The Police are making me break the law

[JonathanL]

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.

 

You misundertand. Physical possession of the cert is not the point and never was. The issue is not having a certificate in force at the time! If it has expired and you still have your guns then you are in illegal possession, end of story.

 

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

 

There are several and perhaps I have? You clearly have not.

 

To point out for the record, yet again, someone has already posted a link to advice given by a firm of solicitors that people should NOT be doing this.

 

J.

Edited November 15, 2012 by JonathanL

[JonathanL]

not that you had a lot of credibility but you lost the lot in comparing this case with someone with a renewal being processed. He had an illegal gun, no one in the military can bring back trophy weapons and stash them under the bed. The fact he had lots of excuses for why it wasn't his fault is irrelevant.

 

In the case of a license holder trying to comply with the law and the police licensing dept running slowly and advising you as you have an application in and it is their fault that they wouldn't prosecute its as far from similar as you can get.

You have one view licensing and normal cert holders have another thats it, the fact remains many thousands of us have been caught up in the technicality and taken the advice of licensing and not been locked up. Certainly in my case though it was a fortnight the new license was back dated from date of expiry of the last one so in their eyes I was never without one. We can talk what iffs all day the real point is what actually happens and a chief constable has ultimate charge of licensing and operations and if one try and trip the other up then its hardly going to help his job prospects.

 

He didn't bring it back and stash it. His mates packed it up and sent it home without telling him. Even the prosecution accepted that.

 

J.

[JonathanL]

so in that case why do you fill in renewal forms and its not classed as an initial grant? and why aren't you pulled immediately your license expires?

 

BECAUSE IT MAKES LIFE EASIER FOR THE POLICE THAT WAY!

 

Mine did expire on my last renewal and it was indeed treated as a new grant.

 

J.

[JonathanL]

**************************************ATTENTION**********************************

Here are the news headlines......

1. The CPS will only prosecute a case that the police give to them.

2. The police would never bring a prosecution if you had sent in your renewal before the old certificate expired. It says so in the form.

3. If they did try they would also be liable under the use,cause, permit legislation as they have caused you to be in unlawful possession and potentially mislead you into thinking its ok.

4. No matter who stopped you at the roadside or wherever all firearms licensing matters will go through the firearms licensing department they would put their recommendations on the file and again they would never support a prosecution because they have a backlog.

5. Don't believe everything you read on the Internet. It's full of people who don't know what they are on about.

6. If you have a question about firearms licensing why don't you ask the firearms licensing department? A bit of a no brainier really.

7. Lastly my SGC and FAC have been up for renewal recently. Both went more than a month over but it did not stop me shooting the same as normal. Maybe I should have arrested myself and seized my guns!

 

Please note this post if free from what if's and maybes.

 

Harry

 

Total fantasy - you are wrong on nearly every point.

 

The bottom line is that the licensing department is a civilian admin department and not much more. They are not operational police apart from possibly the person who physically signs the certs. If you think they have any say as to whether someone gets prosecuted or not then you massively, massively misinformed.

 

J.

[al4x]

He didn't bring it back and stash it. His mates packed it up and sent it home without telling him. Even the prosecution accepted that.

 

J.

 

and the 300 rounds of various ammo, all starts to sound a bit far fetched after a while not checking things when you unpack for years after, very convenient memory loss etc etc

[JonathanL]

This is a great thread,and while I can see everyones point,one or two points are indisputable,the main one being that in the strict sense of the law,if you are in possession of guns and your license for those guns has expired,you are breaking the law,and nothing your issuing authority tells you can change this.That is a fact;BASC will tell you this,and the link someone posted from a lawyer(?) states this also.I have never disputed this fact.

I do not agree however(that even though the Police most certainly can prosecute)they would do so.This doesn't mean it couldn't or wont,or hasn't happened,but if the Police were looking for easy convictions(and the opportunity has existed for donkies years)then why isn't it happening on a daily basis?Why aren't the shooting press full of instances of this?Why aren't our shooting organisations shouting from the bell tower and doing something about it?And perhaps most importantly, WHY AREN'T WE DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT?You needn't answer the last one;I know the answer.

Bedwards posted something along the lines of people getting what they deserve,and I agree,but I think we(shooters)get what we deserve because not many of us are prepared to stand up and say 'enough of this *****',we just idly comply with every little piece of ****** legislation and unreasonable rubbish those in authority care to dish out.

I would be more than willing to take this matter to its conclusion if I'm ever faced with prosecution following the assurances of issuing authorities or FEO that this wouldn't happen if I'm found in possession of my own firearms without a valid license,due to the incompetent service of a licensing authoritiy.(A service I was paying for for the benefit not of me,but of the general public) I wouldn't go quietly I can assure you.

 

As has been stated millions of times on this thread; the police do not initiate prosecutions and the licensing department have even less to do with it.

 

You are probably correct that the force concerned wouldn't do this but what happens when you get stopped in another force area?

 

What happens when you get stopped at night and the licensing department is closed and you get nicked? You get interviewed about all these illegal guns you have (which they are) and you spout off this fantastical story about how it's ok because the licensing department said it's fine to break the law for a few months because they're a bit behind. Do you have any conception at all how that is going to sound to some young ambitious copper who's wet dreams involve being head of Internal Investigations and who then kicks up a stink about it? The licensing department will all get suspended and sacked for telling people to break the law.

 

Think about it. Just imagine for a minute that you have never had anything to do with firearms in your life so you have never heard of this matter before. One day you wake up to the headlines 'SOUTHSHIRE POLICE TURN BLIND EYE TO MASS ILLEGAL GUN POSSESSION: Hundreds of people in Southshire allowed to keep UNLICENSED DEADLY WEAPONS with no checks due to overworked gun licensing department.

 

A few days later (after all hell has broken loose) the headline will be 'REVEALED: POLICE TOLD GUN OWNERS TO HOLD DEALDY ILLEGAL WEAPONS'.- Southshire Journal investigation relveals that licensing chiefs shockingly told hundreds of gun owners to hold on to illegal guns to cover up their poor performance.

 

Stuff like this has a habbit of getting drasticaly out of control and is soon way beyond the reach of anyone who can stop it escallating. Believe me, you really don't want to be one of those caught up in it.

 

J.

[Dirty Harry]

 

The police cannot offer a 'no prosecution' guarantee because they are not responsible for initiating prosecutions to start with.

 

Then who the hell do you think are responsible for initiating prosecutions? The police attend jobs and decide if someone is being naughty. If they are they get arrested or reported and after investigation a file is submitted to the CPS.

 

 

Is there any chance you could enlighten everyone to your skills/qualifications in this matter?

I have 15 years experience as a police officer and have never even heard of someone being prosecuted because the police failed to renew their ticket in time. On the occasions I have had operational firearms licensing issues I have deferred to the licensing department. They are the experts in the field and unlike many on here we respect their greater knowledge.

I am 100% confident that nobody will be getting prosecuted for unlawful possession because the police are too slow in issuing the ticket when the renewal form also says you will not be prosecuted as long as its submitted prior to the old one expiring.

 

Harry

[Canis]

I find this an entertaining thread and do see both sides, whilst I totally agree it’s illegal to hold the firearms without a certificate and if you didn’t have it in writing from the police that you could do so, then you could be in trouble.

 

However with the letter I would suspect that you would have a very strong defence.

 

 

 

 

 

The last bits on both quotes prove my point, the argument would be that had he not received the letter from the police then he would have placed his guns with a licence holder / RDF and not broken the law.

 

It’s irrelevant whether the letter is legally correct or from the chief constable himself, it is from the firearms department (the state) and is the ONLY reason you broke the law, which in my opinion (as a layman mind you) would qualify in a stay of proceedings.

 

The CPS would know this and would act accordingly.

 

Without the letter this defence would be difficult to prove hence why BASC and solicitors say lodge your guns.

 

If it was me I would ask for an official letter like this and I would feel covered even though I am breaking the law, if they refuse to send one I would lodge my guns.

 

While i think this is largely correct think that letter would have far more significance if it had the words "Temporary Section Seven Permit" on it.

 

The point we are all missing is that this service is simply not good enough.

 

How can we affect this?

 

- get your renewal in in good time and demand a section seven if they cannot return a new certificate on time , making it clear that you will lodge a formal complaint if they don't produce one or the other by the expiry date . and lodge the formal complaint if they dont.

 

my understandind is that formal complaints with an upheld/ indisputable greivance) a are taken very seriously by police forces as these complaints are one of the things that each force's performance is monitored on . (current PC's is my understanding correct?)

 

I thiunk the BASC's advice is set around understanding that firearms licencing is low priority for most police forces (and possibly rightly so ) make the situation of long waitsd for licencing generate complaints( which the forces dont like) and each force will be pushed into ameloirating the service they provide. An almost insidious plan from BASC and i like it !

Edited November 15, 2012 by Canis

[chrispti]

 

 

Seriously mate - are you just not bothering to read what you are repsonding to or do you just not understand it?

 

It doesn't matter what the police say. You are still breaking the law.

 

The police cannot offer a 'no prosecution' guarantee because they are not responsible for initiating prosecutions to start with.

