Keeping gun in car while at work?

[casts_by_fly]

One aspect that no one has noted yet is your employer. While it may or may not be legal and may or may not be advisable, it also may or may not be against your employer's policy for dismissal. Some employers take a dim view on firearms in the workplace (misguided or not). I have considered it a few times for the same reason as the OP (clay ground nearer work, go straight after for more time, etc), but at the end of the day if HR or any higher management found out that there was a firearm in the parking lot, I would probably be dismissed on the spot. It would be worth checking your contract of employment and employee manual to see if it is prohibited.

 

thanks,

rick

[Davyo]

Have a chat with your employer also, my employer stated that under no circumstances am i bring any gun related items onto the premises.I wanted to lock the gun in the car & lock the fore end in my desk (was going roosting after work)

[Scully]

The simple fact is the post you mention is guidance and not the law. Also it's for in transit not for storage whilst at work. Exactly, it is only guidance, and not law and therefore open to interpretation. It doesn't mention anything about storage at work, in hotels, B&B or pubs, it merely states in transit. If the OP went shooting prior to going to work then the same guidance would exist and his firearm is temporarily in transit.

People have had their certificates revoked because their gun has been stolen from a car, I actually know one such person. He sought legal advice and was told to forget it and was lucky the police did not prosecute as well. The theft of a firearm is a serious matter. I know of a local farmer who was prosecuted following a similar incident, but then again, he left his compete gun unsecured in his 4x4, including ignition keys, while he went in his house for breakfast. I wonder why your friend wasn't prosecuted?

He was at a local pub and his car got stolen the reason he lost his certificate was the proximity to his cabinet and he should have secured it first. Like I say, it's open to interpretation but not illegal. These are the choices we make as responsible adults.

 

Just because countless people do it doesn't mean they legally can, Of course they can; otherwise it would be illegal. It isn't. it's never really an issue until your gun is stolen then believe my friend when he tells you it becomes a big issue.

 

With what you are saying its ok to leave your gun in the car all the time no need to use your cabinet. Eh? ​I never mentioned anything of the sort, and HO guidance states nothing of the kind, merely in transit, which as far as I'm aware means travelling between one place to another, which is exactly what the OP would be doing.

Wait till your gun gets stolen then try and argue it was secure as reasonably practicable when your cabinet is close by. My guns are as secure as is reasonably practicable in my cabinets; it doesn't however, mean they wont be stolen.

If all sensible precautions are taken then I don't see the problem. If people want to create problems where none exist then crack on.

[Scully]

I suppose if the gun was to get stolen and your cert revoked you could always appeal on the grounds that the PW massive said it was OK to leave it in the car

Well not really the PW 'massive' Mick, but rather HO guidance.

[malantone]

 

The simple fact is the post you mention is guidance and not the law. Also it's for in transit not for storage whilst at work. Exactly, it is only guidance, and not law and therefore open to interpretation. It doesn't mention anything about storage at work, in hotels, B&B or pubs, it merely states in transit. If the OP went shooting prior to going to work then the same guidance would exist and his firearm is temporarily in transit.

People have had their certificates revoked because their gun has been stolen from a car, I actually know one such person. He sought legal advice and was told to forget it and was lucky the police did not prosecute as well. The theft of a firearm is a serious matter. I know of a local farmer who was prosecuted following a similar incident, but then again, he left his compete gun unsecured in his 4x4, including ignition keys, while he went in his house for breakfast. I wonder why your friend wasn't prosecuted?

He was at a local pub and his car got stolen the reason he lost his certificate was the proximity to his cabinet and he should have secured it first. Like I say, it's open to interpretation but not illegal. These are the choices we make as responsible adults.

 

Just because countless people do it doesn't mean they legally can, Of course they can; otherwise it would be illegal. It isn't. it's never really an issue until your gun is stolen then believe my friend when he tells you it becomes a big issue.

 

With what you are saying its ok to leave your gun in the car all the time no need to use your cabinet. Eh? ​I never mentioned anything of the sort, and HO guidance states nothing of the kind, merely in transit, which as far as I'm aware means travelling between one place to another, which is exactly what the OP would be doing.

Wait till your gun gets stolen then try and argue it was secure as reasonably practicable when your cabinet is close by. My guns are as secure as is reasonably practicable in my cabinets; it doesn't however, mean they wont be stolen.

If all sensible precautions are taken then I don't see the problem. If people want to create problems where none exist then crack on.

 

 

+1

Well not really the PW 'massive' Mick, but rather HO guidance.

 

+1

[bostonmick]

Well not really the PW 'massive' Mick, but rather HO guidance.

As with all government guidance it would be down to the police how they interpreted reasonable precautions. And taking into account if you get revoked for whatever reason it is you as the cert holder that has to fight the case and pay for it.It comes down to getting to the shoot half an hour later or not getting to any for a few months or maybe never.And as has been suggested your employer may object or there maybe a anti gun person who could report a firearm on site.

[Scully]

As with all government guidance it would be down to the police how they interpreted reasonable precautions. Yes, it would, as has been stated.

And taking into account if you get revoked for whatever reason it is you as the cert holder that has to fight the case and pay for it. Obviously, unless your organisation thinks you have been dealt with unreasonably.

It comes down to getting to the shoot half an hour later or not getting to any for a few months or maybe never. Well as has been said, HO guidance is there for those who feel the need to have their guns in transit for whatever reason.

And as has been suggested your employer may object or there maybe a anti gun person who could report a firearm on site. Then perhaps it's best not to advertise the fact eh? I never did and no one was ever the wiser. I don't make a habit of telling all and sundry when I've got my guns in my vehicle, but maybe some do.

[robbiep]

My only contribution to this thread will be to say that replies #7 and #8 (by Scully and grrclark) say all that is needed to be said.

[Marki]

Us shooters really are our own worst enemies.

This constant 'what if...' criteria that firearms owners seem to think they have to live their lives by perplexes me.

 

I could not agree more.

[grrclark]

Us shooters really are our own worst enemies.

This constant 'what if...' criteria that firearms owners seem to think they have to live their lives by perplexes me.

 

I could not agree more.

 

Likewise, it genuinely baffles me that so many seem to live in perpetual fear of the FEO.

Edited September 17, 2015 by grrclark

[bostonmick]

 

As with all government guidance it would be down to the police how they interpreted reasonable precautions. Yes, it would, as has been stated.

And taking into account if you get revoked for whatever reason it is you as the cert holder that has to fight the case and pay for it. Obviously, unless your organisation thinks you have been dealt with unreasonably.

It comes down to getting to the shoot half an hour later or not getting to any for a few months or maybe never. Well as has been said, HO guidance is there for those who feel the need to have their guns in transit for whatever reason.

And as has been suggested your employer may object or there maybe a anti gun person who could report a firearm on site. Then perhaps it's best not to advertise the fact eh? I never did and no one was ever the wiser. I don't make a habit of telling all and sundry when I've got my guns in my vehicle, but maybe some do.

on your first point I don't know if you realise but a lot of cert holders are not members of any of the organisations,secondly it is for those who have the need to transport guns not left in a parked car for 8 or 9 hours as the guidance says whenever possible they should not be left in parked cars for long periods when not necessary,and just because you don't fancy the trip back home to get it well I doubt that would stand..also you don't have to list the items in your car for the casual thief to be interested cars do get stolen and broken into,even from private car parks.strangely enough a friend traded his car in for a new bmw about three weeks ago and when the transporter arrived to take all the p/x motors off to auction guess what his had been stolen from the dealers yard.it had only been there one day.

[timps]

 

The simple fact is the post you mention is guidance and not the law. Also it's for in transit not for storage whilst at work. Exactly, it is only guidance, and not law and therefore open to interpretation. It doesn't mention anything about storage at work, in hotels, B&B or pubs, it merely states in transit. If the OP went shooting prior to going to work then the same guidance would exist and his firearm is temporarily in transit.

People have had their certificates revoked because their gun has been stolen from a car, I actually know one such person. He sought legal advice and was told to forget it and was lucky the police did not prosecute as well. The theft of a firearm is a serious matter. I know of a local farmer who was prosecuted following a similar incident, but then again, he left his compete gun unsecured in his 4x4, including ignition keys, while he went in his house for breakfast. I wonder why your friend wasn't prosecuted?

He was at a local pub and his car got stolen the reason he lost his certificate was the proximity to his cabinet and he should have secured it first. Like I say, it's open to interpretation but not illegal. These are the choices we make as responsible adults.

 

Just because countless people do it doesn't mean they legally can, Of course they can; otherwise it would be illegal. It isn't. it's never really an issue until your gun is stolen then believe my friend when he tells you it becomes a big issue.

