The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

Sim G wrote:

bradaz11 wrote: it's a shame, Aintree pistol club have been excellent when I have visited to shoot comps, the guys I have met all seem to be top noch guys, and run their club very well.

I think it’s actually fair to say that even though the guys you met were top notch, they didn’t run the club very well....!

Ultimately Home Office criteria is how a club should be administered. It’s actually not complicated and the pamphlet that lays it down is only half a dozen pages long. As opposed to this event being sinister or vindictive by the police, it’s come about by inept management of the organisation....

Have you seen more about it than what's in this thread?

Sim G wrote:

bradaz11 wrote: it's a shame, Aintree pistol club have been excellent when I have visited to shoot comps, the guys I have met all seem to be top noch guys, and run their club very well.

I think it’s actually fair to say that even though the guys you met were top notch, they didn’t run the club very well....!

Ultimately Home Office criteria is how a club should be administered. It’s actually not complicated and the pamphlet that lays it down is only half a dozen pages long. As opposed to this event being sinister or vindictive by the police, it’s come about by inept management of the organisation....

Most clubs I know have their own ways of meeting the Home Office criteria .
Some are super hi-tech with computerised systems , others use pen and paper .
Some just ask a prospective member if he has had a cert refused or revoked or that Section 21 of the Firearms Act does not apply to them. Some clubs have a multi page application form for prospective members to fill in .

Gossip has it that there is one club that has considered a rule that full membership will only be granted on production of a Doctors letter that meets police requirements !.

You would think that when the club has operated their own way of compliance for many years , with many Home Office renewals that if the clubs systems did not comply they would have been informed and advised at some time in the past .

You would think that if a reasonable Police Force has a suspicion that a club might not be in compliance this year with the criteria that they would meet with club officials and inform them what they were doing wrong and how to rectify their mistakes.

There are those who would agree with you that 10+ police and civilian employees making a well planned visit to a gun club is not vindictive , however there are a few people who might consider it to be sinister .

Removing de=activated wall hangers is neither sinister or vindictive , is it ?

And contacting members of the club telling them to join another club within x weeks or loose your guns and your FAC's is just being plain helpful .

Is that what has happened? they removed some wall hangers?
Our club is full of em

Sim G wrote:

bradaz11 wrote: it's a shame, Aintree pistol club have been excellent when I have visited to shoot comps, the guys I have met all seem to be top noch guys, and run their club very well.

I think it’s actually fair to say that even though the guys you met were top notch, they didn’t run the club very well....!

Ultimately Home Office criteria is how a club should be administered. It’s actually not complicated and the pamphlet that lays it down is only half a dozen pages long. As opposed to this event being sinister or vindictive by the police, it’s come about by inept management of the organisation....

is there a link to that please

I do hope this isn't as simple as an old deac hanging on the wall that dosent meet the specs?

I would suggest that considering the Spanish inquisition we all live under in these difficult times, that club officials inspect any long standing wall hangers to ensure they meet the post 1988 standard, or failing that, if they are very old wall hangers that don't fall within Sec58 (2) obsolete caliber exception, make very sure they are 'deactivated by other means' and no pressure baring parts are capable of reuse.

Personally I would get rid to an RFD if they don't fall under Sec58 or post 1988 deactivated standard, (with stamps and certificate).

Alan D wrote:I do hope this isn't as simple as an old deac hanging on the wall that dosen't meet the specs?

It was nothing to do with any decats.... I've been given the info but can't really share it.

If the issue is with the Clubs home office approval or the renewing of then that would suggest the Club Secretary has not been doing his job as it's his responsibility to make sure everything is in place to comply with the home office approval relevant to the Club or the renewal of.

MistAgain wrote: Most clubs I know have their own ways of meeting the Home Office criteria .
Some are super hi-tech with computerised systems , others use pen and paper .
Some just ask a prospective member if he has had a cert refused or revoked or that Section 21 of the Firearms Act does not apply to them. Some clubs have a multi page application form for prospective members to fill in .

Gossip has it that there is one club that has considered a rule that full membership will only be granted on production of a Doctors letter that meets police requirements !.

You would think that when the club has operated their own way of compliance for many years , with many Home Office renewals that if the clubs systems did not comply they would have been informed and advised at some time in the past .

You would think that if a reasonable Police Force has a suspicion that a club might not be in compliance this year with the criteria that they would meet with club officials and inform them what they were doing wrong and how to rectify their mistakes.

There are those who would agree with you that 10+ police and civilian employees making a well planned visit to a gun club is not vindictive , however there are a few people who might consider it to be sinister .

Removing de=activated wall hangers is neither sinister or vindictive , is it ?

And contacting members of the club telling them to join another club within x weeks or loose your guns and your FAC's is just being plain helpful .

I'm a member of three HO approved clubs and have been a club official in two of them. That is exactly what the responsibility of a club has, the effective running, in line with the criteria for if not, their members FACs and gun ownership is at risk if those members FACs are issued on the basis of being members of that HO approved club for target shooting.

We have deactivated guns on the wall. Never an issue. One of my clubs was even burgled and we had eight air rifles stolen. The security defeated them getting to the section 1 guns and ammunition. We put right the damage and carried on. We even had a HO renewal and the club FAC renewal within the year of the burglary! Absolutely no issues.

There's also been mention in this thread that the club has shareholders. So it's also run as a business? That just compounds the notion that management is the issue. But I imagine there will be all sorts of deflecting from where the blame lies.

Sim G wrote:
There's also been mention in this thread that the club has shareholders. So it's also run as a business? That just compounds the notion that management is the issue. But I imagine there will be all sorts of deflecting from where the blame lies.

There is a Limited Company that owns the building .

The shareholders for this company comprise the following .

Members who either loaned money or stood as guarantors for the bank loan to buy the building when the existing landlord tried to evict the club.
Members who loaned the club money when the MDC tried to compulsory purchase the club building.
Members who over time have contributed many hours of hard work in building maintainance.