Downforce

Well too far away There you go you made me say it

I’m not even going to say it! Grrr!

I just had a guntraitor google and my eyes watered. How do you even insure something like that £20-45K I struggle with my hand made Browning insurance! I actually love my 1970s Browning O/U and I'm very happy with my Beretta A301 both great to shoot but I've always struggled to love the Beretta O/Us Like John I do have a suits everything "goto" my Benelli Nova for most things I did manage to pick up an 1897 as I'd been looking for one for some time and a 10G Gold that I need to try out so I guess I'm covered for now D

Also looks like youve (either removed or) got a missing extractor in the second pucture Small bores with missing extractors is so common as they fall out when the bolt is open/removed Still looking for an extractor for one of mine! I've fired one without realising its missing - absolute pain to get the empty cartridges out D

PS I’m probably checking out now so don’t be offended if I don’t reply I will be reading replies D

Yes I agree with these principles But that’s not my question and I’m struggling to understand why everyone seems to want to avoid answering the question and debate why it shouldn’t be the case because the admin should be done better The question I’m asking is if there’s two people one that’s a drug dealer using a never licensed illegally imported S5 9mm auto pistol to underwrite their Illegal drug dealing activities and the other is a lawful owner that doesn’t do their admin properly for whatever reason do they both deserve 5 years, no questions no difference? Would anyone care to comment? I’ve given my opinion! Should it be the same offences and sentencing or should it be different (and by should I mean the opinion of you the public not the legal sentencing guidelines given to judges)??

No argument here But same question again - for whatever reason someone hasn’t been negligent but ends up with something that was legit and now isn’t. I get everyone can debate the details of how that point should not be the case. Should the criminal justice system recognise the difference in circumstances and prosecute a different offence (maybe something along the lines of failure to comply with the FAC conditions) or should everyone always be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law irrespective of the circumstances of how they got there and specifically regards the circumstances of use (carrying a loaded S5 in public whilst dealing drugs* vs not doing all those things that everyone should do as above and transgressing from being fully licensed and legal to unlicensed) ? * I’m not saying that was the OP example just using that as an illustration IMHO the precedent is already part of the law e.g. ABH vs. GBH get sentenced differently depending upon the intent and severity of the attack/injury

Fair comments However some forces specifically asked that you don’t submit more than X weeks in advance I can’t say if he asked for advice from either force before moving but I could imagine the old force would suggest to wait as it’s easier for them Anyway as I said I’m not trying to justify anything just saying there are circumstances that could catch you out (Coronavirus initial lockdown) that aren’t necessarily your fault that can put you on wrong side of the letter of the law The question is still if that did happen to you despite taking all the reasonable care should you get the same as a drug dealer with a S5 that was never licensed and explicitly held to support other criminal activities ? I know it’s interesting to debate the what ifs of could it happen but that’s the real question if it did should everyone get a flat 5 years?

You are lucky to be BCH where helpfulness is part of the service Im not going to go into any more specific details but based on what I heard they were exceptionally unhelpful and didn’t offer any advice despite being asked specifically to advise

IMHO The law as it stands in this country makes allowances in both prosecutions (is it an aggravated offence) and sentencing to take account of circumstances and intent. I don’t know enough about the two cases OP raised but in principle it seems reasonable that someone with a firearm for criminal intent should get a harsher sentence than someone that doesn’t I can’t say if either did or did not though so I don’t have a specific opinion

As I said… Someone I know got told after six weeks they were not going to get theirs in time having applied in essence as soon as he could after completing the purchase of a house in a different authority to his FAC had been issued The licensing authority may have known that but certainly didn’t proactively let him know it was only after a good bit of chasing they told him What to do ? Sell all guns ? Apply before to the old force at the old address and risk the certificate being issued to the new occupants ? Apply before you have purchased the house in the new county (would you be making a false declaration?) Anyway the point is that there’s going to be situations that could genuinely catch an otherwise law abiding person out and put them in possession of an illegal firearm - same question should everyone get 5 years?

Agreed generally for BCH but there’s always the chance that you don’t get your certificate in time and that could effectively make you illegal Also there’s other things like people in possession of S58 firearms that became S5 firearms overnight so it has to be conceded that it could happen to people that have no criminal intent and are under the impression that they are perfectly legal

What is good time? Someone I know submitted their FAC renewal in excess of 7 weeks before expiry having just moved (not wanting to submit an application to the wrong police force) and after 6 weeks was told that it was unlikely they would get the renewal in time for the expiry

I don’t think anyone has said anything different. It’s more about is it “fair” that the two sentences are roughly the same when one offender had a firearm to underwrite criminal activity and the other (could be argued to have) less risk to public and by implication a larger sentence should go to the drug dealer This has been a genuinely interesting thread IMHO and the point raised about being “odd” is very central to how people perceive an offence and a defendant and if it’s reasonable for authorities to use defendants backgrounds and oddness (bearing in mind they can’t generally talk about previous convictions) You could always draw parallels to more common offences by asking is it fair to get the same sentence for doing 36 in a 30 speed limit vs. stealing a RS4 and ragging it through town trying to get away from police driving on the wrong side of dual carriageway and going through red lights?

Fight or flight instinct is triggered by feeling uncomfortable with a situation it’s built into lots of mammals, when assessing how uncomfortable you are with any given situation it’s highly likely any perceived danger will drive that In the context of you might be more prejudiced that a situation is dangerous if it’s at night in an area you are unfamiliar with compared to in the day when you know the area What I’m trying to say probably not very succinctly is that there’s prejudicial behaviour patterns built into our DNA and that we can potentially extend our prejudices to people we see as odd, which is why the media play on such

I wasn’t making assumptions I was talking about science and evolution Everyone has a flight or fight reaction in some people it’s more flight in some people it’s more fight but it’s based on our view of the situation and everyone has some kind of things that they’ll react to more than others

No I wasn’t saying I thought anything specifically in that case just that I try not to be prejudiced even though I recognise it’s kinda inherently built into humans to be prejudiced

Odd is in the eye of the beholder Some people think anyone that shoots is odd

But how does a deterrent act in the case of unintended consequence It doesn’t If you don’t intend to do something you are not going to rationally evaluate the potential legal outcome So the only value in a deterrent is in the case of an intended action. If (and I really mean IF) the people that are intent on committing crime assess that the chance of getting caught is low, the chance of being charged is very low and the chance of getting convicted is minimal but even if they do get convicted there’s a good chance they can argue that they are the victim are they going to stop? D

Well the criminal justice system as a whole fails to offer “fair” sentences. It happens all over the place. Some would have seen “24 Hours in police custody” where the guy got prison for pursuing burglars and causing an unintended accident whereas the burglars were deliberately theiving got no custodial sentence seemingly as a result of being hard done by as a result of the accident. I think that intent should play a bigger part in both the prosecution and sentencing but obviously establishing intent can be difficult. It does appear that professionals that know how the system works and to just give a no comment interview are just too difficult to deal with so get away with much more. D

I think that if you deliberately do something illegal with firearms then the law should apply, but I do think that the same application of “the law” generally does not apply these days. There seems to be certain topics that get the attention and probably quite rightly firearms is one of the things that’s vigorously pursued, whereas theft and drug offences could be seen to be less important by some forces with some reported offences not getting anything more than a crime number! Having said that there are going to be firearms offences that should require an element of discretion or leniency just like speeding depending on the amount of transgression plus circumstances and I don’t think that same level of sensible-ness is always applied, it seems absolutely binary with firearms. What should happen to someone who has a misfire on the range and picks up a single 22LR round off the floor puts it in their jacket pocket with the intent of disposal then forgets to dispose of it accidentally leaving it in the jacket for example. Personally I have a routine to prevent such things but it’s something that could happen to anyone with no intent. That said there seems to be an argument for an aggravated offence where possession with intent to carry or use does attract a longer sentence and that should be associated to perceived public risk, so someone that’s carrying a glock on the street is potentially much more likely to pull it out and start using it, therefore potentially more public risk (on the face of what’s been reported). D

So not exactly cheap… if you’re buying unseen online and don’t know what you’re getting is more what I mean plus auction fees

I think it went for £850 or £950 plus fees etc, so not exactly cheap

How much for the Nikko Sterling

Is there somewhere you can go for a left handed model? Id be interested D