 

With what you are saying its ok to leave your gun in the car all the time no need to use your cabinet. Eh? ​I never mentioned anything of the sort, and HO guidance states nothing of the kind, merely in transit, which as far as I'm aware means travelling between one place to another, which is exactly what the OP would be doing.

Wait till your gun gets stolen then try and argue it was secure as reasonably practicable when your cabinet is close by. My guns are as secure as is reasonably practicable in my cabinets; it doesn't however, mean they wont be stolen.

If all sensible precautions are taken then I don't see the problem. If people want to create problems where none exist then crack on.

 

You are dragging the HO guidance kicking and screaming totally out of context, if you are at work it is no longer in transit, it is being stored while you are at work.

 

 

What you are suggesting is that I can throw my gun in the boot and as long as I am going shooting at some point in the future (next year even) my gun is temporally in transit. So I don't need my cabinet I can leave the car anywhere I like with the gun in the boot for however long I like as it's in transit.

 

 

The conditions on your licence that are law:

 

 

The firearms and ammunition [or shotguns] to which the certificate relates must at all times (except in the circumstances set out in paragraph (b) below) be stored securely so as to prevent, so far as is reasonably practicable, access to the firearms or ammunition by an unauthorised person.”

 

 

“Where a firearm or ammunition [or shotgun] to which the certificate relates is in use or the holder of the certificate has the firearm with him for the purpose of cleaning, repairing or testing it or for some other purpose connected with its use, transfer or sale, or the firearm or ammunition is in transit to or from a place in connection with its use or any such purpose, reasonable precautions must be taken for the safe custody of the firearm or the ammunition.

 

 

 

 

Now securely hasn't been defined in law, neither you, I nor the home office can say that a car boot is considered storing securely or not only court precedence can.

 

 

Also 'reasonable precautions' are open to the opinion of the judge. Before you quote the home office guidance it states " This document addresses what may be considered to fulfil these criteria in the more usual circumstances. It is not a statement of the law". So the judge is under no obligation to take them into account.

 

 

The stance the police take is Shotguns/Firearms should not be left in unattended vehicles unless there is no reasonable alternative, a 10 minute drive to your house is a reasonable alternative to secure the gun, a 3 hour drive then there is no reasonable alternative.

 

 

If the police decide that the boot isn't storing securely or by failing to go home and secure your gun you are not taking reasonable precautions they can and do revoked certificates, regardless of your opinion, the only way to get them back is legal pressure. If it goes to court and you lose then you have now been found guilty of an offence. Don't think BASC or the like will automatically jump to your aid and wave a magic wand, they assess each case individually.

 

 

Unless you have a law degree in firearms law, then stating that it's all perfectly legal nothing to worry about you have satisfied your certificate is totally misleading. Regardless of your opinion my mate had his revoked, tried to fight it and was told by someone who he paid and has a law degree that fighting it would provoke the police into charging him to defend their stance.

 

 

It's your call what you do but don't try to tell people it's all perfectly legal.

 

[Scully]

 

 

 

on your first point I don't know if you realise but a lot of cert holders are not members of any of the organisations,secondly it is for those who have the need to transport guns not left in a parked car for 8 or 9 hours as the guidance says whenever possible they should not be left in parked cars for long periods when not necessary,and just because you don't fancy the trip back home to get it well I doubt that would stand..also you don't have to list the items in your car for the casual thief to be interested cars do get stolen and broken into,even from private car parks.strangely enough a friend traded his car in for a new bmw about three weeks ago and when the transporter arrived to take all the p/x motors off to auction guess what his had been stolen from the dealers yard.it had only been there one day.

 

If shooters choose not to be members of of any organisation then that's their choice, as is leaving their firearms in their cars. Not being a member of any shooting organisation has no relevance to HO guidance.

You have totally ignored the fact that HO guidance clearly states it is perfectly acceptable to do so given certain criteria and added a time limit (8 or 9 hours) which appears nowhere in that guidance as far as I know.

[bostonmick]

If shooters choose not to be members of of any organisation then that's their choice, as is leaving their firearms in their cars. Not being a member of any shooting organisation has no relevance to HO guidance.

