JonathanL Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 JohnathanL , he said she said ....., we've all done it different in one way or another but at the end of the day the police know what we've been buying or selling, if it was illegal wouldn't we have been notified buy the police already that we're doing it wrong Totally see your point. However, it is an offence not to notify by recorded delivery. Argue it any way you like but it won't make me wrong. Whether that is a good thing or not is not my point, it just is. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 it is a legal requirement that you notify the transfer of a firearm "YES " The Police or the Law cant say Royal Mail Recorded Only , thats a Monopoly Err, yes they can. Parliament can say whatever it pleases, even if it stipulates that every blue-eyed first-born of a firearms dealer must be killed at birth.. You are seriously out of touch if you believe otherwise, sir. The relevant part is in the 1997 Act at section 33 and says; "and any such notice shall be sent by registered post or the recorded delivery service. Hence, if you do not send the notification via recorded delivery (registered does not exist any more) you break the law, end of argument. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 Can you not have the delivery of your email recorded Geordie The Firearms Act says that you must use the 'Recorded Deliery Service', which means the service operated by Royal Mail. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 I'm sure "Being an RFD" i would have been picked up on this I've handled More than 800 ! Maybe in 1968 it was ok , We're in the 21st Century , Most Police forces are ok With Emails from License Holders This wasn't 1968, it was 1997! Regardless of the date, the law states quite clearly that all notifications of transfers must be sent via recorded delivery. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Poon Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 JonathanL , do you really like putting us fellow shooters down by insulting our knowledge of how we conduct our sport Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 (edited) JonathanL , do you really like putting us fellow shooters down by insulting our knowledge of how we conduct our sport Are you saying that I am wrong? J. Edited February 18, 2013 by JonathanL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Poon Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 Well in some way you probably are correct as in the eyes of the law as you have recited the scriptures of gun transfers e.t.c.. But the law is not always 100% followed by all , i.e. when your speeding in a 30 zone and plod pulls you over but gives you a friendly taking to and doesn't want to take your licence off you, Or, going to buy your niece who's only 17 years of age a bottle of wine . Or, buying some cartridges and the shop owner forgets to ask you for your license Get my drift , so yes and no you are correct in someways . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subsonicnat Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 My Lad JUST acquired his First Shotgun Licence: According to WMP you just inform them by A4 sheet with details on, as they do not issue the Forms anymore:: This is of a WEEK ago: From the horses mouth so to speak: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordieh Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 (edited) The Firearms Act says that you must use the 'Recorded Deliery Service', which means the service operated by Royal Mail. J. Does the Firearms Act actually say that you must use the"ROYAL MAIL" Recorded Delivery Service if it does not "i put it to you that you might be wrong or as our licencing depts are quite often, making it up as you go along"(said in my best Rumpole of the Bailey voice) Geordie Edited February 18, 2013 by geordieh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 Well in some way you probably are correct as in the eyes of the law as you have recited the scriptures of gun transfers e.t.c.. But the law is not always 100% followed by all , i.e. when your speeding in a 30 zone and plod pulls you over but gives you a friendly taking to and doesn't want to take your licence off you, Or, going to buy your niece who's only 17 years of age a bottle of wine . Or, buying some cartridges and the shop owner forgets to ask you for your license Get my drift , so yes and no you are correct in someways . So you just follow the bits of the law which suit you? Seriously, you do that? You surely realise that even though you are speeding in a 30 zone that you are actually breaking the law? You also surelyt realise that buying alcohol on behalf of someone who is under age is pretty serious offnce? Amd you are an RFD. Really? J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 My Lad JUST acquired his First Shotgun Licence: According to WMP you just inform them by A4 sheet with details on, as they do not issue the Forms anymore:: This is of a WEEK ago: From the horses mouth so to speak: Yes, lots of forces say this. However, it is still the case that you must inform them by sending the notification by recorded delivery. Yes, I agree it's nuts these days but that is the law, however you look at it. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Poon Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 (edited) So you just follow the bits of the law which suit you? Seriously, you do that? You surely realise that even though you are speeding in a 30 zone that you are actually breaking the law? You also surelyt realise that buying alcohol on behalf of someone who is under age is pretty serious offnce? Amd you are an RFD. Really? J. So your telling me you've never ever broken or bent the law Edited February 18, 2013 by Willpoon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 (edited) Does the Firearms Act actually say that you must use the"ROYAL MAIL" Recorded Delivery Service if it does not "i put it to you that you might be wrong or as our licencing depts are quite often, making it up as you go along"(said in my best Rumpole of the Bailey voice) Geordie Why not try reading it for your self? It's very easily accessible. It says, "the recorded delivery service". If you want to argue that that means something other than the recorded delivery service operated by Royal Mail then good luck with that. I'm pretty confident in saying that you will be wrong though. J. Edited February 18, 2013 by JonathanL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 (edited) So your telling me you've never ever broken or bent the law Nope, never*. You are, however, saying that in your profession as an RFD you regularly break the law. Moreover, you are proving quite clearly that you don't even know what the law is to start with! J. *what constitutes 'bending' the law as opposed to breaking it? Edited February 18, 2013 by JonathanL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Poon Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 Nope, never*. You are, however, saying that in your profession as an RFD you regularly break the law. Moreover, you are proving quite clearly that you don't even know what the law is to start with! J. *what constitutes 'bending' the law as opposed to breaking it? no I'm not a RFD you may have mistaken what I have typed , I was referring to a person who works in a gun shop and forgetting to ask for the buyers certificate .Anyway I really can't believe you've never broken the law , are you really that honest of a person , I reckon even a person of the church had a few skeletons in their cupboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordieh Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 