS guidance

View attachment 519837
If only this were true..!

The Police and the Medical Profession are playing fast and loose with this issue, and the HO is basically sitting on its hands!

It is a NAFU and needs the HS to a: make a decision and b: enforce it!
 

hicky

Old-Salt
If this is the case ref the docs cert, why aren't basc/NGO making a stink over it....limp wristed!
 

4(T)

LE
If this is the case ref the docs cert, why aren't basc/NGO making a stink over it....limp wristed!


They did, but the HO simply ignored them.

The "consultation" process for proposed firearms restrictions is faithfully lobbied by shooting organisations and individuals, but has very little apparent effect on HO decisions.

Not only are proposed restrictions usually implemented with little or no amendment, but they are often implemented with unresolved issues - such as, in this case, the lack of any direction over the question of who pays for doctors' certificates.

One would almost imagine that the process of drafting firearms law amendments was driven by an agenda to make shooting sports so expensive and restricted that they eventually wither away.

p.s. The HO has already moved onto drafting new repressive conditions for:

- high muzzle energy rifles
- licensing of small bore ranges
- age limits on use of air rifles (see associated press propaganda)
- further licensing and legal liabilities for reloading (inc proposal to create offence of "intending" to load ammunition for illegal purposes*)

These are riddled with issues that, once again, look like being ignored by the HO.

p.p.s. Yet another tranche of restrictions also lined up - this time removing a number of calibres from the "obsolete calibre list". Widely predicted punishment of the law-abiding because of the actions of criminals, etc.

This is nasty one which includes several severe problems as yet unanswered by the HO, such as:

- thousands of unlicensed antiques will now become Sect5 (or 7.x); will the owners receive licenses for these?
- thousands of affected firearms are not in proof or cannot be proofed; will there be proof exemption?
- there are £m worth of affected firearms for which sale, trade or giving will be severely curtailed; who will compensate the owners' losses? (Rhetorical question)
- Sect5/7 has severe ownership, transport, security and location conditions; how are thousands of owners - many non-shooters with no firearms security - expected to deal with all this?
- etc.


Plenty more to come..


*sounds innocuous, ie that criminals will be prevented from loading ammo, but also would potentially have the effect of criminalising lawful gun owners - e.g. if you happen to have more empty cases and components which - if loaded - would put you over your "permitted to hold" figure.
 

cymraeg

War Hero
Guys cheers for all the replies he went through basc in the end for a friendly doc. Some informative replies also. Every day a school day
 

hicky

Old-Salt
4(T), inevitable due to Packham and his irk unfortunately......I guess shouting louder does win arguments.
 
Top