You have totally ignored the fact that HO guidance clearly states it is perfectly acceptable to do so given certain criteria and added a time limit (8 or 9 hours) which appears nowhere in that guidance as far as I know.

please read it again I never said ho guidance said anything about 8 or 9 hours just that it states should not be left for long periods,and I think most right minded people may think that the normal working day of such hours is a long period.

I have over the years been on other forums shooting related and will say this one has more threads about certs revoked than any other and in most of these cases the certs were not returned even when they were found not to be at fault or they have been going on for a long time and a lot of them for lesser things than not securing a gun.so while you may think that pushing a point is worth losing you guns even temporarily I definitely do not.

[Scully]

You are dragging the HO guidance kicking and screaming totally out of context, if you are at work it is no longer in transit, it is being stored while you are at work.Is it? Where does it say this in HO guidance? If so then surely that must equally apply to all those guns in our local hotel who are going shooting tomorrow who break down their guns as advised by HO guidance?

 

 

What you are suggesting is that I can throw my gun in the boot and as long as I am going shooting at some point in the future (next year even) my gun is temporally in transit. So I don't need my cabinet I can leave the car anywhere I like with the gun in the boot for however long I like as it's in transit. ​I haven't suggested anything of the sort, and the suggestion you make is ridiculous. Why would you leave your gun in your car if you're at home? The only time your gun would be in your car is if you take it with you when not at home i.e. in transit. If you leave it in your car while you're parked outside your home then it isn't in transit, or have I missed something?

 

 

The conditions on your licence that are law:

 

 

 

 

 

Now securely hasn't been defined in law, neither you, I nor the home office can say that a car boot is considered storing securely or not only court precedence can.I don't need to bother myself with what has or hasn't been defined in law; HO guidance has stated it is perfectly reasonable for me to leave my gun in my vehicle while in transit.

 

 

Also 'reasonable precautions' are open to the opinion of the judge. Yes, they are. Like I said, it's all open to interpretation, it isn't my responsibility to second guess what the judges opinion will be. Before you quote the home office guidance it states " This document addresses what may be considered to fulfil these criteria in the more usual circumstances. It is not a statement of the law". So the judge is under no obligation to take them into account. Under no obligation, I agree, but the judge will no doubt give his interpretation based on the evidence surrounding the circumstances.

 

 

The stance the police take is Shotguns/Firearms should not be left in unattended vehicles unless there is no reasonable alternative, a 10 minute drive to your house is a reasonable alternative to secure the gun, a 3 hour drive then there is no reasonable alternative. Again, like MIck, you've added a time limit of your own making to add weight to your argument. No time limit is mentioned in HO guidance, only that reasonable precautions should be taken to ensure the safety of said firearms. You are no more an expert on what constitutes reasonable precautions than I am.

 

 

If the police decide that the boot isn't storing securely or by failing to go home and secure your gun you are not taking reasonable precautions they can and do revoked certificates, I'm sure they do but again it all depends on interpretation, as you obviously agree with as you yourself have just used that phrase again 'reasonable precautions' regardless of your opinion, the only way to get them back is legal pressure. If it goes to court and you lose then you have now been found guilty of an offence.

Don't think BASC or the like will automatically jump to your aid and wave a magic wand, they assess each case individually. I have never claimed they would, but without checking i think I said something along the lines of 'if they think you have been treated unreasonably'.

 

 

Unless you have a law degree in firearms law, then stating that it's all perfectly legal nothing to worry about you have satisfied your certificate is totally misleading. It is you who are misleading by the skewing of what I have said. To keep your gun in your vehicle while away from home, or in transit if you prefer, IS PERFECTLY LEGAL if you adhere to HO guidance. I have never stated there is 'nothing to worry about' but if you adhere to HO guidance then you have satisfied the terms and conditions of your certificates. Regardless of your opinion my mate had his revoked, tried to fight it and was told by someone who he paid and has a law degree that fighting it would provoke the police into charging him to defend their stance. Then that was his choice.

 

 

It's your call what you do but don't try to tell people it's all perfectly legal. ​For the last time it is NOT illegal. If you don't want to do it then don't do it, but stop telling people it is illegal; it is not. Even the conditions you have included provide scope for the use of firearms in transit and are widely open to interpretation with terms such as 'or any such purpose' and 'other purpose connected with its use'. It does NOT state anywhere that it is illegal. If it is illegal the police are grossly lax in their duties around here.

please read it again I never said ho guidance said anything about 8 or 9 hours just that it states should not be left for long periods,and I think most right minded people may think that the normal working day of such hours is a long period.