 

If you have an accident with, or lose or damage an illegally held gun then you will not be insured.

 

If you take a mate out shooting who does not hold a certificate then their possession of your gun is unlawful as you do not have a certificate of your own.

 

J.

 

I'm just not bothering.

 

I'm not getting prosecuted, nor will anyone else In hampshire, end of.

Edited November 15, 2012 by chrispti

[JonathanL]

and the 300 rounds of various ammo, all starts to sound a bit far fetched after a while not checking things when you unpack for years after, very convenient memory loss etc etc

 

Like I said, the prosecution accepted all that as being the case. The chap was medically known to have severe memory loss before the incident. Also, it is not the case to say that he 'forgot' that he had it under the bed. At no time did he actually know that he was in possession of it in this Country as he wasn't aware that it had ever been sent to him. He knew that he had it in Iraq but that is all. Again, the prosecution accepted all of that as being true.

 

J.

[JonathanL]

Then who the hell do you think are responsible for initiating prosecutions? The police attend jobs and decide if someone is being naughty. If they are they get arrested or reported and after investigation a file is submitted to the CPS.

 

There, you just said it. It's the CPS who initiate prosecutions. The CPS was formed to take the job away from the police decades ago partly because of police corruption. The police were deciding who to prosecute or not prosecute for their own reasons, not the reasons they should be applying. It wasn't uncommon for the police to tell people they could break the law without fear of gettng done for reasons that suited the local flat-foot; oh, hang on, isn't this precisely what we are discussing here?

 

Is there any chance you could enlighten everyone to your skills/qualifications in this matter?

 

What does it matter?

 

 

I have 15 years experience as a police officer and have never even heard of someone being prosecuted because the police failed to renew their ticket in time.

 

Perhaps that is purely because the wheel hasn't come off yet? If Atherton in Horden had expired certs when he shot three people dead can you honestly tell me that today we would be having this discussion? Of course you can't because we wouldn't. There would have been prosecutions, sackings and RFD's store rooms would be rammed full of guns of people who's certs had expired.

I am 100% confident that nobody will be getting prosecuted for unlawful possession......

 

Good for you.

 

J.

[Dirty Harry]

Ok. How will the CPS get the information in the first place?

The CPS do not see every job the police attend. Most never get near the CPS. They only see the stuff the police decide to let them see.

 

You are wrong.

 

If you were to explain where your so called expertise it might give some credibility to your answers.

[timps]

While i think this is largely correct think that letter would have far more significance if it had the words "Temporary Section Seven Permit" on it.

 

I personally think the letter has no legal basis at all, so I don’t think having “temporary section 7 permit” written on it would help, it would have to be an actual temporary section 7 permit to stop you breaking the law.

 

Where the letter does help you is the fact the state cannot coerce you into breaking the law and then seek to prosecute you for doing so. So seeing as the state has said you don’t have to lodge your guns it cannot then prosecute you for failing lodge them even though you are breaking the law.

[JonathanL]

Ok. How will the CPS get the information in the first place?

The CPS do not see every job the police attend. Most never get near the CPS. They only see the stuff the police decide to let them see.

 

And what happens when you get picked up by another force? What happens if you have an accident while out shooting and an investigation is started into some damage or injury you have caused? If your illegal possession comes to light after an unrelated incident that the police can't hide from the CPS, what then? The two cops in Durham got done after such an incident; a gun was stolen and it was discovered that the guy who owned it had bought it from these two. It had then gone too far to stop. If an FAC holder gets burgled or mugged for their gun are you still 100% confident that no one will get done?

 

If you were to explain where your so called expertise it might give some credibility to your answers.

 

It's irrelevant what qualifications I have or haven't got. No one can prove either way in any event so the exercise is pointless.

 

All that it needs is a rational look at the facts. Take the worse case scenario here; if someone with an expired certifcate shoots someone then do you want to be one of the other people with expired certificates? If you were head of a licensing department and that happend in your area how much would that 100% of yours be down to? How secure would you consider your job because you can be sure that you absolutely and positively would be thrown to the lions to save everyone else.

 

J.

[JonathanL]

I personally think the letter has no legal basis at all, so I don’t think having “temporary section 7 permit” written on it would help, it would have to be an actual temporary section 7 permit to stop you breaking the law.

 

Where the letter does help you is the fact the state cannot coerce you into breaking the law and then seek to prosecute you for doing so. So seeing as the state has said you don’t have to lodge your guns it cannot then prosecute you for failing lodge them even though you are breaking the law.

 

It isn't quite the same as the entrapment cases you posted though, although it is similar. Entrapment is the intentional coercing of someone to break the law specifically so that you can prosecute them. In the case we are discussing all that is happening is that the police are telling you it's ok to break the law because it makes their lives easier. In fact I think that the argument could reasonably be made that rather than being entrapped, you are actually guilty of conspiracy to possess firearms contrary to Sections 1 & 2 of the Act, possibly even section 5 in the case of empanding ammo and humane dispatch pistols.

 

J.

[snow white]

I phoned feo and told them that i needed my ticket to get cartriges as i do alot of vermin control .and was told to send photo copy of when ticket was ready feo phoned and asked me to send ticket to them recorded deliver and on next post got ticket back no prob. so why cannot every body do the same.

[Luckyshot]

I phoned feo and told them that i needed my ticket to get cartriges as i do alot of vermin control .and was told to send photo copy of when ticket was ready feo phoned and asked me to send ticket to them recorded deliver and on next post got ticket back no prob. so why cannot every body do the same.

 

That would only work if your force had your ticket ready in time. This whole thread is about a force that has a back log and havent got the tickets ready in time before the old one expires.

[Dirty Harry]

 

 

And what happens when you get picked up by another force? What happens if you have an accident while out shooting and an investigation is started into some damage or injury you have caused? If your illegal possession comes to light after an unrelated incident that the police can't hide from the CPS, what then?

 

 

It's irrelevant what qualifications I have or haven't got. No one can prove either way in any event so the exercise is pointless.

 

 

It's the same process in every force. The police go to jobs. They decide if they are going to submit a file. If its a **** job and going nowhere they won't put a file in. You clearly don't understand the process.

 

We used to have someone from the CPS on duty during office hours for the whole force. Now they are only contactable by phone.

They don't even have access to our computers so can't see what jobs are coming in.

You need to grasp the fact that they only know about jobs that the police take to them.

 

Im not asking for you to prove what qualifications you have im just asking. i dont need photo id or certificates!

 

[FOXHUNTER1]

 

 

Probably so, but every cert holder in Durham is going through this especially if they are flagged.

 

On my last phone call the backlog was put up to 90 days.

 

Along with that they wanted to know regular visitors to my house.... if my daughters had boyfriends, they wanted to check there backgrounds. One member on PW posted that they were going to ask neighbours if they minded if he had guns.....IIRC..could be wrong.

 

My mate has just had both his certs done, & the FEO told him he had taken guns off three shooters the week before, one of the reasons was because the cert holders son was in bother, so the police removed guns from the household.

 

When your FEO comes out ask him.

 

I had the same interview this year when my renewal was due with Durham.

 

I also asked for a Section 7 to be told it will be OK you dont need one to which I replied " I do as I am breaking the law"..

 

My certs landed in the post a few days later !!!

[al4x]

 

It's irrelevant what qualifications I have or haven't got. No one can prove either way in any event so the exercise is pointless.

 

 

who wants a sweepstake as to the extent of qualifications?

 

I'm going with a degree in History and possibly a 3rd class one at that

 

I'd also lay money on him owning at least one cat probably more

Edited November 15, 2012 by al4x

[chrispti]

 

 

who wants a sweepstake as to the extent of qualifications?

 

I'm going with a degree in History and possibly a 3rd class one at that

 

I'd also lay money on him owning at least one cat probably more

 

He said in post 117 he is an rfd.

 

How much is it to store your guns at an rfd these days ..............

[chrispti]

To save you time searching back .....

 

 

 

 

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.

Edited November 15, 2012 by chrispti

[Dirty Harry]

I don't think you need any form of qualifications or expertise to be an rfd but I could be wrong (see I admit when I'm not 100% sure).

[guest1957]

Reading this thread reminds me that lawyers do have their uses sometimes.

[bedwards1966]

Ok. How will the CPS get the information in the first place?

The CPS do not see every job the police attend. Most never get near the CPS. They only see the stuff the police decide to let them see.

 

You are wrong.

 

If you were to explain where your so called expertise it might give some credibility to your answers.

 

So you are utterly convinced that no ambitious police officer or anti would/could put the 'job' forward to CPS for their own gain, or because they felt it was the right thing to do?

 

There is no need to explain the expertise or qualifications of the people on here saying what can, and possibly will, happen. They are simple facts. You do not hold a certificate, therefore you are committing an offence. The police cannot permit you to break the law avoiding a prosecution. Given details of the case, CPS are able to take this forward whether any police want that or not. When found guilty in court, a judge can send you to prison over it.

These are simple facts.

Your 'expertise' from being a police officer for years doesn't seem to have gained you anything (other than arrogance), as you seem to have no understanding of how the system works!

Edited November 15, 2012 by bedwards1966