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

Hi guys. I have never truly been interested in shooting overland,or to put it bluntley hunting.I have recently had the opportunity to use land which has lots of rabbits,plenty of foxes and often deer.I received written permission from the landowner and sent the letter together with my FAC to the police to get it processed.They informed me I would need a mentor
who shoots the calibers I require and who would vouch for me.This have been sorted and the police tell me my FAC with the relevant permissions including expanding bullets will be granted.
How long is normal that I would require a mentor, is there a set time,or does it depend on shooting time etc

Er, you are an experienced shooter, already hold an FAC and the Police are insisting you ALSO have a mentor too!

I know of people granted initial applicant FACs, with zero prior firearms experience; who have been given FACs without any mentor or training requirements.

Sounds like an office jobs-worth inventing more hoops to jump through...

There is absolutely no legal reason for them to enforce the stipulation of a mentor. I'd record each and every occassion you and your 'mentor' go out and then after about a dozen outing return your cert requesting his removal. Demand the location and quote for the mentor, in the Home Office Guidance if they try to refuse.

You must have a good mate to serve as your mentor. There are very few people i'd do it for. He is essentially putting himself and his own cert in jeapordy each and every time he takes you out.

Scotsgun wrote:There is absolutely no legal reason for them to enforce the stipulation of a mentor. I'd record each and every occassion you and your 'mentor' go out and then after about a dozen outing return your cert requesting his removal. Demand the location and quote for the mentor, in the Home Office Guidance if they try to refuse.

You must have a good mate to serve as your mentor. There are very few people i'd do it for. He is essentially putting himself and his own cert in jeapordy each and every time he takes you out.

From what I have read over the last few months, mentors are becoming more popular with certain constabularies when people with very little experience outside of "range environments" ask for centrefire calibres for fox etc. I think it is more to do with recognising suitable backstops and knowing the lie of the land etc (not judging anyone here, just interpreting the issuing force's motives), especially for fox which is typically shot at night. FAC air and rimfire isn't so bad and I can't remember reading about any mentoring conditions required for .22lr or .17hmr etc. A lot of forces also tend to insist on things such as DSC1 etc if you are asking for deer to be granted, although again this seems to vary both between and within force areas.

Also, the general consensus is that the mentor is no more liable for the actions of another shooter than a referee is on an application, or a driving instructor/examiner is in the event of a road collision once a student has "passed"; although I wouldn't want to be the test case

It's a while back now, over ten years, but I'm pretty sure that when my son gained his FAC (.22LR) and when I first gained mine (.22LR and .243) there was a suggestion/expectation by Suffolk FLA that our first few individual outings would be under the supervision of an employee of the estate on which we were shooting, ie the gamekeeper.

As neither of us had firearms experience this seemed an entirely reasonable precaution to take. Having see rimfire range shooters take up field quarry shooting with fullbore calibres, having see guys take up shooting because "they fancy a go at stalking" I believe it remains a relevant precaution.

No disrespect to the OP whom I don't know personally but there is a mile of difference between shooting on a controlled rifle range under the immediate supervision of an RCO and wandering around the countryside by yourself in search of brer fox, porky pig or bambi. Hang on, I just need to get over this barbed wire fence with my loaded rifle: I don't want to snag my expensive new Harlikka jacket and pants though...

billgatese30,

The mentor clause has been used by various forces for about 3 yrs now. Being that i'm on the national Heritage's 'approved stalker' register, have DSC1 & DSC2, access to several thousand acres and an 'open ticket,' i get asked to mentor regularly. Mostly by complete strangers.

Also i know of at least 2 incidents in which mentors have lost their own certs as a result of the mentees actions. In one case the mentee was stopped by police whilst driving to the venue and found to have a rifle in the car with bolt inserted and loaded. Granted he's a t*@t and deserves to loose his cert. but his mentor wasn't even in the car with him. He drove himself to the stalk. The licensing dept. argued that the mentee should have been more aware of the 'basics' of safety and that the mentor should have made him more aware! I believe he's appealing.

It gets harder and harder to argue against compulsory qualifications and certificates with idiots like these on the loose.

Wow, that is really bad. Glad to hear he is appealing the decision. Wonder what would happen if he was on the way to the range on a club day, would the club come under scrutiny for "approving" his safety before granting membership!

The world really has gone mad!

Scotsgun wrote:billgatese30,

The mentor clause has been used by various forces for about 3 yrs now. Being that i'm on the national Heritage's 'approved stalker' register, have DSC1 & DSC2, access to several thousand acres and an 'open ticket,' i get asked to mentor regularly. Mostly by complete strangers.

Also i know of at least 2 incidents in which mentors have lost their own certs as a result of the mentees actions. In one case the mentee was stopped by police whilst driving to the venue and found to have a rifle in the car with bolt inserted and loaded. Granted he's a t*at and deserves to loose his cert. but his mentor wasn't even in the car with him. He drove himself to the stalk. The licensing dept. argued that the mentee should have been more aware of the 'basics' of safety and that the mentor should have made him more aware! I believe he's appealing.

It gets harder and harder to argue against compulsory qualifications and certificates with idiots like these on the loose.

I'm glad he's appealing they need to be told to f*** right off with that one.

The duties of a mentor are not written down; they are not even told to the mentor when he agrees to perform this role. How on this earth can he POSSIBLY be held liable for that one? Fair enough if the pupil shoots someone's cow or something, but that example is plain nuts!!!