Jump to content

Legally held shotgun....OAP gets 2 years for having it loaded in his c


Sprackles
 Share

Recommended Posts

Whilst I wish to live in a law abiding country and agree there is never an excuse for breaking the law, I also wish to live in and place even greater value on living a caring society. If we are to use 88 year olds to set an example and act as a deterent to others than I'm afraid our judicial system has lost it's way.

 

as i mentioned earlier in this topic i wish to single no one out due to their age, young or old i just believe that anyone who has commited a crime like this, particularly with someone whos in a confused state that could have ended in many other ways should be held accountable, i also believe his dr should also be held accountable as i would like to think once contacted by the police when someone applies for their certificate that they hold at the very least a note on their files which would enable to follow these things up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Believe it or not the judge will have a fair bit more to go on than a 600 word article from a regional paper. I wouldn't be so convinced there is anything of concern here.

 

Yes probably the ‘HO Guidelines’ and a full set of ‘Judicial Blinkers’! :/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While not condoning what the old boys intentions may have been, I can understand someone at their wits end taking the law into their own hands out of desperation.

A recent case local to me consists of an old boy let down constantly by social services and left to his own devices to care full time for his wife who suffered severe dementia. He eventually smothered her in her sleep, and then took his own life. Tragic.

I find it quite ironic that any savings made by NHS services in these instances are always offset by the cost of the public enquiry which ensues as a result. It's wonderful life....while you're young and able.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another reason I posted was I looked up the latest legislation and a loaded shotgun did not come under the mandatory 5 year sentence. It's not a S5 weapon nor was he a prohibited person.
Are we missing something or is the old boy a victim of the legal system not knowing it's backside from it's elbow

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And there's me thinking that prosecutions were brought in the public interest.

Sounds like the poor old chap needs some form of support rather than a prison sentence.

 

Agree...maybe if the law did something about the kids making his life a misery in the first place, the old boy probably wouldn't be in the situation he is now.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but if you have in your possession a loaded gun irrespective of your age /mental state then you deserve some sort of punishment

We all must have heard the saying don't point it at anything you're not going to shoot

On another point old people are very wise or some people might say crafty just because someone is old it doesn't necessarily follow that they're nice only the good die young

One major point that has been overlooked is what the **** was a "confused" elderly man doing with guns loaded or otherwise

Edited by jonny thomas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst I agree that this old boy has committed offences and there is no excuse for them, surely it is not in the public interest to jail an 88 year old of previous good character. Surely it would have sufficed to suspend the sentence. He would automatically be a prohibited person within the firearms act with little likelihood of him ever owning another gun.

 

I'm with Ozzy on this one.........

 

Without 'Full facts' we cannot say for sure why, but knowing how some of the 'old timers' who have seen and done everything feel about the loss of faith in today's society I can see why he should possible feel it necc to equip/ face the situation in a way he knew.

Not condoning it but depending on the severity of his situation, many many have been driven to take extreme measures, either on themselves or others.

Mental torment should never be under estimated......

 

Edited due to poor spelling and to agree with the postings below from Marki

Edited by Jaymo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst I wish to live in a law abiding country and agree there is never an excuse for breaking the law, I also wish to live in and place even greater value on living a caring society. If we are to use 88 year olds to set an example and act as a deterent to others than I'm afraid our judicial system has lost it's way.

 

I completely agree. Irrespective of what could have been he actually didn't do anything with the load shotgun.

 

I have guns, knives, bows and whacking great big sticks nearby and have still failed to kill a child, thug or, god help me, a lion. Those that condemn based on what he MAY have done are, unfortunately, condoning the drama queen culture.Each and everyone of us have the tools to kill and, at times, the desire, doesn't mean we do it. I really do fail to see how he is a risk to society? How has this ruling benefited anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shameful situation with useless British justice making an *** of itself once again.

the poor old boy most prob felt that he had to protect himself from these youths as the police most prob failed miserably to sort them out . None of us know the full story but I know for a fact that if I felt I or my family were endanger of harm due to menacing youths and the police failed to due nothing I'd protect myself with anything I can get my hands on. Sod my certificate .
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst we all know the dangers of loaded fire arms I have to ask, at 88 and in a confused mental state where were the local FAO's, why had they not checked him and perhaps removed the guns sooner, my feelings go out to his wife,already dependant on her long time hubby for most support and now facing 2 years dependant on the state for support, god help her, and at 88 and a law abiding citizen up to this point, whats the chances of him surviving the two years, I think that there will be two lives irretrievably damaged by this action the five year rule was originally brought in as an attempt to control the ownership and use of illegal weapons but in cases like this the police can use this legislation on soft targets, a lot less work for them than catching real criminals doing armed robberies , muggings and assaults armed with these illegal arms. :no::no:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but if you have in your possession a loaded gun irrespective of your age /mental state then you deserve some sort of punishment

We all must have heard the saying don't point it at anything you're not going to shoot

On another point old people are very wise or some people might say crafty just because someone is old it doesn't necessarily follow that they're nice only the good die young

One major point that has been overlooked is what the **** was a "confused" elderly man doing with guns loaded or otherwise

 

I went clay shooting today so by your logic I am rightly screwed.

 

At what point did you decide that he was pointing it at anything?

 

Your unbiased knowledge of the elderly is breathtaking, I'm definitely keeping my eye on Grandad in the future.

Edited by Marki
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but if you have in your possession a loaded gun irrespective of your age /mental state then you deserve some sort of punishment

 

Unless you is from londin and have issues. Den you can claim you is being persecuted by da law n den dey will give community service innit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Furthermore, there was no evidence to say he had loaded the gun because of the torment from youngsters, he owned land and regularly shot vermin on that land, he had absent mindedly forgotten to unload the gun or place it in a slip when he popped out to the shops, why does everyone assume he had the gun, in his car , loaded to chase off his tormentors, I quote the relevant text from the court:"" He maintained that he did not intend to cause fear of violence, and prosecutors did not contest this.

Caroline Allison, mitigating, said that Delph had been “tormented” by young people who damaged his property and killed a kitten that he cared for.

She said he posed no threat to the public, had never been in trouble with the law before and the court heard he had the gun to shoot vermin on his land.

No explanation was put forward as to why he had the loaded weapon in his car.""

I think the explanation is very clear , He forgot it was there, he forgot to unload it , hes 88 for gods sake. Im 20 years younger and sometimes forget where I live. :yahoo::yahoo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Despite his protestations that he intended to harm no-one, he offered no explanation whatsoever as to why he was carrying a loaded gun in his car. If he forgot it was there or that it was loaded, what was it doing there in the first place? That is what landed him in prison. A more savvy, younger person would have come up with an excuse - true or not.

 

The inference is that he intended to use it to scare some youths who had caused problems. Total over reaction and he has been a fool.

 

That said, I honestly believe that the sentence should have been suspended. He has contributed to society and his wife is dependant on him. I really don't see the point in putting him in prison, unless it is a deterrent to others - in the same way that all knife offences should result in a prison sentence, but don't.

 

Without his guns, he hardly represents a danger to society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And there's me thinking that prosecutions were brought in the public interest.

Sounds like the poor old chap needs some form of support rather than a prison sentence.

Whilst he has broken the law, I have to agree with you here CharlieT, how can this be in the public interest? He clearly is not a threat to society without the guns, remove the guns, pass a suspended sentence and all is well IMO.

I happen to think questions should be asked when he applied for his last renewal, at best he was 83yrs old, but most likely older. What checks were carried out on him to see if he was still a suitable holder of either FAC or SGC??

In my opinion the law has failed this old mucker!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Furthermore, there was no evidence to say he had loaded the gun because of the torment from youngsters, he owned land and regularly shot vermin on that land, he had absent mindedly forgotten to unload the gun or place it in a slip when he popped out to the shops, why does everyone assume he had the gun, in his car , loaded to chase off his tormentors, I quote the relevant text from the court:"" He maintained that he did not intend to cause fear of violence, and prosecutors did not contest this.

Caroline Allison, mitigating, said that Delph had been tormented by young people who damaged his property and killed a kitten that he cared for.

She said he posed no threat to the public, had never been in trouble with the law before and the court heard he had the gun to shoot vermin on his land.

No explanation was put forward as to why he had the loaded weapon in his car.""

I think the explanation is very clear , He forgot it was there, he forgot to unload it , hes 88 for gods sake. Im 20 years younger and sometimes forget where I live. :yahoo::yahoo:

Whilst he has broken the law, I have to agree with you here CharlieT, how can this be in the public interest? He clearly is not a threat to society without the guns, remove the guns, pass a suspended sentence and all is well IMO.

I happen to think questions should be asked when he applied for his last renewal, at best he was 83yrs old, but most likely older. What checks were carried out on him to see if he was still a suitable holder of either FAC or SGC??

In my opinion the law has failed this old mucker!

I agree.

 

HE approached the police officer to report concerns of the nuisance youths. If he had any bad intentions why would he approach the police? The system has let this gentleman down, from the license renewal department, the police not protecting his family & property to society in general in not providing help & support to an elderly couple. WE should hang our heads in shame. :no:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This old fella is obviously no threat to anyone so its a shame that they locked him up,its also a great shame that hes lost a gun that no doubt will mean a lot to him sentimentally but he had no excuse for having it loaded in his car.Personally if i was the judge i wouldnt have jailed him,slap on the wrist, and off you go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...