Gordon R Posted February 13, 2016 Report Share Posted February 13, 2016 (edited) Browning425 - you seem to take any opportunity to have a pop. I will leave the trolling to you. There is a village somewhere missing their idiot - please return. I feel it's another attempt at trolling at best or at worst pure stupidity on your part. I believe the fine would affect your SGC - you do not. If you don't pay the fine, you can end up in prison. I presume you think that wouldn't affect your SGC either. I will ask GMP Firearms lad next time I see him. Shaun - I agree. Edited February 13, 2016 by Gordon R Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougy Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 Just turn up in your jimjams and teddy's slippers, I'm sure you will be sent home,,,,, or maybe somewhere. I have been picked for 4 line ups, and 1 jury service (that was not needed no idea why) part of life, well as a British citizen anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVB Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 Considering that PW comprises of right of centre/Daily Mail reading/UKippers I would have thought there would be a majority of support for justice and the jury system. Surprised about the number of dissenters on here. Each to their own. I have never been called and as I am a mere employee wouldn't be affected by loss of earnings anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodp Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 Considering that PW comprises of right of centre/Daily Mail reading/UKippers I would have thought there would be a majority of support for justice and the jury system. Surprised about the number of dissenters on here. Each to their own. I have never been called and as I am a mere employee wouldn't be affected by loss of earnings anyway. The country is run on the efforts of "mere employees", don't knock yourself down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjimmer Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 If they compensated folk properly for their lost earnings I doubt it would be an issue. No-one else in the court room will be getting buttons for turning up. Especially the judge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbird Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 as I am a mere employee wouldn't be affected by loss of earnings anyway. Employers don't have to continue to pay staff for jury service (but many do), and I'm guessing in your case it's contractual. In many cases though it isn't. I was called up when I was a student but I was on a placement at the time and told them that, and they immediately crossed me off the list. Not heard anything since. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walshie Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 The fact of the matter is whether you consider it your duty or not, it is. If you were unlucky enough to be in the dock for something (obviously innocently) would you want 12 people who were going to do the job to the best of their ability or would you want 12 people who weren't going to do the job properly because they were all huffy about having to be there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mel b3 Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 i did jury service about ten years ago , it lasted for two weeks and we got sworn in on a trial but never actually got to do anything before being discharged , i was paid expenses from the court and then at a later date i was also given my full wages (god knows how or why) , i spent most of the two weeks shooting with orders from the judge not to speak to anyone regarding the trial , it all worked out rather well . i had been called on a previous occasion that proved difficult for me due to work , they were quite happy to let me duck out that time and my name just went back into the hat. i saw doing it as my duty as a resident of the united kingdom , had i actually got to sit on the trial of someone , i would have tried as hard to do the right thing as i would hope that they would try if id been in the dock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbird Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 If you were unlucky enough to be in the dock for something (obviously innocently) would you want 12 people who were going to do the job to the best of their ability or would you want 12 people who weren't going to do the job properly because they were all huffy about having to be there? I believe the answer to that is obvious, but HMG could start with compensating people for their actual loss of earnings. It wouldn't be hard to do and would be a flea-bite in comparison with other things our money is wasted on. That way you might be more likely to get people who were not disgruntled. I was chatting to a barrister the other day and he was saying that the jury system is already unrepresentative, containing as it does a fair whack of people who are only there by dint of not being able to get out of it. Not a great start really. In reality I think most reasonable people would actually do it to the best of their ability, but ability isn't tested as far as I know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happypig Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 Could join the police they don't get called up Police officers are now able to serve on a jury Could join the police they don't get called up Police officers are now able to serve on a jury Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncan Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 I got called up 20 years ago ,but put in a sick note as I had a broken leg and on crutches , never heard anything since . Tell me Gents is there an upper age limit to jury service Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twistedsanity Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 Write a letter informing them you are at present studying "jury nullification" and are looking forward to educating the rest of the jury on the subject when you meet them, I have heard tales of jury selections where they actually asked if the potential jurors had knowledge of this and refused them on that basis. If the jury decides there is no case to answer they have the power to dismiss the case entirely and over rule the judges decisions, something that is never publicised and frowned upon by those who rule over us as it messes with their "superiority" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 The fact of the matter is whether you consider it your duty or not, it is. If you were unlucky enough to be in the dock for something (obviously innocently) would you want 12 people who were going to do the job to the best of their ability or would you want 12 people who weren't going to do the job properly because they were all huffy about having to be there? Like I said; let the judge decide. He wanted the job, is trained to do it and gets paid well to do it. Personally I'd do everything I could to get out of it. If I couldn't get out of it, then well...we'll see what happens if and when I'm selected. I suppose my sciatica could flair up again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walshie Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 I see what you're saying, but that is denying the person in the dock the right to be judged by his peers instead of some out of date fuddy-duddy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browning 425 clay hunter Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 I believe the fine would affect your SGC - you do not. If you don't pay the fine, you can end up in prison. I presume you think that wouldn't affect your SGC either. I will ask GMP Firearms lad next time I see him. . Not for one second have I said going to prison wouldn't effect you sgc, I said paying the fine. But it was nice of you to presume, unfortunately incorrectly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 I see what you're saying, but that is denying the person in the dock the right to be judged by his peers instead of some out of date fuddy-duddy. Fair enough, but the suggestion wasn't initially mine, and it has, and does in fact take place. Trial and sentence by a jury less trial has and does take place. I'm not denying anyone the right to be judged by their peers, just not by me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 Browning 4.25 - your problem is you don't think things through. It must be nice in simplistic world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 I believe the fine would affect your SGC - you do not. If you don't pay the fine, you can end up in prison. I presume you think that wouldn't affect your SGC either. I will ask GMP Firearms lad next time I see him. The fine and or prison sentance reflects the serious nature of the offence. It is,after all, contempt of court and, as such, treated severly and I for one, would not be suprised to find that someone found guilty of such an offence was not considered a fit and proper person to hold a SGC/FAC. At least I hope so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 Police officers are now able to serve on a jury Police officers are now able to serve on a jury Serving? I knew retired were now eligible but not serving? Is t there something about lawyers/cps staff not being able too? Does t apply to me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sitsinhedges Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 The fine and or prison sentance reflects the serious nature of the offence. It is,after all, contempt of court and, as such, treated severly and I for one, would not be suprised to find that someone found guilty of such an offence was not considered a fit and proper person to hold a SGC/FAC. At least I hope so. It isn't serious at all though is it? The derisory sum paid reflects how important the powers that be think the job is. Reward Jurors so they at the very least aren't out of pocket and attitudes will change instead of treating them as press ganged stooges. What I find particularly sickening on this thread and many others like it is how many shooters would gladly have other shooters lose their certificates purely because they have a different point of view. Folk like that really are the lowest form of human. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyska Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 It isn't serious at all though is it? The derisory sum paid reflects how important the powers that be think the job is. Reward Jurors so they at the very least aren't out of pocket and attitudes will change instead of treating them as press ganged stooges. What I find particularly sickening on this thread and many others like it is how many shooters would gladly have other shooters lose their certificates purely because they have a different point of view. Folk like that really are the lowest form of human. But it's not a point of view, it's the law! You are obliged as a part of our democracy to be part of the jury system. You are paid expenses, not your wage, if anything goes by the hourly rate it appears the plumber I used last week he'll be claiming £4500 a day for jury service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sitsinhedges Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 But it's not a point of view, it's the law! You are obliged as a part of our democracy to be part of the jury system. You are paid expenses, not your wage, if anything goes by the hourly rate it appears the plumber I used last week he'll be claiming £4500 a day for jury service. It's your point of view that folk who are more interested in providing for their families should be penalised should either lose money or lose their gun licences because they don't want to be press ganged into weeks of lost earnings. That will create hardship for a lot of folk and sounds more like a dictatorship than a democracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winnie&bezza Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 What if your rent/mortgage is higher than what you'd get on service? If you've got a family to support and your the only worker how is it feasible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 It's your point of view that folk who are more interested in providing for their families should be penalised should either lose money or lose their gun licences because they don't want to be press ganged into weeks of lost earnings. That will create hardship for a lot of folk and sounds more like a dictatorship than a democracy. Like it or not democracy and freedom come at a price. The hingepin of our democracy is our legal system which is the envy of the world. Try being charged with an offence in Thailand or some 3rd rate African country and see where you would rather be. The small price we as individuals pay for our system is giving a few days of our life to serve as a juror. The importance of this fact is reflected in the scale of fine for this offence. It is a level 3 offence (out of a scale of 5) and is contempt of court. Such blatant disregard and contempt for the law hardly deems anyone so convicted a fit and proper to hold a FAC/SGC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sitsinhedges Posted February 14, 2016 Report Share Posted February 14, 2016 Like it or not democracy and freedom come at a price. The hingepin of our democracy is our legal system which is the envy of the world. Try being charged with an offence in Thailand or some 3rd rate African country and see where you would rather be. The small price we as individuals pay for our system is giving a few days of our life to serve as a juror. The importance of this fact is reflected in the scale of fine for this offence. It is a level 3 offence (out of a scale of 5) and is contempt of court. Such blatant disregard and contempt for the law hardly deems anyone so convicted a fit and proper to hold a FAC/SGC Utter ********. Gun licences are there purely to keep guns out of the hands of those who might pose a danger to the general public. They were not for the purposes of threatening and coercing members of the public or as a means of punishment by revocation. Why not take their driving licences too or their children. 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.