Consultation on Firearms Licencing, including medicals...

[GeeRam]

Looking at the press release if BASC want to help shooters they need to be realistic and not travel the same tired ground they did the last time. Firstly making it statutory for Doctors to complete the process will cause great ill will from the medical profession especially combined with the request that there should be no fees for the service.

They need to be realistic, what needs to happen is:

a) A process to allow a certificate to be issued or renewed if a Doctor conscientiously objects to doing it, this could be via a different GP or the local NHS trust

b) If a fee is to be charged it needs to be nationally agreed by all parties and realistic taking account of GPs workload but also the fees that shooters already have to pay

c) Ten year certificates to reduce the workload on Firearms licensing departments and GPs. This will also reduce the cost burden for shooters

BASC going in and demanding Doctors comply and must do it for free will cause more ill will and make outcomes for us worse!

Can't argue with any of that

[Polchraine]

In England and Wales there are around 150k FACs and 550k SGCs. Most FACs also have an SGC with an end figure of 580k having one or both details here

There are approx 45k GPs in the England and allowing a little for Wales, say 47k.

That will give 580/47 = 12.3 Cert Holders per GP and with 5 year certificates means they would have to complete the paperwork 2.4 times per year or once every 5 month. If it took certificates lengths out to 10 years it would mean an average of 1.2 per year or one every 10 months.

Is it really an onerous task to do that? They probably spend more time decdiing what car they will be buying next or which drug company sponsored "conference" to participate in.

[Polchraine]

Over the weekend there were more rports about doctors not wanting to have to collect fees from, invoice or report, "Health Tourists" that are costing the NHS tenms of millions, but they are quite willing to try and rip off FAC & SGC applicants.

[forbie]

Totally agree with you there. Just how many people are the doctors actually being asked to do this for? Do we have any way of finding out? Per doctor / practice?

[Alan D]

Over 5% of GPs in England have sought help for their mental health from the GP Health Service over the past two and a half years.
2,314 GPs have been assessed and treated ,of these, 69% were fully-qualified GPs .
The Office for National Statistics has data showing that between 2011 and 2015, 430 doctors died by suicide.

At the risk of annoying what is a decent group of people , I wonder if doctors are suitable to to say a shooter is safe .

Well, I would say your GP is simply basing his or her evidence of your suitability to hold firearms, on your records.

A simple two question form like the below is all thats required.

Has the person been treated for mental health issues including anger management issues , yes or no?

If yes, give more information.

Does the person have any other illness (or ongoing treatment for) that might cause mental or judgemental impairment, yes or no?

If yes, give more information.

Sign, date, job done....


It 'should' be a simple evidential assessment...

It's not rocket science to standardise and organise this nationwide and shouldn't have any baring on a doctor's mental health....

It shouldn't have, at least...

It's a great idea to standardise this as keeping firearms away from the mentally impaired is good for everyone..

[Rockhopper]

I have absolutely no problem paying my GP for whatever is needed in just the same way I would do if I was applying for an HGV licence etc.
My big worry is if they refuse to engage with the police due to their moral stance on firearms. Changing GP.s is not that simple, they have catchment areas and usually won’t accept new patients who don’t live within that area. In my case I’d actually have to move house to register with another doctor!

[artiglio]

In the document it says there has been no assessment of the benefits of the changes and that the costs are estimated to be in the region of 40 million over 10 years. So the argument seems to be that when its someone elses money any assumed prevented life or injury is worth infinite cost.

At one time ( not sure of current value) the highways agency used a figure of 1.6 million as the value of prevented fatality (vpf)and had another for a prevented injury (vpi).

Any road safety improvement works are based on cost being less than the estimated vpf/vpi over a given period.

On those rough figures it would need to be demonstrated that the measures would be likely to prevent 25 deaths. ( suicides excluded) for them to be reasonable. Or else surely it would be reasonable for the state to spend equivalent sums on every hazard for which they are responsible.

GP’s cannot be expected to do the additional work for nothing, but as a public safety issue it should form part of their contracted work and paid for accordingly by the nhs. Where a GP declines to fullfill this duty then it should be the GP’s/practices responsibility to have the work completed by another doctor/service and any additional cost borne by them , it being a consequence of their decision.

But seeing as the funding is very unlikely to come from the nhs at the least the fee should be set as if your own gp does the work and again if they decline , it should be there responsibility to have the report completed by others at their additional cost. In addition an initial report would have a higher fee as it effectively covers the applicants entire medical history, any follow up reports should be a reduced fee as it would then cover only the intervening period. Though if its done by a different doctor they may not wish to accept the previous opinion.

[artiglio]

I have absolutely no problem paying my GP for whatever is needed in just the same way I would do if I was applying for an HGV licence etc.
My big worry is if they refuse to engage with the police due to their moral stance on firearms. Changing GP.s is not that simple, they have catchment areas and usually won’t accept new patients who don’t live within that area. In my case I’d actually have to move house to register with another doctor!

But in this case , its not a report that enables you to earn a living , and as the scottish bin lorry driver showed such a report / medical was worthless. He subsequently killed 6 people.

Many years ago i needed a considerable number of vaccinations to work in africa, i had to pay a not inconsiderable sum , however had i been attending Haj as part of my religion they would have been free. Not sure if thats still the case, but if it is, why would the costs of religious observance be susidised by the state ( on the grounds of the risks, of mixing with so many people from so many places in close confine , both in terms of to the person and the wider public if they return with communicable disease) but not pay to protect the public from what is effectively another lifestyle choice?

[Pete]

40-odd years ago, I remember attending the Tropical Diseases clinic in London prior to visiting dodgy countries, and getting pumped up for free.............don't know if that's still the norm.
Then again, my motives were anything but spiritual............

Pete

[Alan D]

Instead of this being a case of absolutely blinding common sense, simple form to fill out etc for a nominal fee, say £15 and standardised across the country...

You can guarantee this will be dragged out into a long series of meetings, while people try to justify their jobs..

Lots of walking about with clipboards, looking busy with red,green and blue pens in top pockets .... (Or whatever the modern version of this is) aaarggh