Fire arms licensing department/ medical condition

[Dry Rot]

Now I am beginnig to worry about my health!

If my GP doesn't have the sense to flag up any issues on my file that might make me unsuitable to possess firearms -- at the time they occur -- I think I'll go to the vet next time. If he is wasting his time trawling through my medical notes when he should be doing his job, I'd worry even more.

As a patient, you have the right to look at your medical records and to obtain a copy. I got a copy of mine as I was considering getting some surgery done by a good friend of mine (a consultant in his speciality) who practices in Czechoslovakia.

 

[JCMaloney]

The issue between Police & GP is down to budget.
If the Police add on a fee to pay to the GP then the admin to "move" the fee also needs to be funded.....by whom?
If the GP charges the Police it cuts the other way.

If the hobbyist pays the admin cost is negated, unfortunately they left that bit out in the legal side of the process.

 

[Scholsey]

The issue between Police & GP is down to budget.
If the Police add on a fee to pay to the GP then the admin to "move" the fee also needs to be funded.....by whom?
If the GP charges the Police it cuts the other way.

If the hobbyist pays the admin cost is negated, unfortunately they left that bit out in the legal side of the process.

The doctors unions are all telling their members not to participate in applications because they don’t want the risk of Ok’ing the likes of a Derick Bird etc and week or two later they go on a killing spree, the doctor gets the blame for not noticing despite them not having a appointment for 11 years or been in once with a ingrowing toe nail and expected to be able to vouch for a patients mental state.

It’s not the doctors fault, you could argue we should have to pay for independent assessment done privately, it’s hard enough to get appointments with GPs as it is without having a waiting room full of recreational gun owners slowing everything down aswell.

It’s the application/renewal process what needs looking at not the doctors.

 

[icanshootwell]

Why is it a con? Is it a con when you have to pay for a report for life insurance? You're free to change doctors or to use a private GP to do your report if you want. Not sure exactly what use your medical records will be to you. They want the opinion of a doctor who has knowledge of your medical history from your notes.

The mind boggles at the thought of farmers who can afford to shoot resenting paying a professional £40/50/60 for their professional opinion once in 5 years saying 'I won't pay'. No wonder Joe Public generally thinks so highly of farmers!

Its not about the money, its the principal, another payment for the tax payer, and just for the record i,ve had a licence for 30 years, why have i not been issued an invoice before? As someone as already said, this is a simple money making exercise. Would the dr not be better off doing what there paid for(again by the tax payer) and tending to sick people rather than getting there secretaries to send out unnecessary invoices.

 

[ollie989898]

Its not about the money, its the principal, another payment for the tax payer, and just for the record i,ve had a licence for 30 years, why have i not been issued an invoice before? As someone as already said, this is a simple money making exercise. Would the dr not be better off doing what there paid for(again by the tax payer) and tending to sick people rather than getting there secretaries to send out unnecessary invoices.

GPs surgeries are private enterprises, and can do what they like. Including charge you for the costs they incurr for checking your medical history. Personally I think they should be insisting on a private consultation with mandatory attendance the cost of which I dread to think of. Still, compared to the other costs of the hobby, it is minor.

 

[Scholsey]

GPs surgeries are private enterprises, and can do what they like. Including charge you for the costs they incurr for checking your medical history. Personally I think they should be insisting on a private consultation with mandatory attendance the cost of which I dread to think of. Still, compared to the other costs of the hobby, it is minor.

But then how many doctors are really going to be willing to risk their career vouching for someone they’ve meet for 5 minutes.

It should be more reference based, your references should have to put their licenses on the line so if you do something silly with yours they lose theirs aswell! Might be a few people around who struggle to find someone for references then and rightly so.

 

[Minesapint]

But then how many doctors are really going to be willing to risk their career vouching for someone they’ve meet for 5 minutes.

It should be more reference based, your references should have to put their licenses on the line so if you do something silly with yours they lose theirs aswell! Might be a few people around who struggle to find someone for references then and rightly so.

Your referees don't have to be certificate holders so not really relevant

 

[Dry Rot]

I'd like to see a few statistics. What percentage of gun owners actually go on to kill? How many shooting incidents involving legally held guns are there per 'x' thousand of the population?

Maybe everyone should have a medical, and pay £50 for it, before getting a driving licence? How many terrorist attacks have their been using motor vehicles compared to firearms?

Perhaps drivers should have their cars seized for illegal parking as that clearly demonstrates inconsiderate and irresponsible behaviour! (According to local rumour, plod wanted to seize the guns of a driver who allgedly ran a red light. But that was quashed by a senior officer, probably because of an absence of witnesses!

Perhaps police officers who have a criminal conviction (apparently 993 in England and Wales according to Google) should be dismissed the force as they are clearly not suitable for a job demanding the trust and confidence of the public?

 

[Scholsey]

Your referees don't have to be certificate holders so not really relevant

I didn’t say they did, but there should be no better judge of character than your friends! I am sure the majority of gun owners have 2 gun owning friends who would vouch for them.

You don’t need to be a doctor to tell if someone is a weirdo recluse or bloody idiot who isn’t safe with a Swiss Army knife let alone a shotgun.

 

[Brisel]

Your referees don't have to be certificate holders so not really relevant

They do have to be people of standing in the community, so not just any old person.

 

[Jon]

I haven't seen my doctor for years, last time was to have a toe nail pierced. What value would my medical record be with a nine year blank ?

 

[ollie989898]

But then how many doctors are really going to be willing to risk their career vouching for someone they’ve meet for 5 minutes.

It should be more reference based, your references should have to put their licenses on the line so if you do something silly with yours they lose theirs aswell! Might be a few people around who struggle to find someone for references then and rightly so.

Doctors, or rather GPs, are doing exactly that probably 60 times every working day.

You have 10 minutes for a consult to decide what is up with someone.

 

[Scholsey]

Doctors, or rather GPs, are doing exactly that probably 60 times every working day.

You have 10 minutes for a consult to decide what is up with someone.

I know but it won’t be seen as their fault if they say they are fit for gun ownership for them to have a 110round capacity semi auto .22LR and go on a killing spree at their local car boot sale.

 

[egbert]

They do have to be people of standing in the community, so not just any old person.

I understand your ref has to be someone whose professional standing is of worth, IE if a FRICS, or a different quack, and whose professional body might withdraw accreditation should they be seen doing the 'wrong thing' and using their qualifications .

 

[Brisel]

I understand your ref has to be someone whose professional standing is of worth, IE if a FRICS, or a different quack, and whose professional body might withdraw accreditation should they be seen doing the 'wrong thing' and using their qualifications .

Not sure what your angle is there. Wouldn't a professional potentially be a better countersignatory than Joe Bloggs? I've never heard of someone being struck off for aiding & abetting a wrong 'un.

 

[egbert]

anyway, it's a huge load of insulting hokum.

A cop -in a position to know- told me backalong it would be very easy to obtain an illegal firearm inside an hour or two in any city, probably even the local market town-
and they're seldom sought for innocent purposes are they?
Nowadays the risk lawful firearms pose is minuscule by comparison, held by known persons and kept at known sites.



As for the Dr charging or not.....i'd move if mine did -they haven't so far- as i consider I've been a very profitable client, hardly ever darkening their door.

And tell me this, if you tell me no more.
If you had personal issues, stress, demons eating away, or a raging desire to use a firearm in an inappropriate manner....would you go and mention it to your own doctor, knowing they could be consulted at renewal time -which has been the case for quite a while I believe-? Hardly likely.

As I said, hokum.

 

[egbert]

Not sure what your angle is there. Wouldn't a professional potentially be a better countersignatory than Joe Bloggs? I've never heard of someone being struck off for aiding & abetting a wrong 'un.

Yes they are, for exactly that reason...one of my own refs, a FRICS, told me, simple as.

And I'm as certain as can be that professionals absolutely can be struck off for mis-using their professional accreditation.
been watching news reports of a such lately, and being struck off is the least of his worries!

 

[Brisel]

Yes they are, for exactly that reason...one of my own refs, a FRICS, told me, simple as.

And I'm as certain as can be that professionals absolutely can be struck off for mis-using their professional accreditation.
been watching news reports of a such lately, and being struck off is the least of his worries!

So what do you suggest instead? The police guidance states you need someone of responsibility, so if you can't use anyone with a professional qualification, you're stuffed.

Was he just avoiding signing them? No offence intended.

 

[farmerm]

Why is it a con? Is it a con when you have to pay for a report for life insurance? You're free to change doctors or to use a private GP to do your report if you want. Not sure exactly what use your medical records will be to you. They want the opinion of a doctor who has knowledge of your medical history from your notes.

The mind boggles at the thought of farmers who can afford to shoot resenting paying a professional £40/50/60 for their professional opinion once in 5 years saying 'I won't pay'. No wonder Joe Public generally thinks so highly of farmers!

The mind boggles how a GP can possibly give a professional option of someones current mental fitness to carry a firearm in all but a very small proportion of cases where they have recent patient contact regarding a mental health issue. A 5 minute consultation about an ingrowing toenail or other physical ailment gives no insight into someones mental health. I haven't seen a GP at my surgery in a couple of years, havent seen my named GP in over a decade, I am not even sure who my named GP is! If a GP really has serious concerns about someones fitness to hold a gun licence, a drivers licence, a pilots licence, an explosives licence etc etc should they really be waiting 5 years until the flag it up in a licence renewal medical report? Requesting a GP review at each licence renewal is simply a waste of everybodys time and money. A better system would be to increase the time between licence renewals but have both random and targeted spot check firewarms interviews with GPs given the right to refer patients, overtly or covertly, for a "random" re-appraisal if they have sufficient grounds for concern.

 

[Minesapint]

I haven't seen my doctor for years, last time was to have a toe nail pierced. What value would my medical record be with a nine year blank ?

Exactly my point. My FLO told me they would only need my records for the five years since my last renewal. I hadn't seen my doctor in that time yet still had to pay the £60