I have over the years been on other forums shooting related and will say this one has more threads about certs revoked than any other and in most of these cases the certs were not returned even when they were found not to be at fault or they have been going on for a long time and a lot of them for lesser things than not securing a gun.so while you may think that pushing a point is worth losing you guns even temporarily I definitely do not.

That isn't even worth my time replying to MIck.

Edited September 17, 2015 by Scully

[bostonmick]

That isn't even worth my time replying to MIck.

Well i will leave you with this one.When it comes to interpretation of guidelines you are king.And to the op I would say do as you wish i dont suppose anything will go wrong and even if it did just tell the powers that be that Scully told you it was all good and I am sure they will back off.If not you can always come back on Here for further advice.

Edited September 17, 2015 by bostonmick

[Scully]

Well i will leave you with this one.When it comes to interpretation of guidelines you are king.And to the op I would say do as you wish idontsuppose anything will go wrong and even if it did just tell the powers that be that Scully told you it was all good and I am sure they will back off.If not you can always come back on Here for further advice.

To quote one of my heroes, Sir Terry Wogan...'Is it me'?

Edited September 17, 2015 by Scully

[timps]

Scully Can I ask where you studied law? Then as you put it for the last time you are in no position to state it is perfectly legal. I have never stated that it is bang to rights illegal in any of my posts, I have stated people have lost their certificates never to get them back by following your legal advice though.

 

Each case is individual and Home Office guidance does not cover every eventuality, nor does following it to your interpretation guarantee you will not face prosecution as you claim, even the guidance itself states that.

 

If you also read the home office Guide on Firearms Licensing Law it clearly states:-

 

19.2. The Firearms Rules 1998 (SI 1941) (as amended) prescribe safe keeping conditions on firearm and shotgun certificates. They create two levels of security:

(a) Paragraph (a) provides for the firearms and ammunition to which the certificate relates to be stored securely at all times except as provided in paragraph (b), so as to prevent, as far as is reasonably practicable, access by an unauthorised person; and

 

(b) Paragraph (b) lists the circumstances in which the security requirements of paragraph (a) do not apply:

 

i. when the firearms or ammunition are in use;

ii. when certificate holders have the firearm with them for cleaning, repairing or testing it or in connection with its use, transfer or sale; or

iii. for some other purpose connected with its use, transfer or sale; or

iv. the firearm or ammunition is in transit in connection with any of these purposes.

 

So if we are only sticking to the guidelines you like so much you are only covered in transit in connection with its use, transfer or sale. Going to work is not in connection with its use transfer or sale, staying at a hotel to break up your journey to the shoot is, you wouldn't be at the hotel unless you were shooting so it is in connection with its use, but you go to work most days regardless of shooting.

 

So at work it is no longer in transit in connection with any of these purposes and it has to be stored securely at all times. Like I said securely as yet has no definition in law, you might not feel the need to bother yourself with what has or hasn't been defined in law but that is what you will get prosecuted with and that's what is illegal. You are probably going to argue that it doesn't say you cannot do a shift at work on route or going to work all day is still in transit in connection with its use as at some point you intend to shoot.

 

But here is the thing, you can still be prosecuted and convicted. The requirements to keep firearms securely are statutory, there are no statutory provisions on how this duty should be discharged so your personal interpretation of the guidelines will not protect you.

 

If your gun is stolen while you are at work they will look at the case individually, they may decide to revoke, prosecute or do nothing, but they can prosecute you for not keeping your gun stored securely if they see fit. Whether the judge agrees with them is a different matter but remember you are close to your police approved secure storage and didn't use it when you could have and left your gun all day in an unattended car. Do you really think that is going to end well for the OP.

Edited September 17, 2015 by timps

[Scully]

Scully Can I ask where you studied law? Of course you can ask, but I'm afraid sarcasm doesn't impress me; save it for Mick; he likes that sort of thing. See post 41. Then as you put it for the last time you are in no position to state it is perfectly legal. This really is the last time. It is NOT illegal to have your firearms in your car while in transit. The OP has stated his shooting ground is 10 miles from his house making a round trip of 20 if he wants to return either for his guns before use or to take them back home after use while at work. Whether this is in breach of HO guidelines covering firearms in transit or not is open for interpretation and is basically the point neither you nor me can prove one way or the other. I have never stated that it is bang to rights illegal in any of my posts,​Incorrect; read back through your posts and you will find you have stated 'that doesn't make it legal', which, unless I'm mistaken must mean you regard it as illegal. Unless of course you are now going to suggest there are differing degrees of legality. A little bit of sarcasm for you there; thought you might like it. I have stated people have lost their certificates never to get them back by following your legal advice though. I've never denied this.

 

Each case is individual and Home Office guidance does not cover every eventuality, nor does following it to your interpretation guarantee you will not face prosecution as you claim, even the guidance itself states that.There you go again!....I have never claimed my interpretation of HO guidelines is a guarantee against prosecution! The guidance is open to interpretation as you say, and which I have been saying from the beginning!

 

If you also read the home office Guide on Firearms Licensing Law it clearly states:-

 

19.2. The Firearms Rules 1998 (SI 1941) (as amended) prescribe safe keeping conditions on firearm and shotgun certificates. They create two levels of security:

(a) Paragraph (a) provides for the firearms and ammunition to which the certificate relates to be stored securely at all times except as provided in paragraph (b), so as to prevent, as far as is reasonably practicable, access by an unauthorised person; and

So If the OP has his gun stored securely in his car and an integral part of its mechanism on his person (as advised in HO guidelines) hasn't he then taken precautions as is 'reasonably practicable' to prevent it's theft while at work? All we're arguing about basically is if the authorities would regard that as in transit. You don't regard it as such, I do.

 

(b) Paragraph (b) lists the circumstances in which the security requirements of paragraph (a) do not apply:

 

i. when the firearms or ammunition are in use;

ii. when certificate holders have the firearm with them for cleaning, repairing or testing it or in connection with its use, transfer or sale; or

iii. for some other purpose connected with its use, transfer or sale; or

iv. the firearm or ammunition is in transit in connection with any of these purposes.

 

So if we are only sticking to the guidelines you like so much you are only covered in transit in connection with its use, transfer or sale. Going to work is not in connection with its use transfer or sale, This is only your opinion and your interpretation of HO guidelines. There are many shooters who take their shotguns with them when working away so they can do a spot of shooting at local grounds in their free time, myself included. staying at a hotel to break up your journey to the shoot is, you wouldn't be at the hotel unless you were shooting ​Not necessarily so, as I've just pointed out. so it is in connection with its use, but you go to work most days regardless of shooting.

 

So at work it is no longer in transit in connection with any of these purposes ​Again, only in your opinion. and it has to be stored securely at all times. Like I said securely as yet has no definition in law, you might not feel the need to bother yourself with what has or hasn't been defined in law So, again, it all depends on interpretation. but that is what you will get prosecuted with and that's what is illegal.​ You are probably going to argue that it doesn't say you cannot do a shift at work on route or going to work all day is still in transit in connection with its use as at some point you intend to shoot.Again, it doesn't mention anything about shifts, work, hotels, et al, as I've already mentioned.

 

But here is the thing, you can still be prosecuted and convicted. The requirements to keep firearms securely are statutory, there are no statutory provisions on how this duty should be discharged so your personal interpretation of the guidelines will not protect you.​ I have never claimed they would, all I have stated is that if you adhere to HO guidelines you should be ok; how those guidelines are interpreted depends on the circumstances.

 

If your gun is stolen while you are at work they will look at the case individually, they may decide to revoke, prosecute or do nothing, but they can prosecute you for not keeping your gun stored securely if they see fit. Whether the judge agrees with them is a different matter but remember you are close to your police approved secure storage and didn't use it when you could have and left your gun all day in an unattended car. Do you really think that is going to end well for the OP. Again, it depends entirely on interpretation. By your last comment you seem to be making the assumption the gun (missing an integral part of its mechanism remember, as per HO guidelines) will be stolen. I'm assuming it wont be; I'm also assuming no one but him will be aware of its presence. The OP has a choice; either do it or don't. I'm assuming he is an adult and can take responsibility for his own actions.

You cannot say for definite that what he is doing is illegal, and until someone is prosecuted for doing so, we'll never know, and the entire matter is open to opinion, interpretation and conjecture.

I'm of the opinion we shooters need to stop living in fear of those who regulate us. Surely as adults we can apply common sense to our own actions rather than constantly have to ask 'is it ok to walk through town with my gun?' or 'can I clean my guns in my own back garden?' or 'can I take my gun on public transport?' or 'can I take my gun on my bicycle?' etc etc.

​There are many people doing as the OP has asked on a regular basis, if he had just done it and not asked no one would be any the wiser. Get on and live your lives and stop bloody worrying.

Edited September 18, 2015 by Scully

[rimfire4969]

Now I like Scully and I like Timps but who is right.

 

In the words of Harry Enfield "There is only one way to find out FIGHT"

[mossberg-operator]

The FEO is right....

[grrclark]

It is a good and fairly typical PW argument.

 

I don't believe that Scully has promoted anything that is irresponsible or would encourage irresponsible behaviour, he just said there is nothing proscriptive in the guidance that would preclude storing a gun in the car when you are at work providing you take reasonable measures to secure the gun. Whether that is interpreted as being in transit or for some other purpose is absolutely subjective.

 

Should the gun be stolen on it's own, or with the car, then of course there will be challenging questions and rightly so, but the person storing the gun has to be content in whether they think they have been reasonable and responsible or not and of course be prepared to fight their corner should they be challenged on their decision.

 

There is a risk in every action that we take, do we drive the car and risk being in an RTA? do we risk leaving the gun secured in the car or not? etc. Some are risk averse and will choose not to, whilst other assess the risk differently and choose to do something different.

 

I believe that Scully's point, and it is one that I also agree with, is that there does seem to be a number of firearm holders who are disproportionately risk averse due to the fear of sanction by their firearm licensing unit, they have an unreasonable fear.

 

There have been threads where people recommend not cleaning their gun in their own private garden for fear of onlookers becoming offended and how that might result in the car with the blue disco lights on the roof putting in an appearance. That is disproportionately risk averse and unreasonably fearful.

 

Occasionally if I am working on a clients site and I am going shooting afterwards I will leave the gun in the boot in the breakdown case, the case is locked and then the case is secured to one of the lashing eyes with a cable lock. The car is in an underground public car park that is monitored by CCTV. The fore end I pop into my laptop bag and I head into the office.

 

The gun is secured with 4 different locks (boot, cable lock and case locks) in a car with an alarm in a monitored car park and the gun is kept out of sight. The gun is effectively handicapped by removing the fore end. I think that is absolutely reasonable. The rozzers may disagree, but in the hugely unlikely event that the gun was stolen then I am prepared to have that argument or if my FEO is reading this then give me a call to discuss.

 

It would be a 70 mile round trip home and about 2-3 hours of commuting at rush hour which would mean I miss most of the competition.

 

The alternative is that I have to miss a regular competition and socialising with friends for fear of speculative what ifs and maybes.

[Scully]

Now I like Scully and I like Timps but who is right.

 

In the words of Harry Enfield "There is only one way to find out FIGHT"

If you like Harry Enfield, try his book 'A Year in my life' or something like that. My daughter bought me it as a birthday present; the man is insanely crazy. Laugh out loud in parts.

[rimfire4969]

If you like Harry Enfield, try his book 'A Year in my life' or something like that. My daughter bought me it as a birthday present; the man is insanely crazy. Laugh out loud in parts.

 

I will give that a go thanks.

[stubear]

Part of the problem with the guidance is just that - Its guidance only, and in the event that you gun is stolen you're going to have your ticket yanked and have to justify to the powers that be that you werent negligent in order to get it back.

 

Its not illegal to leave your gun in your car as long as you take "reasonably practical" precautions to ensure it doesnt get nicked. So chaining it to the car, taking the forestock with you, leaving it covered up etc are all things you should do. TBH if you're planning to regularly leave it in the car I'd be tempted to bolt a breakdown safe in there and use that!

 

Arguably taking it to work to avoid having to pick it up after work is unnecessary if you are a reasonable driving time away from home, but arguably if you take reasonable precautions you're not doing anything wrong. Arguably is the key word though!

 

I wouldnt speak to the FEO about it because you hear stories about people getting licences revoked for all sorts of reasons and frankly I wouldnt want to give them any reason to pull mine, valid or otherwise! I'd ask BASC for their views and see what their firearms team have to say about it for sure, and if its going to be a regular thing then I'd look into a breakdown cabinet in the car.

 

Ultimately its your licence and your risk, so as long as you dont do anything illegal, have taken guidance from a shooting organisation and feel confident in arguing your case with a judge should the worst happen then I guess thats all you can do.