So you just follow the bits of the law which suit you? Seriously, you do that? You surely realise that even though you are speeding in a 30 zone that you are actually breaking the law? You also surelyt realise that buying alcohol on behalf of someone who is under age is pretty serious offnce? Amd you are an RFD. Really? J. Actually Jonathon buying alcohol for your 17 yr old niece if she is drinking it on private premesis is not illegal it would only be illegal if she was under 5.It is also legal for you to buy beer wine or cider for a 16 or 17 yr old in a pub or restaurant if you were having a table meal.So it aways depends on what the law actually says in writing(black and white)and nowhere does it say you have to use "The Royal Mail" Recorded delivery Service.I have read the Firearms Act by the way Geordie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowboy1403 Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 i`m sure i have read somewhere that e-mail was accepted by law as a recorded delivery service because it was so traceable,more so than the postal service.that is why the ISP`s have to keep them so long so they can be used in court cases even if they have been deleted from computers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happypig Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 (edited) JonathanL is correct. That is what the act says Technology is ahead of the law... So some forces accept emails, the facts are as reported .... Both parties must notify independently by registered or recorded post. Don't shoot the messenger.... Extract of Firearms act (amendment 1997) 33 Notification of transfers involving firearms.E+W+S (1)This section applies where in Great Britain— (a)any firearm to which section 1 of the 1968 Act applies is sold, let on hire, lent or given; (b)any shot gun is sold, let on hire or given, or lent for a period of more than 72 hours. (2)Any party to a transfer to which this section applies who is the holder of a firearm or shot gun certificate or, as the case may be, a visitor’s firearm or shot gun permit which relates to the firearm in question shall within seven days of the transfer give notice to the chief officer of police who granted his certificate or permit. (3)A notice required by subsection (2) above shall— (a)contain a description of the firearm in question (giving its identification number if any); and (b)state the nature of the transaction and the name and address of the other party; and any such notice shall be sent by registered post or the recorded delivery service. (4)A failure by a party to a transaction to which this section applies to give the notice required by this section shall be an offence. Edited February 18, 2013 by happypig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenhunter Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 (edited) Oops! Looks like my Firearms office and I have just conspired to break the law then! Rang up last week and asked if it was ok to send my notification in by email. The nice lady on the other end of the phone said yes and went to the trouble of making sure I had the correct email address. A few minutes later the job was sorted! I think in this day and age it could easily be argued that an email is a recorded delivery service. Edited to add that it could also be argued that the offence lies in not notifying the police and not in the method used to do it. GH Edited February 18, 2013 by Greenhunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wabbitbosher Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 IT’S A CONSPIRACY!!!! The Police are trying to make us All break the Law! 90% of Police forces I speak to (On a Daily Basis) except Email as Notification by License Holders as acceptable Northamptonshire Police have an Online Form (I’ll post the link if you like) I kind of get the Feeling they are moving into the 21st Century After all a Recorded Delivery letter is Only Proof you sent a letter to the Police NOT proof of its Content You know what I might try my hand at Train spotting looks like it could be Fun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 I always send my transactions with licensing as recorded so there's no comeback if THEY lose it,which makes a nonsense of the fact I'm happy to knock on the door and hand it to one of the firearms staff if I happen to be passing Police HQ! I realise common practise is totally different to legit' practise,and am well aware the smelly stuff may hit the fan one day when one of the staff gets distracted on their way back upstairs and leaves it in the loo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 Actually Jonathon buying alcohol for your 17 yr old niece if she is drinking it on private premesis is not illegal it would only be illegal if she was under 5. If you purchase alcohol on behalf of a person who is under 18 you commit an offence. You are confusing 'buying' it with 'drinking' it. There is no offence in giving a person who is under 18 alcohol or letting them drinking, unless they are over 5. If you purchase for them, like if they ask you to, then that is an offence. It is also legal for you to buy beer wine or cider for a 16 or 17 yr old in a pub or restaurant if you were having a table meal.So it aways depends on what the law actually says in writing(black and white)and nowhere does it say you have to use "The Royal Mail" Recorded delivery Service.I have read the Firearms Act by the way Geordie The Firearms (amendment) Act 1997 says quite clearly that it has to go via recorded delivery. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 i`m sure i have read somewhere that e-mail was accepted by law as a recorded delivery service because it was so traceable,more so than the postal service.that is why the ISP`s have to keep them so long so they can be used in court cases even if they have been deleted from computers. It's not the 'traceability' issue that maks it legal. Yes, Recorded Delivery was specified in the Act because it leaves a paper trail but it isn't the case that any method which happens to be traceable is legal. I do agree that email is probably the pefect method but it isn't legal - yet. J. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowboy1403 Posted February 19, 2013 Report Share Posted February 19, 2013 It's not the 'traceability' issue that maks it legal. Yes, Recorded Delivery was specified in the Act because it leaves a paper trail but it isn't the case that any method which happens to be traceable is legal. I do agree that email is probably the pefect method but it isn't legal - yet. J. J. i think it`s a case of the CPS deciding is it in the public interest to take things forward.if they go to court over it and loose then all forces would have to accept e-mail as a form of notifacation and they proberly use this as "their paperwork mountain"reason for taking so long to process things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subsonicnat Posted February 19, 2013 Report Share Posted February 19, 2013 (edited) Being traceable is only part of the argument, if you did send it by Royal Mail and so yes>>> PROOF OF POSTAGE:<<<< As To what the contents are, I doubt if you would send a BLANK A4 Sheet .lol. Then this would be traceable back to you by the post Office that sent it, Yes!!!!. I fail to see why anyone would want to send it by any other courier as it would in my opinion be a lot of trouble for nothing really: Yes, Let us have the right to use EMAIL,BUT,, I would want a REPLY to it, otherwise how would you know they had received it: . Edited February 20, 2013 by subsonicnat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts