Old Bull Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 Heard on the radio this morning North Yorkshire police are holding a web chat between 5 and 6 for the public to help them better understand firearms law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shootgun Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 Did you heard three times, or only once? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Bull Posted February 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 Haha I've got real bad internet at the moment it has a mind of its own Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 Why do the Police feel the public need to better understand firearms law? The Police aren't beyond interpreting firearms law to better their own needs so perhaps it may be worthwhile our shooting orgs taking part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 Why do the Police feel the public need to better understand firearms law? The Police aren't beyond interpreting firearms law to better their own needs so perhaps it may be worthwhile our shooting orgs taking part. Would it not be a good thing if the public did have a better understanding of firearms law and the people who hold them.at the moment a lot of people think it is only criminals and killers who have firearms.i am sure our organizations would be there if they thought the need was there.or perhaps they already have the content of the web chat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 Would it not be a good thing if the public did have a better understanding of firearms law and the people who hold them.at the moment a lot of people think it is only criminals and killers who have firearms.i am sure our organizations would be there if they thought the need was there.or perhaps they already have the content of the web chat. I suspect you are ex-job or similar? As hardly any shooters in my experience support how firearms licensing go about things and are only happy when they get a quick variation or renewal. The longer they hold their tickets the more cynical they become, wonder why that is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 I suspect you are ex-job or similar? As hardly any shooters in my experience support how firearms licensing go about things and are only happy when they get a quick variation or renewal. The longer they hold their tickets the more cynical they become, wonder why that is? Firstly had you read my previous posts some of which you have commented on you would know my living.as for being cynical if things are all as they should be nobody has anything to fear from the license authority.does everyone not have most of what they requested.this post was about raising public awareness which can only be a good thing.education is a marvellous thing.atb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 Firstly had you read my previous posts some of which you have commented on you would know my living.as for being cynical if things are all as they should be nobody has anything to fear from the license authority.does everyone not have most of what they requested.this post was about raising public awareness which can only be a good thing.education is a marvellous thing.atb Do you know many blokes of reasonable age have had multiple careers, does that surprise you? You did the same thing from leaving school did you? Frankly I wasn't all that interested in your life story as you claim it to be, you wouldn't be the first fantasy person on a forum and for all we know your wife, son or sibling is a chief constable. Heck I know more than a few ex-coppers who do very different things today from selling insurance to being an RFD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evo Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 Would it not be a good thing if the public did have a better understanding of firearms law and the people who hold them.at the moment a lot of people think it is only criminals and killers who have firearms.i am sure our organizations would be there if they thought the need was there.or perhaps they already have the content of the web chat. well said,totally agree with your post,the public do need educating where guns are concerned because we are not all wannabe gangsters just because we have guns as the joe public thinks, well said bostonmick, I agree with you 100% atb Evo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 (edited) Do you know many blokes of reasonable age have had multiple careers, does that surprise you? You did the same thing from leaving school did you? Frankly I wasn't all that interested in your life story as you claim it to be, you wouldn't be the first fantasy person on a forum and for all we know your wife, son or sibling is a chief constable. Heck I know more than a few ex-coppers who do very different things today from selling insurance to being an RFD You seem to appear quite a defensive and slightly aggressive person by the nature of your posts on here that do not follow your path.are you aware that the general public and the anti fieldsport people have full access to these forums and I wonder what impression it gives to them.if the public gain just a little confidence from such things as web chat by the police or indeed the shooting organizations of the country that can only be a good thing.if the sport of shooting was explained to the masses correctly we may see a lot of converts.as this has not yet taken place perhaps you should reserve criticism until after.atb Edited February 17, 2014 by bostonmick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuddster Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 it would be worth noting that the head of firearms licensing in north yorkshire is an avid game shot and clay shooter. good on them for opening up and extending the service in a public manner. fudds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Livefast123 Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 If it stops even one Joe Public going into meltdownmeltdown and calling the police after seeing somebody with a 'super magnum sniper rifle' then it's surely a good thing! Most MOPs don't have a clue about why somebody would want or can own a sporting firearm in this country. Education has got to be seen as a positive thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 Would it not be a good thing if the public did have a better understanding of firearms law and the people who hold them.at the moment a lot of people think it is only criminals and killers who have firearms.i am sure our organizations would be there if they thought the need was there.or perhaps they already have the content of the web chat. It would be a very good thing, but knowing how the Police interpret firearms law to suit their own particular needs can we rest assured the public will receive open, honest and totally impartial information? If so, then it would be a very good idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cleaner4hire Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 My dealings with N Yorks licensing have been nothing but excellent; by far the best of the 4 authorities I have been under. Providing this type of information can only be a good thing as far as I'm concerned and is a step in the right direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobba Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 It would be a very good thing, but knowing how the Police interpret firearms law to suit their own particular needs can we rest assured the public will receive open, honest and totally impartial information? If so, then it would be a very good idea. I'm intrigued. Perhaps you could kindly provide PW members with your supporting evidence ( yes please, evidence and not heresay generalisations) of just how you know that the police interpret firearms law to suite their own particular needs. Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 It would be a very good thing, but knowing how the Police interpret firearms law to suit their own particular needs can we rest assured the public will receive open, honest and totally impartial information? If so, then it would be a very good idea. Yes I agree with this. Perhaps we / myself have become cynical through years of dealing with them, If its about educating the public to the fact they are quite safe great- lets just see though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazza9t9 Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 My dealings with N Yorks licensing have been nothing but excellent; by far the best of the 4 authorities I have been under. Providing this type of information can only be a good thing as far as I'm concerned and is a step in the right direction. I have to second this, after moving from West Yorkshire they have been brilliant. I rang them a few weeks back as I was/am considering putting in my for my FAC and they were brilliant talking me through things. I agree with some of the comments on here, if this web chat helps one member of the public to understand that we are not criminals I think it's a good effort. After all they do not have to do this, if nothing else it can only help the sport. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuddster Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 Tony Allerton wrote in the last BASC mag how north yorks had shared the BASC stand at the last five Yorkshire Game shows-offering advice and I think variation chats. Tony is also a competive clay shot and a game shooter. Mind you, they could have been slipping listening devices into certificate holders pockets or perhaps dishing out some mass hypnotism. only on PW... fuddster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 I'm intrigued. Perhaps you could kindly provide PW members with your supporting evidence ( yes please, evidence and not heresay generalisations) of just how you know that the police interpret firearms law to suite their own particular needs. Thank you. There's quite a few examples on here if you want to have a look, but here's a couple to be going on with: Failing to issue an applicant with the relevant permit when an applicant is left in illegal possession of their own firearms without a valid certificate at renewal, or simply telling applicants they don't need one, again leaving applicants in illegal possession of their own firearms. Telling applicants they 'must' enclose their current valid certificate with their renewal forms, again leaving applicants in illegal possession of their own firearms. Telling applicants that they (licensing) require a GP's letter or medical report with their renewal/application before they can complete their application, and that the cost will be met by the applicant. Durham didn't have the monopoly on this one. Cumbria are acknowledged by BASC to be one of the best licensing authorities but they're not beyond 'trying it on' with their interpretations of possibly not firearms law but HO guidance. They once tried to tell me it wasn't possible to give authority to possess 1000 rounds of .22rf, and that as I already had one S1 shotgun I had no 'good reason' for another. They were wrong on both counts. Various shooting organisations (The Shooters Rights is only a small organisation but have had great success at this) have taken various licensing authorities to court for failing to administer firearms/licensing law as it exists but rather as they deem it should be, and unless I'm mistaken BASC have recently introduced legal expenses cover for just such cases so it would appear there may be a need? I sincerely hope N.Yorkshire do themselves proud and the general public are enlightened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footu Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 Heard on the radio this morning North Yorkshire police are holding a web chat between 5 and 6 for the public to help them better understand firearms law. Did I read this wrong? It's a web chat for the public, to help them (police) better understand the firearms law. Just saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobba Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 There's quite a few examples on here if you want to have a look, but here's a couple to be going on with: Failing to issue an applicant with the relevant permit when an applicant is left in illegal possession of their own firearms without a valid certificate at renewal, or simply telling applicants they don't need one, again leaving applicants in illegal possession of their own firearms. Telling applicants they 'must' enclose their current valid certificate with their renewal forms, again leaving applicants in illegal possession of their own firearms. Telling applicants that they (licensing) require a GP's letter or medical report with their renewal/application before they can complete their application, and that the cost will be met by the applicant. Durham didn't have the monopoly on this one. Cumbria are acknowledged by BASC to be one of the best licensing authorities but they're not beyond 'trying it on' with their interpretations of possibly not firearms law but HO guidance. They once tried to tell me it wasn't possible to give authority to possess 1000 rounds of .22rf, and that as I already had one S1 shotgun I had no 'good reason' for another. They were wrong on both counts. Various shooting organisations (The Shooters Rights is only a small organisation but have had great success at this) have taken various licensing authorities to court for failing to administer firearms/licensing law as it exists but rather as they deem it should be, and unless I'm mistaken BASC have recently introduced legal expenses cover for just such cases so it would appear there may be a need? I sincerely hope N.Yorkshire do themselves proud and the general public are enlightened. Many thanks for this. I can now see where you were coming from. Regards. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 There's quite a few examples on here if you want to have a look, but here's a couple to be going on with: Failing to issue an applicant with the relevant permit when an applicant is left in illegal possession of their own firearms without a valid certificate at renewal, or simply telling applicants they don't need one, again leaving applicants in illegal possession of their own firearms. Telling applicants they 'must' enclose their current valid certificate with their renewal forms, again leaving applicants in illegal possession of their own firearms. Telling applicants that they (licensing) require a GP's letter or medical report with their renewal/application before they can complete their application, and that the cost will be met by the applicant. Durham didn't have the monopoly on this one. Cumbria are acknowledged by BASC to be one of the best licensing authorities but they're not beyond 'trying it on' with their interpretations of possibly not firearms law but HO guidance. They once tried to tell me it wasn't possible to give authority to possess 1000 rounds of .22rf, and that as I already had one S1 shotgun I had no 'good reason' for another. They were wrong on both counts. Various shooting organisations (The Shooters Rights is only a small organisation but have had great success at this) have taken various licensing authorities to court for failing to administer firearms/licensing law as it exists but rather as they deem it should be, and unless I'm mistaken BASC have recently introduced legal expenses cover for just such cases so it would appear there may be a need? I sincerely hope N.Yorkshire do themselves proud and the general public are enlightened i am all for people or organisations being held to account if they behave in a manner not inkeeping with the rules.but the cases you have sited have no substance,please give names dates and checkable details.as for things posted on here about how unfair the police have been well a large pinch of salt is mostly needed.how many people were refused certificates because they never supplied a doctors letter?.there is a thread on here at the moment about how the police took someones guns away for no good reason.yet a firearms solicitor asked £8,000 to defend the case well excuse me but there must be more to it for any legal experts costs to come to that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 (edited) i am all for people or organisations being held to account if they behave in a manner not inkeeping with the rules.but the cases you have sited have no substance,please give names dates and checkable details.as for things posted on here about how unfair the police have been well a large pinch of salt is mostly needed.how many people were refused certificates because they never supplied a doctors letter?.there is a thread on here at the moment about how the police took someones guns away for no good reason.yet a firearms solicitor asked £8,000 to defend the case well excuse me but there must be more to it for any legal experts costs to come to that. I'd like to give dates, names, addresses and inside leg measurements but have no interest. All the relevant info' can be found on here, whether you regard they have any substance or not is of no interest to me; all instances have occurred as I've stated. I have no idea how many people were refused tickets for failing to supply a GP's letter, nor did I ever claim any had. As for the remainder of your post, regarding a firearms solicitor and 8 grand, I'd like to reply to that also but don't have a clue what you're on about.atb Edited February 17, 2014 by Scully Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 I'd like to give dates, names, addresses and inside leg measurements but have no interest. All the relevant info' can be found on here, whether you regard they have any substance or not is of no interest to me; all instances have occurred as I've stated. I have no idea how many people were refused tickets for failing to supply a GP's letter, nor did I ever claim any had. As for the remainder of your post, regarding a firearms solicitor and 8 grand, I'd like to reply to that also but don't have a clue what you're on about.atb you seem to lose interest in threads very quickly.you were asked to supply facts on your statement all you did was quote hearsay from a forum by largely anonymous people.surely there must be documented cases if the police are that bad.atvb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poontang Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 (edited) Failing to issue an applicant with the relevant permit when an applicant is left in illegal possession of their own firearms without a valid certificate at renewal, or simply telling applicants they don't need one, again leaving applicants in illegal possession of their own firearms. I know someone that happened to. He asked for a section 7 certificate when he was told his certificate would run out before the new one was issued. He was told there was no need, and if he was stopped or questioned about it he should point the officer to the firearms dept. i am all for people or organisations being held to account if they behave in a manner not inkeeping with the rules.but the cases you have sited have no substance,please give names dates and checkable details. No disrespect but I shan't be giving you names, dates or 'checkable' details of the above as I don't have a clue who you are. I can however assure you the above is 100% correct. Edited February 17, 2014 by poontang Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.