JonathanL Posted August 22, 2012 Report Share Posted August 22, 2012 I stopped reading here. It should not be a privilege, privileges can be taken away. Rights cannot. It should not be a privilege and is not a privilege. As a matter of law if you meet the statutory criteria then the police must grant a certificate. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted August 22, 2012 Report Share Posted August 22, 2012 Angryhan, we dont have any rights mate, as subjects and not citizens we have no constitution or vaible bill of rights, the authorities can do to us anything they think they can get away with. Ian. This old subjects/citizens rubish again. We are not British 'subjects'. We are British (and EU, for that matter) citizens. Strictly speaking we are subjects of the Crown but that has very little practical meaning and hasn't had for a very long time. We are most certainly not subjects of the government or Parliament and we have a perfectly viable constitution (university law libraries have entire floors dedicated to the subject). J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted August 22, 2012 Report Share Posted August 22, 2012 I can only go by my own situation, you are living in cloud cookoo land if you think licenced gun owners have any rights, they don't in my case, i'm in the cells and armed units came to my house and demanded my wife open the gunsafe, she said she never knew where the keys are kept, they phoned headquarters and were instructed to smash open the safe and sieze the gun, they looked at the safe and decided it would need a breaker of some kind to get it open, they decided to come back later if i got released. When i did get released uncharged, 7 officers returned to confiscate the gun, 4 of which were the armed reponse unit. They took every bit of amunition and dispersed it to the corners of essex, it took 5 hours to recover from 3 police stations. Believe me you do not have any rights....The police have every right to confisgate your guns just on someone elses say so, a vindictive neighbour, a spurned girlfriend ( or mistress) any reason they consider is valid, it may be the way you talk to them when challenged .....Its an honour and privelage to own and use a gun today, the fact that you can enjoy limited freedom shooting is something to cherish, unless we act now it won't be like that for the next generation...In some countries now, guns are kept in armories as i have found out. We have to be strong and united, its the only way the public will support us. Dennis You have already contradicted your own statement about not having any rights though. You have said that you have taken action against the police who have already admitted liability and will end up having to pay you at some point. You had your rights abused but are being compensated for that abuse. I'm not defending their actions but it is incorrect to say that you have no rights and that the police can do as they please. Clearly they can't as they have admitted themselves that they have breached your rights. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted August 22, 2012 Report Share Posted August 22, 2012 I had my SGC visit last night and a few points came up that might be relevant here. In no particular order. If you try to photocopy a modern SGC is doesn’t copy properly and has ‘Illegal copy’ written through it. The officer advised that I take the original with me when I have the guns – if I damage it then I can get a new one for free by sending it back. (that said, I still think taking a copy or photo for personal files or as a backup is sensible) If there is any sort of domestic disturbance in a house then national policy is to remove the guns from the household until the situation is resolved. This protects everyone, including protecting the gun owner from bogus claims about ‘(s)he threatened me with a gun’. He didn’t say, but he implied that any sort of problems with police, neighbours, etc would probably mean the guns would be taken first, then questions asked afterwards – just to cover the police’s **** as much as anyone else’s. He also said, Owning a shotgun is a right, and everyone is allowed one unless the police think they are not fit to have one. Owning a firearm is not a right, and you have to prove that you are fit to have one. So, a lot of what’s in the last few pages may or may not be accurate depending on what sort of gun is being discussed. Lastly, and veering into offtopic. If someone commits an offense (like taking a nutters gun) then they have a defence of necessity. The offence has still been committed, but it has a defence. To look at it like maths, it’s +1 offence - 1 defence = 0 criminal record. If it wasn’t an offence then you wouldn’t need a defence. Once all the dust has settled it is as if you hadn’t committed the offence, but during the court case and the workings then it has to be acknowledged and dealt with. I think (but may need correcting) that it’s the difference between committing and offence, being charged with an offence, being prosecuted for an offence, and being found guilty of an offence. Sorry to drag this on but did they not just ask you where the keys were? This comes up time and time again and the officer is wrong. You have a legal right to either certificate if you meet the statutory criteria. The criteria are different, and some would say that sec.1 us harder to meet, but neither is less of a right than the other. The key point is the wording in the Act which says 'A chief off shall grant a certificate...'. The use of the word 'shall' is an instruction from Parliament to a chief officer telling him that me must grant the certificate. Contrast that with the word 'may' which is used in the Northern Ireland legislation. In NI, because of that word, a certificate is truly a privilege because there is no requirement for it to be issued. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 Seconded. :good: :good: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robl Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 In defence of the FEO, I may have misquoted the exact words. I don’t believe he was trying to give me the exacting wording of the law, but more the spirit of the law. Which is (in different words). You can have a shotgun . . . .unless there’s a reason not to allow you one. You can’t have a rifle . . . .unless you can prove you should be allowed one. I’m not sure of the legal working in terms of ‘rights’ and ‘privilege’ and so forth, but as a two line description of the difference I think it serves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
denniswebb Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 We all have to understand its the long term aim of the police to get rid of all guns from society, if they could do it now they would restrict all guns to be held at Shooting grounds in armouriers. Our national bodies are ineffective at defending our sport as was demonstrated the last time that shotgun licences were changed...The Olympics also showed that there was no aim to leave any long term legacy for the sport, they totally ignored our national shooting bodies. I would love to find out the statistic of gun licence applications year on year over the past 20 years and see where we are today. In my case i am sueing the police for wrongful arrest, i accept that in there view that the removal of my gun is a precautionary measure. Its my rights and rights of my family that concerns, being confronted with armed police in my house. Its that bad that i really am moving out of Essex, its not a ploy, why should i have to do this, why havn't the police apoligised to both myself and my family, reassured them that it was all a mistake, why isn't the affending officer being brought up on charges, sacked or reduced to the ranks, its clear he is not fit to be in charge of others. What i witnessed on telly with what has to be said executions, the two shootings is that it could happen to others , the police are incompetant and its that incompenance that worries me . Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 What i witnessed on telly with what has to be said executions, the two shootings is that it could happen to others , the police are incompetant and its that incompenance that worries me . Dennis Essex police do seem to have had a poor record recently particularly with domestic incidents and firearms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robl Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 It’s not police policy to get rid of guns – that’s absurd. There may be some political lobbying for that, but there are plenty who aren’t or are pro gun. They may be some police divisions that are better than others at dealing with firearms, but that’s not the same as national police policy. I’m sure all police want to get rid of illegal guns, or guns owner by nutters, but that’s quite different. As for the rest, I think you’re too close to the situation to see it objectively. Whenever there is an arrest then guns are confiscated – that’s a sensible precaution. It’s also sensible to send armed police to the address. Why isn’t the offending officer being charged? Well, I don’t know the whole story. But, at a guess, the people who came and got the guns aren’t the same as the one who ‘approved’ the arrest. Those who confiscated the guns did nothing wrong – they followed the law. I think you said you have already received an apology and are receiving compensation from the police – that’s all that is needed. Assuming the officer who made the arrest has made a mistake – I’m sure that will be dealt with internally. It’s possible he didn’t make a mistake in terms of law or procedure, but that the law or procedure needs to be changed because of your situation. He operated as an agent of the police and as such the police as a whole are responsible not the individual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
denniswebb Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 I have not recieved any offical apology, in fact since last January no response from The Police Complaints Dept . This situation came about really because the local police had been withdrawn 10 years ago. Our private village now employs private police to patrol the area. Years ago local police would have difused situations such as mine because they knew everyone in the village, its heavy handed every time now.......The risks that every manual worker in this country have to face on a daily basis in something the police will not now face...Police should be like any other buisness. Foot patrol Brixton ,armed definatly....country areas normal policing, differant pratices. They should produce a method statement for there own patch. Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 Its that bad that i really am moving out of Essex, Dennis Take it Herts is out of the question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 Dennis - if you move - it is because you chose to do so. Your reasoning for moving is bizarre. You insist on posting bits of a tale, without ever giving a full blow by blow account. I accept that you cannot do this - or it would occupy many, many pages. You can post what you want, but we never hear the other side of the story. You slag the Police off, without them being in a position to respond or refute what you say. That makes it impossible to judge whether the Police are partly or wholly to blame. They may even be completely blameless. We are not in a position to judge. What exactly do you hope to achieve by your posts? I genuinely don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
denniswebb Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 When you post on websites or in the press as this has been in both Pull and Clayshooting , the police read these because i went to a meeting and they produced the mag, the officer agreed with everything because he had checked it out. As someone that ran one of the biggest shooting website in the sport i know because the home officer used to inform me they would be monitoring the website for referance purposes, its the same with this website...In every medium whether its sports or our general way of life, personal freedoms and discrimination are something the government take seriously. At this meeting with this officer he was on the shooters side, he understood the heavy handed of some officers in dealing with situations such as mine. It was him that advised me to seek another County to base my gun licence in, i am fortunate in being able to afford to buy another property somewhere else to keep my shotgun......Gordon, I am an ex RNLI lifeboat coxswain ( check my record on the RNLI website) i have recieved commendations for rescues. I have been a World Champion and have shot for my country for the past 30 odd years...... What i hope to achive is that the police have a long think about how they deal with simalar situations, remember there was 4 weeks between the complaint to the police and them acting on it.....There has to be something else the police are not saying as to why they took this course of action, they would not tell me at the pace meeting. Dennis Webb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 Dennis - I don't doubt you can shoot and anyone who has served on a lifeboat has my utmost admiration. :good: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 (edited) We all have to understand its the long term aim of the police to get rid of all guns from society, if they could do it now they would restrict all guns to be held at Shooting grounds in armouriers. That may be true but only to a certain degree. The police as an organisation have no goals of their own. They do what politicians tell them to do. Politicians do what they think will get them re-elected or further up the greasy pole. If banning guns will make am MP's life easier then that is what they will push for and is what they will encourange the minions beneth them to try and do. By the same token, if a politicians job is made easier by not banning guns or, heaven forbid, actually promoting shooting sports then that is what he will do. in 1986 a nutter killed loads of people with a law fully possessed, centre-fire semi-automatic rifle. There were about 7K people who owned these things - result; centre-fire, semi-auto rifles were banned. In 1996 a nutter killed loads of people wil a lawfully possessed pistol. There were about 57K people who owned these things - result; pistols were banned. in 2010 a nutter killed loads of people with a double barralled shotgun. There are around 500K people who own these things - result; 500K people still own these things. Why? Because it did not serve a political purpose to ban them and would have probably damaged the carreers of lots of politicians. It's as simple as that. We all know that if there were 7K people owning double baralled shotguns in 2010 then there would be precisely zero today! I would love to find out the statistic of gun licence applications year on year over the past 20 years and see where we are today. The Home Office produces stats every year. I'll try and dig out a link. Numbers of certs have been going up over recent years though. In my case i am sueing the police for wrongful arrest, i accept that in there view that the removal of my gun is a precautionary measure. Its my rights and rights of my family that concerns, being confronted with armed police in my house. Its that bad that i really am moving out of Essex, its not a ploy, why should i have to do this, why havn't the police apoligised to both myself and my family, reassured them that it was all a mistake, why isn't the affending officer being brought up on charges, sacked or reduced to the ranks, its clear he is not fit to be in charge of others. What i witnessed on telly with what has to be said executions, the two shootings is that it could happen to others , the police are incompetant and its that incompenance that worries me . Dennis I do see your point here. The reason why individual oficers are rarely personally held liable is because of the way the police are structured legally. When you start an action against the police you do it against the Chief Constable and not (usually) against individual officers. I can see the reason as to why it's like that but I think that there should be more times when individual officers should be held accountable. J. Edited August 23, 2012 by JonathanL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 This is the link to the Home Office page regarding the number of FAC/SGC's on issue. There is a PDF to download with the full report. In short. http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/police-research/hosb1012/ ' There were 11,502 new firearm certificates granted in 2011/12, an increase of two per cent from the 11,286 certificates granted during 2010/11. This follows an increase of 19 per cent between 2009/10 and 2010/11 and a six per cent fall between 2008/09 and 2009/10.' J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 Dennis, what's the name of the firm of solicitors you have instructed that are supposed to be sorting out Essex Police for you and do they know you're on a public forum in you're own name giving it what for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HW682 Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 This old subjects/citizens rubish again. We are not British 'subjects'. We are British (and EU, for that matter) citizens. Strictly speaking we are subjects of the Crown but that has very little practical meaning and hasn't had for a very long time. We are most certainly not subjects of the government or Parliament and we have a perfectly viable constitution (university law libraries have entire floors dedicated to the subject). J. Out of interest, I looked in my passport. Under the details I am a British citizen. Note 2, near the front, explains that other options include British subject, British protected person and various types of British overseas national or citizen. Only a British citizen has a right of abode in the UK. The rest do not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sixhills 69 Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 well thats took some reading and i have come to the conclusion this thread has gone completley of track. So to get it back on track and i think that you will find this is correct yous SGC and FAC belong to the cheif constable and he or his officers can remove these said licences at any point and once removed they can remove your firearms for safe keeping nothing to do with common law or any other law just fact they can. Dennis sorry to say after reading your life story ive come to the conclusion that you are a bully and you think you can hide behind you business you have over stepped the mark on occassions and the police have been informed and you don't like it and this said you have gained an attitude problem and think the world is agaist you but you have made your own destiny and now you do not like it well Tuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 Dennis sorry to say after reading your life story ive come to the conclusion that you are a bully and you think you can hide behind you business you have over stepped the mark on occassions and the police have been informed and you don't like it and this said you have gained an attitude problem and think the world is agaist you but you have made your own destiny and now you do not like it well Tuff X2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swiss.tony Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 He shoudl have sued the cow for the costs he incurred due to her lies. It's shocking that she wasn't prosecuted. J. whats your problem with my mother ? moooooooooo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Z Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 This thread is epic! I'm not even going to comment on all the ego bashing going on, you guys can carry on thrashing it out yourselves. Small fish, big system. Just an on topic pragmatic point... If an officer asks to take my gun/s, could I remove and keep the forends? This seems a responsible thing to do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 well thats took some reading and i have come to the conclusion this thread has gone completley of track. So to get it back on track and i think that you will find this is correct yous SGC and FAC belong to the cheif constable and he or his officers can remove these said licences at any point and once removed they can remove your firearms for safe keeping nothing to do with common law or any other law just fact they can. Dennis sorry to say after reading your life story ive come to the conclusion that you are a bully and you think you can hide behind you business you have over stepped the mark on occassions and the police have been informed and you don't like it and this said you have gained an attitude problem and think the world is agaist you but you have made your own destiny and now you do not like it well Tuff And I think you will find that that statement is complete and utter garbage. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 (edited) We all have to understand its the long term aim of the police to get rid of all guns from society, if they could do it now they would restrict all guns to be held at Shooting grounds in armouriers. Our national bodies are ineffective at defending our sport as was demonstrated the last time that shotgun licences were changed...The Olympics also showed that there was no aim to leave any long term legacy for the sport, they totally ignored our national shooting bodies. I would love to find out the statistic of gun licence applications year on year over the past 20 years and see where we are today. In my case i am sueing the police for wrongful arrest, i accept that in there view that the removal of my gun is a precautionary measure. Its my rights and rights of my family that concerns, being confronted with armed police in my house. Its that bad that i really am moving out of Essex, its not a ploy, why should i have to do this, why havn't the police apoligised to both myself and my family, reassured them that it was all a mistake, why isn't the affending officer being brought up on charges, sacked or reduced to the ranks, its clear he is not fit to be in charge of others. What i witnessed on telly with what has to be said executions, the two shootings is that it could happen to others , the police are incompetant and its that incompenance that worries me . Dennis Not sure about the rest of the UK. The number of certificates are down in N Ireland. Year Numbers of Firearm Certificate Holders 2006 71,280 2007 66,825 2008 62,391 2009 61,981 2010 61,565 The total number of weapons covered by those certificates is 141, 539 Edited August 23, 2012 by ordnance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sixhills 69 Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 And I think you will find that that statement is complete and utter garbage. J. I think you will fid that as of the 1st of december 2011 all forces were informed by the home office that if officers are called out to an incident which involved a registered firearms licence holder thier shotgun and FAC are to be taken and booked it as they are the proprty of the chif constable if the person involved refusues to hand over his firearms for safe keeping officers have the right to remove them. If no offences have been commited the licences are then to be passed onto the firearms licencing manager for him to contiue his investigation. I Know thsi for a fact as i had the email at work and at the end of november 2011 i went through the process myself And I think you will find that that statement is complete and utter garbage. J. So Sorry you may not be up to date Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts