The Police are making me break the law

[TopDown]

No it's not that simple. That's what a lot of contributors have been trying to make people aware of. The police cannot grant an exemption against prosecution. Hampshire has borders, Dorset, Wiltshire, Surrey, Sussex. Have they agreed to this? I don't think so.

[Dekers]

This is going round in circles.

 

There is no debate or argument that if you do not have a current valid FAC or SGC, then you are breaking the law, apparently some forces appear to be suggesting that if you are caught breaking the law they will not prosecute you!

 

Oh Dear, looks like a job for the New Police and Crime Commissioners!

 

Incompetent forces trying to hide their incompetence!

 

Interestingly, they processed my last renewal very efficiently (well, only about 8 weeks) and it actually turned up a month before my co-terminus expired, 5 years previously it didn't, and despite chasing several times I wrote to them a week before expiry pointing out I wanted my certificates or a Temp cert BEFORE my current certificates expired, I got a temporary!

 

Enjoy, over 100 posts already and I can't help thinking this has more legs in it. :good:

[Dunkield]

Either way, that is Hampshire's policy. No licence holder in Hampshire will get prosecuted for adhering to it.

 

Simple as that.

That would work for me, but not some or our, shall we say, more excitable members

[bedwards1966]

It's nothing like speeding through a red light, its highly dangerous and could seriously injure or kill someone !!

 

Having an expired sgc won't !!!!

 

 

If I got pulled by the police and they discovered I had no certificate, then I would show them the letter they sent me stating that I do not have to hand my guns in.

 

The officer who pulled me only has to make a call to verify the letter.

 

Cps would nfa. There's no case there.

 

Plus, the police would be VERY busy arresting the 100s of expired certificate holders all over Hampshire, who's renewals were caught up in the back log.

 

There is a perfect case there for CPS, as by being in possession of the gun without a certificate you are committing an offence - you really couldn't hand them an easier case.

A police officer stopping you may not believe the letter you produce - after all, that would be a nice way for a criminal to have guns, just print off a fake letter! And it doesn't make it legal, plus he can seize the guns if you can't produce a certificate (even if you actually hold one) if he wishes.

 

To think that a letter saying they won't prosecute from a department which has nothing to do with any of the departments who would make that decision would be any defense is utter stupidity. It would have as much standing as if I told you now, on here, that you can go and get a machine gun without a certificate.

[bedwards1966]

and there we have the huge difference with one licensing team putting in writing that you are ok while an application is in progress and another saying it isn't. You'd be seriously silly to not put them into storage if told to do so, but vice versa with a letter stating the delay was down to them and to keep the guns then I would keep them and not panic.

 

Whether told to put them into storage or not would make no difference. Your either committing an offense or not (which you are without holding a certificate), you should not be in possession of them whatever you were or were not told.

[Scully]

Of course I'm serious - it happens all the time. I know many people who have been told in no uncertain terms that their cert will not be renewed before it expires and that they won't be getting a sec.7 permit so they need to store their guns somewhere. It happened to me on my last renewal and I had the paprtwork in in good time. If I hadn't put them in storage then they would have been lifted and I would be prosecuted for illegal possession.

 

It really doesnt make any difference whether it's their fault that it won't be renewed. There is no time requirement so they can please themselves. Sometimes they do issue a sec.7 permit and sometimes they don't - it really just depends on what their policy at the time happens to be. They may be the least efficient licensing dpartment in the country and the inefficiency may be entirely their fault but they are not required to issue a sec.7 permit. If you don't have a valid cert then they can lift your guns and you!

 

J.

I don't accept this at all I'm afraid.If it does 'happen all the time' it's possibly because people are letting it;but it isn't happening around here and seriously, I know literally dozens and dozens of shooters. I would be more than willing to challenge such a decision as you describe above,regarding being told to store my guns 'somewhere' if I had fulfilled my part of the obligation as far as a renewal went. I thrive on confrontation and have a really annoying habit of cutting off my nose to spite my face when faced with beligerant figures of authority(much to the annoyance of my licensing authority,my other half,and once, an egotistical and arrogant Italian passport control officer! I paid the price for that of course,but I was the only one smiling when I left.....I wouldn't advise trying it in Tel Aviv however! ) and is the cause of my not inconsequential 'record'. While I'm willing to accept you undoubtedly have a good knowledge and a logical mind,and you may have the monopoly on never being wrong,I don't think that monopoly extends to the outcome of theoretical scenarios.After all,they're theoretical.

You accuse another of 'a massive amount of assumption' and tell us what the cops MAY or MAY not do but then go on to state with a degree of certainty so definite that we can bet our lives that 'all' those in possession of illegal guns due to expired tickets in Durham on 1st January would have had those guns 'seized as a precaution'.

No offence,but I'm still with Bill.Have met him a couple of times...grand bloke.

[bedwards1966]

 

The whole thread is based on assumptions.

 

You could get nicked and spend a night in the cells.

 

But ultimately, I would not get prosecuted.

 

And how do you work that out? You would be committing an offense, and the police could very easily prosecute you as the law is perfectly clear on this.

[bedwards1966]

You can only imagine what a decent brief would make of a delay in the licensing department causing them to put in writing that it was fine to keep guns and then you getting arrested. We're talking serious compensation but an event that is never going to happen as even the CPS at their most silly wouldn't entertain the notion of winning that one. Thats why it has never happened the whole essence of firearms licensing is stopping naughty people having guns the facts are you are complying with their requirements in having and renewing a certificate so when the department in question are reasonable and say the delay is their fault carry on as you are you can assume they have also put in place the notification to officers on the ground to not arrest people with renewals under way. Many moons ago I had a similar instance and took the advice and went with it no problems my FEO claimed there was as much effort in a temporary cert as a renewal so all it does is adds to the workload and make matters worse.

 

The main thing is you getting your ticket back in time, I would suggest those being told to lodge them and possibly seeing the big stick wielded are those who didn't get a completed application in in good time

 

The fact that the licencing department were the reason you don't hold a certificate may be enough to avoid a penalty in court. But you would still have to go to court, and you would have still committed an offence. Your just hoping/assuming that you'd be let off. I certainly wouldn't want to take the chance of a few years behind bars thinking 'i'll be let off'. God help you if the judge is anti shooting!

 

Whether you could get compensation for being told by the licencing department that it's 'OK' I don't know - but I doubt it. And you would still have committed an offence, even if you got let off.

Edited November 14, 2012 by bedwards1966

[bedwards1966]

I'm not going to the US ...... What if, what if ....

 

My feo was round last night checking my cabinet for my renewal, I put this to him, he told me, although technically it is against the law, I, nor the hundreds of others in the same situation, will get prosecuted.

 

You are relying on someone choosing to let you off, which is rather stupid. Aside from those who like to get everyone they can for anything, just get an police officer who's anti gun pull you up when driving home, you still feel comfortable that he/she won't arrest you for the illegal possession?

 

 

I find it incredible how many people are certain that they would not be prosecuted for committing an absolute offence, which can carry very heavy penalties.

Some of you are so trusting and naive in your views I think you perhaps deserve to be arrested and prosecuted, yes you may not be doing any harm, yes it may not be your fault you don't hold a certificate, but if your daft enough to think that the police, CPS and the courts only ever punish people who are doing harm, and would never trouble anyone else, then crack on, you deserve what may come your way.

 

Here's an example of someone who clearly should not have been sent to prison - and I rather fancy his chances of getting off with this similar offence to be higher than anyone saying 'my FEO/FLD said it's OK to break the law'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2231266/My-SAS-hero-betrayed-Wife-tells-torment-special-forces-husband-jailed-possessing-pistol-given-Iraqis-outstanding-service.html

[JonathanL]

Ahh calling mods idiots are we near the end of the what if scenarios!

 

Fundamentally feo's are applying the licensing laws the fact a force can't keep up due to cuts is one thing. Basc can only give the completely safe option and indeed there is nothing stopping people following their advice. However most of us will keep working with licensing departments till the first case goes to court then we may think differently, though that's assuming the force that does it doesn't end up on the end of a severe compensation claim

 

So, what you are saying then is not to bother with independent thought of your own but just react to sitations as they happen. Shooters are expected to be a bit brighter than that.

 

What happens, and how will you feel, if you are the first case? Martyrdom is never a good course of action.

 

How on earth will they be faced with a compensation claim? You can't sue someone for following their advice that breaking thelaw is acceptable practice. Do you think you could sue the police if you got caught driving without a licence because they told you it would be ok?

 

J.

 

Yes I have it in writing, the letter was from the chief constable...

 

Would you mind posting a copy of what it says for information?

 

J.

[chrispti]

No one in Hampshire has ever been prosecuted.

 

The police will need to put a case together against themselves, and then seek cps advice, the fact that I, and everyone else in Hampshire who is waiting for their renewal, has in writing, that they do not need to surrender their guns, would get laughed out of court, event if it got that far in the first place.

 

 

 

So, what you are saying then is not to bother with independent thought of your own but just react to sitations as they happen. Shooters are expected to be a bit brighter than that.

 

What happens, and how will you feel, if you are the first case? Martyrdom is never a good course of action.

 

How on earth will they be faced with a compensation claim? You can't sue someone for following their advice that breaking thelaw is acceptable practice. Do you think you could sue the police if you got caught driving without a licence because they told you it would be ok?

 

J.

 

 

 

Would you mind posting a copy of what it says for information?

 

J.

 

I have mate, post 96.

Edited November 14, 2012 by chrispti

[JonathanL]

Either way, that is Hampshire's policy. No licence holder in Hampshire will get prosecuted for adhering to it.

 

Simple as that.

 

For the umpteenth time - it is not the licensing department or even the police who make that decision. It is the Crown Prosecution Service. In fact, there would be no problem with a private individual initiating a prosecution against you. One hopes a bunch of idiots like Animal Aid don't get that idea into their twisted little minds.

 

Just because the police tell you to do something does not make it legal; The police do not make or amend the law. They have no power to tellyou to do this and whomever is saying it could face charges themselves. It is no different to the situation of the police telling you it's ok to drive without insurance. The police could send you a letter telling you its ok to walk down the street shooting people but it won't stop it being illegal to do so.

 

J.

[JonathanL]

No it's not that simple. That's what a lot of contributors have been trying to make people aware of. The police cannot grant an exemption against prosecution. Hampshire has borders, Dorset, Wiltshire, Surrey, Sussex. Have they agreed to this? I don't think so.

 

Precisely not even the Supreme Court can do this. Doing so would amount to making law and only Parliament can do that.

 

Even if they could grant a promise not to prosecute it would still not mean that you were acting legally. You would still be in illegal possession. You are probably not covered by your insurance if you are in illegal possession of firearms. If you negligently injure someone while out shooting then you could be taken to the cleaners. What about other issues; if you are transporting illegal guns and ammo in your car then are you validly insured to drive? I don't know as it's something which has only just ocurred to me but it doesn't seem unreasonable that you may not be.

 

J.

[chrispti]

 

 

For the umpteenth time - it is not the licensing department or even the police who make that decision. It is the Crown Prosecution Service. In fact, there would be no problem with a private individual initiating a prosecution against you. One hopes a bunch of idiots like Animal Aid don't get that idea into their twisted little minds.

 

Just because the police tell you to do something does not make it legal; The police do not make or amend the law. They have no power to tellyou to do this and whomever is saying it could face charges themselves. It is no different to the situation of the police telling you it's ok to drive without insurance. The police could send you a letter telling you its ok to walk down the street shooting people but it won't stop it being illegal to do so.

 

J.

 

And what do you think the cps would say/do, in the situation Hampshire constabulary have put us in?

 

 

[JonathanL]

That would work for me, but not some or our, shall we say, more excitable members

 

So, it bothers you not at all that the police are merrily telling people that it's perfectly ok to commit serious firearms offences simply because itsuits their purposes?

 

Someone has already pointed out that as soon as someone does get prosecuted (which they will eventually) they it will change peoples opinion about the matter. As soon as this happens though all hell is going to break loose. Everyone who at that time has a lapsed certificate and is still in possession of their guns will instantly brick it an inundate RFD's with storage requests and the police will be running around like idiots seizing guns left, right and centre.

 

J.

[SakoQuad]

Have been trying to find some advice I know I have read that says, apply in plenty of time, don't surrender your certificates until you have the new one, ask for / insist on a S7 a week before expiry date, make formal complaint if you don't get one (or your new cert.), make it clear you will be seeking the recovery of any storage charges forced upon you by their failure to get a S7 or renewed cert. out to you by expiration date as without either you will be forced to store your guns.

 

This link from Sporting Gun http://www.sportinggun.co.uk/homefeature/531609/Shotgun_licence_delayed_Don039t_stand_for_it.html

 

I had a recent conversation with BASC and their insurers about another matter. What I was told, that must surely apply here, was that their insurance cover would not be valid in the event of any claim where a BASC member was found to be acting illegally in any way. JL is absolutely right when he repeatedly points out that if we haven't got a current certificate or S7 then we are acting illegally and the law is very clear that is the case.

[JonathanL]

I don't accept this at all I'm afraid.If it does 'happen all the time' it's possibly because people are letting it;but it isn't happening around here and seriously, I know literally dozens and dozens of shooters. I would be more than willing to challenge such a decision as you describe above,regarding being told to store my guns 'somewhere' if I had fulfilled my part of the obligation as far as a renewal went.

 

Whether you believe it otr not is really not the issue mate. I'm an RFD and I see this all the time. We have been literally styepping over massive piles of guns in our store room at times because tickets weren't getting renewed and people have been told to get rs of them. As I say, it happend to me personally a while back.

 

It doesnt matter whether you have fullfilled your side of the agreement.If they say they aren't issuing a permit then they aren't issuing one and there is nowt you can do about it. There is no appeal procedure as it is purely at the discretion of the police.

 

J.

[chrispti]

 

 

So, it bothers you not at all that the police are merrily telling people that it's perfectly ok to commit serious firearms offences simply because itsuits their purposes?

 

Someone has already pointed out that as soon as someone does get prosecuted (which they will eventually) they it will change peoples opinion about the matter. As soon as this happens though all hell is going to break loose. Everyone who at that time has a lapsed certificate and is still in possession of their guns will instantly brick it an inundate RFD's with storage requests and the police will be running around like idiots seizing guns left, right and centre.

 

J.

 

Looks like Hampshire will have to sweat it out and prey a prosecution doesn't take place whilst their certificates are in for renewal then, or hand their guns in for the 6 month turn around time its currently taking.

 

I know which option Id choose.

[JonathanL]

And what do you think the cps would say/do, in the situation Hampshire constabulary have put us in?

 

Depends how they decide to look at it? What happens if they take the view that this amounts to police corruption, which they may well do? Lets face it, is it that far away? The police are telling people to commit serious offences because it suits them to do so; 'It's fine mate, forget about needing an FAC for a few months because we're really busy at the minute doing lots of other stuff but it's not an offence if we say it isn't so don't stress over it. Is there anything else you think the CPS would ignore just because the police said it was ok to do?

 

J.

[chrispti]

 

 

Depends how they decide to look at it? What happens if they take the view that this amounts to police corruption, which they may well do? Lets face it, is it that far away? The police are telling people to commit serious offences because it suits them to do so; 'It's fine mate, forget about needing an FAC for a few months because we're really busy at the minute doing lots of other stuff but it's not an offence if we say it isn't so don't stress over it. Is there anything else you think the CPS would ignore just because the police said it was ok to do?

 

J.

 

It's not quite like that though is it...

 

Their terms are laid out in the last paragraph of the letter I posted up.

 

So why are they allowed to continue with their policy?

 

All other departments know how Hampshire is dealing with the huge backlog, why has no other department stepped up and challenged their policy?

 

Why is the Chief Constable allowing this to happen?

[chrispti]

It's also quite possible that someone from the cps, judges, lawyers etc are gun owner's. Have they turned a blind eye to Hampshire's renewals policy?

[JonathanL]

It's not quite like that though is it...

 

Their terms are laid out in the last paragraph of the letter I posted up.

 

So why are they allowed to continue with their policy?

 

All other departments know how Hampshire is dealing with the huge backlog, why has no other department stepped up and challenged their policy?

 

Why is the Chief Constable allowing this to happen?

 

None of that changes the law. If you have no cert and no sec.7 permit then you are in illegal possession. There is absolutely no debate to this.

 

The 'terms' you refer to are not 'terms' at all. This is not a contractual agreement.

 

Like I said before, the firearms licensing department in at least three forces knew that two police officers in Durham were selling off police property. It is inconceivable that the property office didn't know as well along with the officers immediate superiors and other police staff. They had effectively been given permission to do it yet were still prosecuted and convicted.

 

Moreover, the entire reason they are doing this is is because it suits their purposes. Sec.7 permits are, apparently, a performance indicator so they don't like issuing them because it makes them look bad. It's no different to telling people it's ok to drive without insurance because the paperwork takes too long to fill out when they nick someone.

 

Does the CC actually know this is happening? Why don't you drop him a quick line and ask him if this is ok if you are so confident that it's perfectly fine?

 

J.

[bedwards1966]

No one in Hampshire has ever been prosecuted.

 

The police will need to put a case together against themselves, and then seek cps advice, the fact that I, and everyone else in Hampshire who is waiting for their renewal, has in writing, that they do not need to surrender their guns, would get laughed out of court, event if it got that far in the first place.

 

 

 

I have mate, post 96.

 

Your talking nonsense. The police would not be putting a case together against themselves, what the FLD may or may not say is nothing to do with the divisional police who would be arresting you, nor are they anything to do with CPS.

They are completely separate.

You may think it would get laughed out of court - your still breaking the law.

You have ignored the link I posted showing someone getting sent down for another silly thing.

You've also ignored the fact that anyone in the system who is anti shooting would do everything within their power to bring a prosecution against you, along with others who look to forward their own careers. It happens, so why do you think you'd be exempt because some civilian in the firearms department told you it's OK to break the law?

 

For the umpteenth time - it is not the licensing department or even the police who make that decision. It is the Crown Prosecution Service. In fact, there would be no problem with a private individual initiating a prosecution against you. One hopes a bunch of idiots like Animal Aid don't get that idea into their twisted little minds.

 

Just because the police tell you to do something does not make it legal; The police do not make or amend the law. They have no power to tellyou to do this and whomever is saying it could face charges themselves. It is no different to the situation of the police telling you it's ok to drive without insurance. The police could send you a letter telling you its ok to walk down the street shooting people but it won't stop it being illegal to do so.

 

J.

 

How many times must it be said before people learn to read?

 

And what do you think the cps would say/do, in the situation Hampshire constabulary have put us in?

 

Anything they want. If they want to bring an easy case before the court (such as this, as you are committing an offense, there is no question about that) they will do so. If they want to increase the figures for prosecutions involving firearms, they will do so. They are nothing to do with the firearms department telling you to break the law, and they'll be perfectly happy to prosecute you if they so wish.

 

It's not quite like that though is it...

 

Their terms are laid out in the last paragraph of the letter I posted up.

 

So why are they allowed to continue with their policy?

 

All other departments know how Hampshire is dealing with the huge backlog, why has no other department stepped up and challenged their policy?

 

Why is the Chief Constable allowing this to happen?

 

Because it suits the police. They won't/can't renew certificates on time, and they do not like issuing temp certificate. For them, it's far easier to just tell everyone they don't need to store the guns which makes a large number of morons think they're fine to break the law with no possibility of being imprisoned as a result.

Yes one day a shooter could (and probably will) be prosecuted over this, at which point it will all look very bad for the FLD to have told people they can do this. Until this happens, it's an easy way for them to avoid dealing with problems.

 

 

You may continue with this silly uneducated view that nobody would or could prosecute you for breaking the law if your application is in - what if it got lost? What if you can't prove the police have it? Think that'll stand too? None of the excuses for not holding a certificate change the fact you've committed an offence which can have serious penalties. Aside from prison, I rather doubt you'll ever get a certificate after being prosecuted for illegally possessing a firearm...

You also seem to be ignoring the possibility of invalidating your insurance as well - do you think they'll pay out a claim if you say 'well I've been told it's OK to break the law'?

Edited November 15, 2012 by bedwards1966

[chrispti]

 

 

There are hundreds in Hampshire caught up in the backlog, and are just waiting out their renewal, as instructed.

 

As iv previously said, my flo is a serving officer not a civi. The letter acknowledging the receipt of the application I posted above is proof.

 

And the police will prosecute everyone, because they put them in that situation and advised them to keep hold of their guns...... Ok, I guess we'll all have to wait out on that one....

 

 

[MiLisCer]

JL

 

You keep harping on about having no certificate - well I would beg to differ as the new one runs from the date the old one expires - ah but you pipe in you don't actually have the certificate so you are in illegal possession - neither do you have it once it has been lost, sent in for variation, destroyed in the washing machine, eaten by next door chimp - these situations do not leave you in illegal possession either.

 

Maybe you should take the LLB exam instead of being a barrack room lawyer - try it for real.