Gordon R

Conor O'Gorman - I assume that you can read, so you answer is deliberately wrong. I asked how you can ensure that a bird shot with steel, had not previously ingested lead shot and therefore claimed to be lead free. Your track record of avoiding a straight answer is well established. That isn't a personal attack, but merely a fact. I will not respond to any of your posts on this thread. i feel embarrassed for you. Please don't offer one of your famous "phone calls".

Sorry, Conor O'Gorman - you didn't.

You have to get a medical report before you complete any application, so you could well be out £50, which will not be refunded if unsuccessful.

Having listened to part of the podcast, I am not inclined to listen to the rest. Conor might claim it is a good listen and needs to be heard in full. It sounded like a group of brainwashed pals having a cosy chat about trivia. The first few minutes are frankly embarrassing. Perhaps someone could enlighten them about the difference between "was" and "were". Perhaps Conor could cite the part of the podcast which deals with birds shot by steel or bismuth, who had previously ingested lead shot. I don't think it will be in there. If Conor claims that it is - against my better judgement - I will listen to the rest. If I am compelled to listen to the rest, I will be less than happy if it isn't in there.

Whilst I wish anyone, who is suitable and wants to enter shooting, every success, I genuinely think you need to speak to your FEO. If they are optimistic, you can then apply and part of that will be getting a medical opinion.

I did listen to the first 10 minutes and gave up. The effect of consuming lead was glossed over, with no mention of the fact that some people have their water supply through lead pipes. It seemed rather vague, with no-one challenging the big assumptions. Given that the "wee chicks" pick up small amounts of lead as grit and digest it, how can BASC claim that game shot with lead alternatives are in fact lead free? I don't see how that is possible.

Given that the last thread you started on the voluntary move away from lead shot has just been closed, I would question why you felt the need to start another.

It would be nice to think that the people who dreamt it up and implemented it might face corporate manslaughter charges at some point.

Your location would assist your sale.

I would take a lot of convincing.

No idea what that means.

Konor - despite his appalling contributions on this and other threads, I still feel sorry for him. He has dug a hole and isn't bright enough to get out of it. I genuinely think he is out of his comfort zone and his depth.

I suspected that from post one. Nothing has changed. The lack of detail is pointed. The story changes - blamed on poor memory. 🙂 🙂

Conor O'Gorman, I felt the need to point out that the link you supplied did not answer Old farrier's question, as he has confirmed. Do you have a sensible response? I honestly wonder about your motives. Your answer to straight questions is to avoid them, go off at a tangent or feign offence. You keep offering a phone call, when the only one I can recall commented that it was of little use or words to that effect. Are so arrogant that you think you could appease posters, by talking to them? It's laughable.

I don't believe you can get a fixed penalty for assault. This is what I meant when I said details are normally drip fed.

Can you clarify how you managed to get probation without appearing at the Mags court?

Old farrier - the cited links doesn't give that information. It references some species, but lacks the promised detail.

You appear to be avoiding asking the only people who can answer you.

You hit the nail on the head.

🙂

I think you will struggle to qualify. From 1st April 2022, Crown Oil can only supply red diesel to the following sectors: Commercial boating industry, including fishing and inland water freight industries and passenger ferries. Non-commercial power generation, such as hospitals and off-the-grid households.

I don't think you would get the specific detail for a refusal. I suspect you would be informed that you had been refused. At best, you might be told that theChief Constable felt unable to authorise a certificate, based on the information you and your GP provided. Save yourself a lot time, worry, money and speak to your FEO.

On the basic details provided, I think the OP will struggle. Anyone would need the full script to pass proper judgement, but in these cases, the full details are normally drip fed.

Conor O'Gorman - Perhaps I was following your lead in never answering any "difficult" questions. Your track record consists of evading straight questions, directing posters to read irrelevant links or asking people to consider their behaviour. Other options seem to consist of an email or useful phone call. I cannot accept that you have genuinely tried to debate. You may well be a very nice person and well intentioned, but your contributions do you little credit. I too will leave the debate, as there seems little point in going around in circles. Perish the thought that you would like the thread closed.

Connor O'Gorman. Perhaps you could look back through your posts to check how many times you have patronised posters, suggesting that they re-read answers which aren't there. Then you accuse Konor of disrespecting you. It's a bit rich.