Dirty Harry Posted November 16, 2012 Report Share Posted November 16, 2012 You are quite correct. Indeed, it is unlawful for an insurer to provide insurance for an illegal activity. This is why if you cause a crash whilst over the drink-drive limit your insurer does not have to pay out your losses. J. But they still have to pay out third party losses. I dealt with a bloke who had obtained his car insurance fraudulently and was committing a criminal act relating to the fraud when he was stopped. In court the insurance company said he was insured for third party risks despite the fraud as he had paid the premium They cancelled the policy from the date I stopped him but we could not prosecute him even thought he lied to get the insurance. Crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Harry Posted November 16, 2012 Report Share Posted November 16, 2012 They never just 'turn up'. J. My FAC and SGC were renewed without a visit but I had a letter with my new tickets saying they might just turn up to inspect security at a later date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted November 17, 2012 Report Share Posted November 17, 2012 Just out of Interest, how would you deal with Hampshire's back log, currently 6 months behind?? No one's problem but that of Hampshire police. The police want to retain their power to issue FAC's and SGC's and have resisted every suggestion to the contrary. That being the case, it is their responsibility to operate the system in a fair, equitable, just and speedy manner. If they are incapable of such then it should be removed from them. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted November 17, 2012 Report Share Posted November 17, 2012 But they still have to pay out third party losses. I dealt with a bloke who had obtained his car insurance fraudulently and was committing a criminal act relating to the fraud when he was stopped. In court the insurance company said he was insured for third party risks despite the fraud as he had paid the premium They cancelled the policy from the date I stopped him but we could not prosecute him even thought he lied to get the insurance. Crazy. It would all hinge upon the specific cirsumstances of the case, I would think. There is a difference between being covered for your own losses and statutory third party cover. If you are caught drunk driving and cause third-party damage then the third-party damage is paid for but not your own. Vehicle insurance contains a statutory third-party element that shooting insurance does not because you have to have it. J. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted November 17, 2012 Report Share Posted November 17, 2012 My FAC and SGC were renewed without a visit but I had a letter with my new tickets saying they might just turn up to inspect security at a later date. But they never do just 'turn up' because they have no right to. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted November 17, 2012 Report Share Posted November 17, 2012 Interesting point, I suspect you would come up as an EXPIRED SGC holder in this situation! Just my opinion, that could be interesting! It would be! Copper stops you in your car at 3am. You have a boot full of guns and ammo. He checks you and the check comes back as 'FAC expired 2 months ago'. Cop knows nothing at all about fireams licensing and has some bloke dressed in camo in front of him who has a boot full of illegal guns and ammunition. What is the likely outcome? This is the 'lite' version of the story. In the 'full fat' version; a few hours ago in the same force area a bloke with an expired FAC and SGC shot three of his family to death with his illegally possessed guns. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrispti Posted November 17, 2012 Report Share Posted November 17, 2012 The point is that you cannot take out insurance cover on an illegal activity or on illegally possessed property. Your driving licence does not 'go in for renewal' but the photo on it expires. Your point about being checked on the PNC entirely misses the point of the thread. J. What illegal activity? I dont even need a sgc to go shooting. I can still take out insurance and go pigeon shooting with a certificate holder, all quite legally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrispti Posted November 17, 2012 Report Share Posted November 17, 2012 Really? You have proof of that, of course? What does 'fireams' actually mean on the PNC? Realistically, it could mean anyone from a person being connected to a 1ft/lb airgun up to a drug dealer murdering people with an illegal machinegun. J. Yes of course, ask any serving police officer. It means the person has access to firearms/ shotgun. The officer can then ask for more details if they so wish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrispti Posted November 17, 2012 Report Share Posted November 17, 2012 It would be! Copper stops you in your car at 3am. You have a boot full of guns and ammo. He checks you and the check comes back as 'FAC expired 2 months ago'. Cop knows nothing at all about fireams licensing and has some bloke dressed in camo in front of him who has a boot full of illegal guns and ammunition. What is the likely outcome? This is the 'lite' version of the story. In the 'full fat' version; a few hours ago in the same force area a bloke with an expired FAC and SGC shot three of his family to death with his illegally possessed guns. J. Thats right, when we go shooting we fill our cars to th brim with guns and ammo . Or, you get stopped, a few rabbits in the boot, next to a shotgun, I don't wear camo, cop knows nothing about firearms, I show him my expired certificate and letter from the police. I go on my way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Harry Posted November 17, 2012 Report Share Posted November 17, 2012 But they never do just 'turn up' because they have no right to. J. You don't need a right to knock on someone's door. The police don't have to have an appointment to go to someone's house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrispti Posted November 17, 2012 Report Share Posted November 17, 2012 (edited) No one's problem but that of Hampshire police. The police want to retain their power to issue FAC's and SGC's and have resisted every suggestion to the contrary. That being the case, it is their responsibility to operate the system in a fair, equitable, just and speedy manner. If they are incapable of such then it should be removed from them. J. The question wasn't for you, But feel free to give your view on what you would do in their situation? And don't skirt around the question with " its Hampshire's problem" , what would you do? Edited November 17, 2012 by chrispti Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka Joe Posted November 17, 2012 Report Share Posted November 17, 2012 But they never do just 'turn up' because they have no right to. J. On the last renewal visit it was clearly stated that Durham, in the light of Hordan, could possibly do the same, without notice. Just out of Interest, how would you deal with Hampshire's back log, currently 6 months behind?? Not just Hampshire, Durham is 6mth behind aswell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrispti Posted November 17, 2012 Report Share Posted November 17, 2012 On the last renewal visit it was clearly stated that Durham, in the light of Hordan, could possibly do the same, without notice. Not just Hampshire, Durham is 6mth behind aswell. What are they suggesting you do with your guns mate? As you have probably read, Hampshire are saying, if you submit your renewal in time, they will not prosecute if your ticket expires and you are not in posesion of your new to ticket due to a back log. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welsh1 Posted November 17, 2012 Report Share Posted November 17, 2012 You don't need a right to knock on someone's door. The police don't have to have an appointment to go to someone's house. You can knock on the door,but you do not get an automatic right of entry just because you are a police officer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka Joe Posted November 17, 2012 Report Share Posted November 17, 2012 (edited) What are they suggesting you do with your guns mate? Durham's advice was to leave the guns in the cabinet after the cert expired, & don't use them. Edited November 17, 2012 by Bazooka Joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrispti Posted November 17, 2012 Report Share Posted November 17, 2012 Durham's advice was to leave the guns in the cabinet after the cert expired, & don't use them. **** isn't it, so you could potentially miss the whole game / wildfowling season.......... If that was the advice give to me by Hampshire, I think I'd store my gun at my mates who I shoot with, and just go out with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka Joe Posted November 17, 2012 Report Share Posted November 17, 2012 **** isn't it, so you could potentially miss the whole game / wildfowling season.......... Yes your right....if it wasn't for the last phone demanding a temp cert. i think the wait would have been longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bedwards1966 Posted November 17, 2012 Report Share Posted November 17, 2012 Just out of Interest, how would you deal with Hampshire's back log, currently 6 months behind?? Well that's not my concern. I pay money for a certificate to be granted, which (provided I fulfill the requirements) I have a right to. It's up to them to find a way to do their job. Whether this means taking on more staff, doing things more efficiently, finding a way to spread the work to another firearms office in another area with too many staff, it's not supposed to be my problem. That doesn't mean I want to cause them trouble if their struggling, but it's up to them to do their job, and I should not be left unable to possess my firearms. What illegal activity? I dont even need a sgc to go shooting. I can still take out insurance and go pigeon shooting with a certificate holder, all quite legally. Yes, provided you don't have access to your firearms (leaving them in the cabinet and just not using them does not prevent you breaking the law) then as long as whoever your shooting with holds a valid certificate, your fine. You're simply a non-certificate holder. I find it strange just how many people think that shooting insurance is a must, yet so many are happy to then invalidate it as well as risk a prison sentence! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Harry Posted November 17, 2012 Report Share Posted November 17, 2012 You can knock on the door,but you do not get an automatic right of entry just because you are a police officer. Correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted November 18, 2012 Report Share Posted November 18, 2012 Thats right, when we go shooting we fill our cars to th brim with guns and ammo . Or, you get stopped, a few rabbits in the boot, next to a shotgun, I don't wear camo, cop knows nothing about firearms, I show him my expired certificate and letter from the police. I go on my way. With an expired certificate? J. You don't need a right to knock on someone's door. The police don't have to have an appointment to go to someone's house. This is very true. They have no right to demand to be let in though - we do still have some rights to our privacy left in this country. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted November 18, 2012 Report Share Posted November 18, 2012 (edited) The question wasn't for you, But feel free to give your view on what you would do in their situation? And don't skirt around the question with " its Hampshire's problem" , what would you do? I would hire more people. Alternatively, just renew the cert anyway and use as long as it tales to do the checks. If anything shows up then revoke the cert afterwards. Like I said though, it isn't anyone elses problem so no one else has to come up with an answer. The police want the power to do it so they have the responsibility of finding a solution. J. Durham's advice was to leave the guns in the cabinet after the cert expired, & don't use them. What are they going to do it you use them? J. Edited November 18, 2012 by JonathanL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka Joe Posted November 18, 2012 Report Share Posted November 18, 2012 What are they going to do it you use them? I'll pass on that one, cause I really don't know what they would do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bedwards1966 Posted November 18, 2012 Report Share Posted November 18, 2012 Telling you not to use the guns and to keep them in the cabinet is silly. Although it means you won't be stopped while out shooting, it still leaves you in illegal possession of them and doesn't solve any problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted November 18, 2012 Report Share Posted November 18, 2012 I'll pass on that one, cause I really don't know what they would do. Well, the only thing they could do is prosecute you. That though would seem to be an exercise in the police making themselves look ridiculous. They would be saying that they are fine for you to be in illegal possession for some reasons but not others. It makes you wonder as to why they are saying that you can remain in possession as long as you don't use them? If they are happy for you to remain in possession then what is the problem in using the guns? It doesn't make it more illegal if you use them. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted November 18, 2012 Report Share Posted November 18, 2012 Telling you not to use the guns and to keep them in the cabinet is silly. Although it means you won't be stopped while out shooting, it still leaves you in illegal possession of them and doesn't solve any problems. I suppose it reduces the problem of them being found out for allowing people to remain in possession! I really can't see any other reason for it. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts