belly47 Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 So we have gone from 9 to 12 in a couple of lines.I suppose they should be congratulated really. Thirteen pages so far and last time I checked not one post by anyone who has had a visit under the new initiative. Seems your fears really aren't ungrounded. probably three of the pages can be attributed to you boston Its the default position that all shooters are potentailly untrustworthy, non compliant and need sneaking up on that riles me. Its intrusive and unnecessary. That and the smear that which links legal owners to terrorism, which is how the public will read it. If the police could already do this, why are they making such a song and dance about it? It's smoke and mirrors to be seen to be doing ’something', which further demonizes us in the process. EXACTLY its not the fact that they may visit me, as rightly pointed out they have always been able too, its more the way they are advertising it and linking it to terrorism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 That is what Kes has been attempting to make some people understand! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 I havent posted stats before on US gun crime victims. These are readily available, so I dont get your point - same as ever really. However re your comment "Seems your fears..." , I think you mean unfounded and if they arent unfounded then there is some veracity in what I have said - you may wish to eliminate the double negative as well as put in the correct word. A post before yours stated 9000 that's where the jump came from. As for my choice of words it can't be that wrong as you knew what was meant.but I do thank you for pointing out my error. A thought just came to me.your not johnathon reborn are you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
belly47 Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 (edited) is it as obvious to everyone else as it is me that some people involved in this thread just seem to want to argue with everyone who has an opinion different to them. they don't want to, or are unable to discuss it without making comments aimed at trying to belittle someone. its like the naughty child at school that always shouts the loudest and craves attention YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE (if you don't, we do ) Edited October 16, 2014 by belly47 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 probably three of the pages can be attributed to you boston I will have a count in a while.I usually manage a lot more than three. EXACTLY its not the fact that they may visit me, as rightly pointed out they have always been able too, its more the way they are advertising it and linking it to terrorism They put everything in the terrorism box nowadays.try not to take it to heart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
belly47 Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 They put everything in the terrorism box nowadays.try not to take it to heart. true enough mick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steppenwolf Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 Thirteen pages so far and last time I checked not one post by anyone who has had a visit under the new initiative. Seems your fears really aren't ungrounded. If that is the case I am glad and it seems like the police are only doing those visits at addresses where there is concern therefore nothing effectively has changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blunderbuss Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 is it as obvious to everyone else as it is me that some people involved in this thread just seem to want to argue with everyone who has an opinion different to them. they don't want to, or are unable to discuss it without making comments aimed at trying to belittle someone. its like the naughty child at school that always shouts the loudest and craves attention YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE (if you don't, we do ) Yep very obvious, and not just on this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 probably three of the pages can be attributed to you boston EXACTLY its not the fact that they may visit me, as rightly pointed out they have always been able too, its more the way they are advertising it and linking it to terrorism +1 A post before yours stated 9000 that's where the jump came from. As for my choice of words it can't be that wrong as you knew what was meant.but I do thank you for pointing out my error. A thought just came to me.your not johnathon reborn are you. So you believe in reincarnation but not in 'holding a line', Boston is in Lincolnshire isnt it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 +1 So you believe in reincarnation but not in 'holding a line', Boston is in Lincolnshire isnt it? It always was.but you never know they may have moved it to combat terrorism. Atb your a nice lad really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 It always was.but you never know they may have moved it to combat terrorism. Atb your a nice lad really. As my final thought on this topic. I trust the police/powers that be, are as concerned about IS making EBOLA bombs as they are about the safest group of the British population allowing their guns readily into the hands of these terrorists, Maybe an understanding of the word 'terror' would suggest they have. Didnt we have anthrax letter bombs once ? I would be more concerned about the safety of the data which the police hold on all of us 'gun nuts', rather than making unannounced visits - no chance that data could be accessed by a hacking terror group to target the 'best' guns? No - I'm sure thats all covered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkield Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 You are appearing slightly more nutty with each post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonmick Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 As my final thought on this topic. I trust the police/powers that be, are as concerned about IS making EBOLA bombs as they are about the safest group of the British population allowing their guns readily into the hands of these terrorists, Maybe an understanding of the word 'terror' would suggest they have. Didnt we have anthrax letter bombs once ? I would be more concerned about the safety of the data which the police hold on all of us 'gun nuts', rather than making unannounced visits - no chance that data could be accessed by a hacking terror group to target the 'best' guns? No - I'm sure thats all covered. I would not worry to much about the data on guns being hacked.a lot of the records are a complete mess.as for them targeting the best guns well you would not expect them to be seen with a Hatsan or a lanber. An so5 or mx12 at the very least. You are appearing slightly more nutty with each post Not nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 (edited) Read my last line again. All I can say is "read my last line again". Possibly I have led a narrow life probably not but it has been filled with generally respectful people whom I have respected in return. This is clearly an alien concept to you. I think I called it right since your reply ticks all the boxes of 'philistine' behaviour. I would assume you ask yourself if you are "avin a larf", if, for a moment, you allow yourself to be 'normal'. Oh as for NO link to terrorism, did you say this - What's wrong with terrorism and legal firearms ownership being talked about together. You really are 'avin a larf, and if you think get over it is a personal insulting remark, all I can say is get over it. Are you really suggesting you feel insulted and upset but those words.....what sort of a narrow life have you led? There is NO link to terrorism, the way I see it is they want to check so terrorists don't get hold of our guns, where does it say/suggest we are terrorists? You are unbelievable and seem to have lost all grasp of reality, talking to you is clearly a waste of time, correct I did say......... What's wrong with terrorism and legal firearms ownership being talked about together. I also said ............ There is NO link to terrorism, the way I see it is they want to check so terrorists don't get hold of our guns, where does it say/suggest we are terrorists? The Police scenario is broadly we want to check legally held firearms don't get into the hands of terrorists, which part of that are you struggling to understand! As for the insults (kindly don't insult me calling me a philistine), - par for the course and sadly typical, I am deeply offended and will have to make a formal complaint against you! Get over it! Edited October 16, 2014 by Dekers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 BASC guidelines have not changed on this subject other than a few new words, the Police have always been able to inspect. So BASC guidelines haven't changed, but they felt the need to add 'a few new words'? I haven't read it as it doesn't effect me, so I'll have to take your word for it. Now they are saying they might actually do so you are getting upset. I have only had one 'unannounced' visit, and it was over 20 twenty years ago. He told me he wanted to check the serial numbers on my handguns against those on HQ records, but had no records with him for some strange reason. I later found out from another copper who used to come into the canteen on nights that the bloke was a gun nut and just wanted to see my handguns. I wasn't 'upset' then and I'm not 'upset' now, but I am pretty annoyed about the reasons ACPO have given for instigating this latest 'initiative', and it would appear that some of our shooting organisations aren't too chuffed either, as the NGO has entered a formal complaint, and the CA have posted links for members to contact their MP's regarding some of the reasons ACPO have given for the 'initiative'. So, it was fine before when they could but seldom did, but now they actually might you are getting upset! If you think it was 'fine before', then good for you, but I have never claimed I thought it was fine. Once again, I'm not 'upset' but rather annoyed (still ) that under the new 'initiative' no one appears to know what the outcome will be if I say no, or even if I still can, if or when the 'unannounced' visit takes place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 BASC guidelines have not changed on this subject other than a few new words, the Police have always been able to inspect. So BASC guidelines haven't changed, but they felt the need to add 'a few new words'? I haven't read it as it doesn't effect me, so I'll have to take your word for it. Now they are saying they might actually do so you are getting upset. I have only had one 'unannounced' visit, and it was over 20 twenty years ago. He told me he wanted to check the serial numbers on my handguns against those on HQ records, but had no records with him for some strange reason. I later found out from another copper who used to come into the canteen on nights that the bloke was a gun nut and just wanted to see my handguns. I wasn't 'upset' then and I'm not 'upset' now, but I am pretty annoyed about the reasons ACPO have given for instigating this latest 'initiative', and it would appear that some of our shooting organisations aren't too chuffed either, as the NGO has entered a formal complaint, and the CA have posted links for members to contact their MP's regarding some of the reasons ACPO have given for the 'initiative'. So, it was fine before when they could but seldom did, but now they actually might you are getting upset! If you think it was 'fine before', then good for you, but I have never claimed I thought it was fine. Once again, I'm not 'upset' but rather annoyed (still ) that under the new 'initiative' no one appears to know what the outcome will be if I say no, or even if I still can, if or when the 'unannounced' visit takes place. There are no new laws and the police have no new powers of entry, how many times in how many ways does that need saying! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 You are all welcome to carry on your merry ways, I am rather bored of this now. I am the first to stand up to officialdom and have had to educate the Police over firearms/legislation/their interpretation/etc, on numerous occasions, the vast majority here have no experience of this, and despite copious quantities of willy waving will generally be the first to roll over like a puppy dog with a knock at the door! There is Nothing to get excited about here, as I have said, if anything, this should be viewed as a way of portraying the shooting community in a positive law abiding fashion, there is NO suggestion we are terrorists. 14 pages of bravado, not a single home visit report and absolutely no progress, a number here appear to have their heads way to far in the clouds! Have a nice day, and beware that knock on the door! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 You are appearing slightly more nutty with each post I shall assume thats not an 'official' censure but an inexplicably humorous post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 (edited) There are no new laws and the police have no new powers of entry, how many times in how many ways does that need saying! I have never claimed there are any 'new laws' nor 'new powers of entry', but have claimed that the new 'initiative' is open to abuse as the HO have stated that the police will use their 'judgement' as to what reason they deem necessary for the 'unannounced' visit. Can anyone tell me what the outcome will be if I tell the rozzers it isn't convenient as I'm in the middle of my tea, but they will be more than welcome to come back in half an hour? Edit: predictive text. Edited October 16, 2014 by Scully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 (edited) You are unbelievable and seem to have lost all grasp of reality, talking to you is clearly a waste of time, correct I did say......... What's wrong with terrorism and legal firearms ownership being talked about together. I also said ............ There is NO link to terrorism, the way I see it is they want to check so terrorists don't get hold of our guns, where does it say/suggest we are terrorists? The Police scenario is broadly we want to check legally held firearms don't get into the hands of terrorists, which part of that are you struggling to understand! as for the insults (kindly don't insult me calling me a philistine), - par for the course and sadly typical, I am deeply offended and will have to make a formal complaint against you! Get over it! I think my summation might be 'beneath contempt'. Edited October 16, 2014 by Kes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 (edited) I have never claimed there are any 'new laws' nor 'new powers of entry', but have claimed that the new 'initiative' is open to abuse as the HO have stated that the police will use their 'judgement' as to what reason they deem necessary for the 'unannounced' visit. Can anyone tell me what the outcome will be if I tell the rozzers it isn't convenient as I'm in the middle of my tea, but they will be more than welcome to come back in half an hour? Edit: predictive text. What abuse is it open to, Nothing has changed, the Police have always been able to use their judgement for an unannounced visit, all they are doing now is actually telling you they can use their judgement for a visit! Do you seriously believe EVERY historical home visit to check firearms was simply a routine, name out of a hat, luck of the draw situation? Nobody here can answer your question, perhaps you would care to email the question to your Firearms region and post their response on PW! Edited October 16, 2014 by Dekers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 Judging purely on the comments made here so far, I reckon the final sentence in the statement made by the NGO spokesman pretty much has it nailed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 You are all welcome to carry on your merry ways, I am rather bored of this now. I am the first to stand up to officialdom and have had to educate the Police over firearms/legislation/their interpretation/etc, on numerous occasions, the vast majority here have no experience of this, and despite copious quantities of willy waving will generally be the first to roll over like a puppy dog with a knock at the door! There is Nothing to get excited about here, as I have said, if anything, this should be viewed as a way of portraying the shooting community in a positive law abiding fashion, there is NO suggestion we are terrorists. 14 pages of bravado, not a single home visit report and absolutely no progress, a number here appear to have their heads way to far in the clouds! Have a nice day, and beware that knock on the door! I don't believe anyone has so far belittled or insulted your comments, but you can't seem to help doing so to others, but despite your apparent obsession with waving willy's I'll do my best to (ooohh, have just spotted David BASC has come online ) ignore it....oops! Anyhow, rest assured you're not the only one who has had to put the police right about one or two matters, and that I too, don't, and wont, be rolling over like a puppy dog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 I agree. The NGO fears it will lead to malicious reporting and generally erode trust between firearms users, the police and the public at a time when they actually need to be strengthened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 What abuse is it open to, Time will tell. Nothing has changed, So you keep saying, so why are some of our shooting organisations 'upset' about the comments made by ACPO? the Police have always been able to use their judgement for an unannounced visit, all they are doing now is actually telling you they can use their judgement for a visit! Again, so you keep saying (you're not the only one getting bored now.. ) but previously I had the option to say it wasn't convenient, now no one seems to be able to tell me whether I can still do so, including you. Do you seriously believe EVERY historical home visit to check firearms was simply a routine, name out of a hat, luck of the draw situation? Apart from the visit I mentioned I've never had a home visit that wasn't pre-arranged, so none of mine were a 'name out of a hat, luck of the draw situation' and I can't recall saying I believed they were. Nobody here can answer your question, perhaps you would care to email the question to your Firearms region and post their response on PW! Good suggestion; do you think I'll get a totally honest unbiased answer? I may ask my shooting organisation first if it's ok with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts