Firearms Safety Cert (FSC, HSC replacement)

[ke6guj]

that sure sounds ripe for problems in the future.

customer passes the test and it is time to issue the card;
internet down, sorry, can't issue an FSC card.
credit card maxed out, sorry, can't issue an FSC card.
does the company pay for the the state fees or does the instructor?
who invoices the customer for the card and test, the store or the instructor?


and why does the state deserve $15 for the instructor to reprint a lost FSC card? its not like it is using up a blank HSC card? its just looked up on the website and confirmed to be valid and then reprinted AFAIK. and if that is the case, why can't any instructor retrieve the info and print up a new card, why does it have to be the original instructor?

[kemasa]

Save each file for the certificate and then you could also re-print it without using the system.

[ke6guj]

Save each file for the certificate and then you could also re-print it without using the system.

yup, an instructor could definitely do that, print to PDF and then print from the PDF. and if you guys are just printing to plain white stationary, I'll probably just scan it to PDF and put it my dropbox folder so that I could reprint it anytime I needed to.

[kemasa]

its just looked up on the website and confirmed to be valid and then reprinted AFAIK. and if that is the case, why can't any instructor retrieve the info and print up a new card, why does it have to be the original instructor?

Unless you gave the test, you really have no idea of what was done, so it really needs to be the original instructor.

There should be no fee to the DOJ for re-printing it though, all the costs are on the instructor.

[ke6guj]

Unless you gave the test, you really have no idea of what was done, so it really needs to be the original instructor.

not sure what the issue would be here. are you saying that perhaps the original instructor let the guy cheat or something and that because of that, only the original instructor should do the re-print?

not sure why that would really matter down the line, the guy either has a valid FSC in the system or he doesn't. perhaps when it is reprinted, it could show the orginal instructor's info on it and maybe a "reprinted by XYZ instructor" on it as well. but are you concerned about liability for reprinting from a CADOJ website a potentially fraudulently-issued FSC?

There should be no fee to the DOJ for re-printing it though, all the costs are on the instructor.

I definitely agree.

I wonder if this is because the legislature assumed the FSC program would run like hte BFSC and HSC programs did with physical cards, where their was an actual physical expense for issuing and re-issuing cards, but now that the new system is internet-based and "cards" are printed on plain white paper, is that $15 state cost still justified (not that it ever was).?



edit: I dunno, how are the FSC approvals entered into the system, by DL/ID#? if so, why do we even need a hard-copy of the cert? why not cross-check it in DES when they type in the DL# and have DES show if the FSC is valid?

[kemasa]

not sure what the issue would be here. are you saying that perhaps the original instructor let the guy cheat or something and that because of that, only the original instructor should do the re-print?

I would not want to have my name listed on something which I had no knowledge of. There is also the problem of the ability to look up the information from another instructor. Would you want someone to be able to look up who you had issued it to?

Why does the instructor have to sign it at all? What does the signature signify? If it means something, then how could someone else sign it when they actually have no knowledge of it?

not sure why that would really matter down the line, the guy either has a valid FSC in the system or he doesn't. perhaps when it is reprinted, it could show the orginal instructor's info on it and maybe a "reprinted by XYZ instructor" on it as well. but are you concerned about liability for reprinting from a CADOJ website a potentially fraudulently-issued FSC?

I don't want to have any association with something that I had nothing to do with. Let the DOJ print it and email it to the person, rather than involving another instructor.

If you wanted to make it easy, the FSC number should be the CA DL/ID number and it should just be stored in the system (ignoring that the whole thing should be tossed).

I definitely agree.

I wonder if this is because the legislature assumed the FSC program would run like hte BFSC and HSC programs did with physical cards, where their was an actual physical expense for issuing and re-issuing cards, but now that the new system is internet-based and "cards" are printed on plain white paper, is that $15 state cost still justified (not that it ever was).?

Before, each card cost money, $15, and the state did not want a discounted card. The instructor could issue another one, at no profit to the instructor, but the DOJ did not want to issue a refund or anything for the $15 which was paid for that card.

edit: I dunno, how are the FSC approvals entered into the system, by DL/ID#? if so, why do we even need a hard-copy of the cert? why not cross-check it in DES when they type in the DL# and have DES show if the FSC is valid?

Because it is the law that we have to have a copy of it. It is the government, it does not have to make sense.

I still have one HSC card left, which means I am going to have to go through the refund process, which is annoying.

[ke6guj]

I would not want to have my name listed on something which I had no knowledge of.

ok, I guess I see your point, but in essence, wouldn't your name as a reprint instructor just state that you reprinted something from the CADOJ website.

and if that is an issue, why even make it so that the reprint instructor's name is anywhere on it if it is just a regurgitation of the info that CADOJ already has.

There is also the problem of the ability to look up the information from another instructor. Would you want someone to be able to look up who you had issued it to?

not sure why it would require CADOJ to let you see everyone a different instructor has issued FSC's to. make it like the FFL ez-check system works where you have to know the customer name and ID/DL# and it then lets you see the current FSC. you dont' have to navigate to instructor John Doe's list of issued FSC cards and find customer Joe Blow's FSC info.

Why does the instructor have to sign it at all? What does the signature signify? If it means something, then how could someone else sign it when they actually have no knowledge of it?

I haven't seen the new FSC, does the instructor actually sign it? and on a reprint, it wouldnt' necessarily have to be a requirement that the reprint instructor sign it.

I don't want to have any association with something that I had nothing to do with. Let the DOJ print it and email it to the person, rather than involving another instructor.

I'm just brainstorming here and trying to figure out why only the original instructor can reprint, and not initially seeing why a reprint instructor would be so opposed to having anything to do with it.

If you wanted to make it easy, the FSC number should be the CA DL/ID number and it should just be stored in the system (ignoring that the whole thing should be tossed).

that sounds like a good idea.

Before, each card cost money, $15, and the state did not want a discounted card. The instructor could issue another one, at no profit to the instructor, but the DOJ did not want to issue a refund or anything for the $15 which was paid for that card.

I'm aware of that, and would explain to people that if your HSC was less than 2 years old, then pay the $15, but if it was more than that, that it made more sense to retake the test and pay $25 for a new 5-year card.

Because it is the law that we have to have a copy of it. It is the government, it does not have to make sense.

again, that was brainstorming, I know the current law requires that, but opining on how an easier system could work.

[kemasa]

ok, I guess I see your point, but in essence, wouldn't your name as a reprint instructor just state that you reprinted something from the CADOJ website.

If you could do that, then you wouldn't need to print it, it would be in the system for each DROS and they can't make it that easy.

I haven't seen the new FSC, does the instructor actually sign it? and on a reprint, it wouldnt' necessarily have to be a requirement that the reprint instructor sign it.

I have not seen the new cards, other than the instructor cards, which have a place for the signature, so I assume that the FSC cards are also the same.

I'm just brainstorming here and trying to figure out why only the original instructor can reprint, and not initially seeing why a reprint instructor would be so opposed to having anything to do with it.

In the past, it was because only the originally issuer had a record of it. There would be a record of the number on the DROS as well, but only if the person bought a firearm.

I'm aware of that, and would explain to people that if your HSC was less than 2 years old, then pay the $15, but if it was more than that, that it made more sense to retake the test and pay $25 for a new 5-year card.

Yes, but as it turns out, if this occurred a couple of years ago it would have been better to save the money and just pay the replacement cost since the HSC is just about worthless, unless the person only buys handguns.

[ke6guj]

If you could do that, then you wouldn't need to print it, it would be in the system for each DROS and they can't make it that easy.

and that's what it all boils down to unfortunately.

I have not seen the new cards, other than the instructor cards, which have a place for the signature, so I assume that the FSC cards are also the same.



In the past, it was because only the originally issuer had a record of it. There would be a record of the number on the DROS as well, but only if the person bought a firearm.

right, but now, there does seem that there may be some sort of record online with the new system, or are they just letting you print blank FSC cards that you will then fill in the customer's info on? I guess we'll know more in 3 days.

Yes, but as it turns out, if this occurred a couple of years ago it would have been better to save the money and just pay the replacement cost since the HSC is just about worthless, unless the person only buys handguns.

right, once the FSC program was known, then calculating the cost/year for a replacement changes and you have to do the math to figure out what is the best for you.

[halifax]

So, everything's a-go for tomorrow's launch?

[Condorguns]

I'm ready on my end....I think. Tests printed, answer sheets printed.

Will the link for issuing cards be added to the screen you get after login tomorrow?

[halifax]

Really no idea what to expect.

[ugimports]

I have a bunch of appointments tomorrow so the system better be working!

[Condorguns]

I'm booked up also tomorrow. This dang thing better work. I forgot to look, is the support center not in tomorrow?

[Condorguns]

I have some ticked off customers. Other shops are telling them they don't need the FSC if they DROSED by today. Now I'm the mean one.