Farmboy91 Posted March 6, 2020 Report Share Posted March 6, 2020 I did watch it back in February on fieldsports channel and I seem to remember it being discussed on here at the time but they done another video about the poor bloke controlling Canada's and being attacked by anti's with one shoving he's phone directly into he's face. The way he's been treated is disgusting, i know as firearm holders we have to be a cut above the rest and always keep your cool but how far would it have to have gone before he would have been deemed permitted to defend himself? No doubt if he'd been kicked to the ground and had he's gun taken that would have been he's fault to. Is there any past or present members of the constabulary on here who's delt with this sort of thing in the past? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sam triple Posted March 6, 2020 Report Share Posted March 6, 2020 Been following this too ,absolutely disgraceful Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
udderlyoffroad Posted March 6, 2020 Report Share Posted March 6, 2020 The video in question, for those who haven't seen it. He did well to maintain his demeanour Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmboy91 Posted March 6, 2020 Author Report Share Posted March 6, 2020 (edited) 19 minutes ago, udderlyoffroad said: The video in question, for those who haven't seen it. He did well to maintain his demeanour I was in a violent relationship for a long time, so I can take a smack and not retaliate pretty well but where do you draw the line? If you thought you was going to loose control of your firearm because of it surely you'd be expect to do whatever you could to stop them falling into unauthorised hands? 21 minutes ago, sam triple said: Been following this too ,absolutely disgraceful I'd like to see BASC making more of a big deal over this. Edited March 6, 2020 by Farmboy91 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mick miller Posted March 6, 2020 Report Share Posted March 6, 2020 Just now, Farmboy91 said: I'd like to see BASC making more of a big deal over this. They won't, they never will. Too 'controversial' for them to get involved with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmboy91 Posted March 6, 2020 Author Report Share Posted March 6, 2020 Just now, mick miller said: They won't, they never will. Too 'controversial' for them to get involved with. No, heaven forbid they make some noise for a worthy cause. Whether he's a member or not shouldn't make a difference either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manthing Posted March 7, 2020 Report Share Posted March 7, 2020 If you read the reports basc are involved and supporting him in all areas of the case where they can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saltings Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 looks like we need to be submissive to keep a licence and the antis know it shame we cant explain they should go home and stay there as most of them are well known to the police and walk away no charge for many different crimes I know mi rights guv Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mick miller Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 (edited) On 07/03/2020 at 10:46, manthing said: If you read the reports basc are involved and supporting him in all areas of the case where they can. Rather than being 'supportive' perhaps they could use the 'political route' to push for legislation to further protect? Isn't that the point of spending members money on entertaining MPs with free shoot days etc, if not to gain political influence and 'get things done'? Edited March 11, 2020 by mick miller Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manthing Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 2 minutes ago, mick miller said: Rather than being 'supportive' perhaps they could use the 'political route' to push for legislation to further protect? Isn't that the point of spending members money on entertaining MPs with free shoot days etc, if not to gain political influence and 'get things done'? So you think they should have hung this poor sod out in the rain and concentrated on the political side? It takes years to change laws etc, this bloke is receiving help now, legal and anything else they can help with. At the same time they are schmoozing the "movers and shakers" to get the best for us, or are trying to. I know basc have dropped themselves in it lately, but some folk will knock them for no reason. He pays his subs and is getting the benefits. Simples. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mick miller Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 (edited) Do both. They've had years of schmoozing to achieve something. In the words of my old boss 'be better, wow me'. Edited March 11, 2020 by mick miller Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manthing Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 They are doing both. They were involved in the licensing consultation and them the Dr's and police went back on the agreed terms. Your getting a bit tricksy mucka. Complained they don't schmooze enough and should do more, being less supportive, then want them to schmooze and support, which they do. Your not a big fan I'd guess.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 The laws on trespass and aggravated trespass are clear and enforceable, one under civil law the other under criminal law. So Mick, tell me exactly what laws should be changed? In the UK people have the right to demonstrate, ask and copper and they will tell you, but sadly, as we have often seen, some who oppose shooting will turn to all sorts of dirty ticks to try and get their way, and it is down to the police to keep the peace and arrest if they see fit and then charge if possible and then run to prosecution if the CPS will let it go through... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mick miller Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 (edited) Apply pressure, through those same political connections the organisation likes to boast about, to ensure that prosecutions happen. Then publicise those successes when they occur. Be the voice of shooting. Wow me. If we can get legislation through to specifically protect services animals or get legislation passed that allows those with strange ideas about food to have those beliefs enshrined as religious beliefs then, it can not be beyond the wit of man, to push for stricter laws when it comes to intimidation, threats to property and life directed at people going about a lawful activity. This isn't about lawful protest. Generic laws regarding trespass are just that. A bit woolly, open to interpretation. Specific laws are precise and make things clear in the public's mind. Crikey, those at the CA would likely be supportive of that too, so it wouldn't even be a solo exercise. Edited March 11, 2020 by mick miller Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
del.gue Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 No changes needed. The laws are already there. They just need enforcing. A police officer turns up at a job and has both sides trying to put a point across. He/she can only go with what they feel right at the time and best evidence of an offence. Sometimes they get it wrong. But no charges were brought in this case. Most bobbies do not deal with aggravated trespass regularly... or poaching... or anything under the ecclesiastical act... (ok im being flippant)... but i would not criticise the police in this incident. But if it carried on in the same way it is cause for a complaint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mick miller Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 I need to move away from these threads... maybe spend some time in craft & diy, it's lovely in there. My parting shot would be simply to say, I don't think its an exaggeration to think that these type of events are hate crimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rim Fire Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 (edited) Had to delete swearing in it didn't realise it was a video of antis headbutting a bystander at a hunt Edited March 12, 2020 by Rim Fire Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbie to this Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 55 minutes ago, Rim Fire said: Had to delete swearing in it didn't realise it was a video of antis headbutting a bystander at a hunt Was it on YouTube? what was it called? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 Sadly again, just an illustration of how things have gone south to further unbalance society? It seems now ok for the anti mob to parade around with faces covered intimidating others at will, knowing that as they have little to loose the victim usually has more besides a busted face? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbie to this Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 (edited) There's a petition on .gov to make it illegal to be in a public space wearing a face covering, may be worth a sign. Obviously it's not aimed at the antis though. Edited March 12, 2020 by Newbie to this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penelope Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 12 hours ago, mick miller said: I need to move away from these threads... maybe spend some time in craft & diy, it's lovely in there. My parting shot would be simply to say, I don't think its an exaggeration to think that these type of events are hate crimes. 👍 Spot on. But as the vast majority who shoot/hunt/fish are white middle aged men, that will never happen. We are fair game. A few weeks ago back during the season, my dad was acting as a stop alongside a road when cyclist went passed and called him a Nazi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lloyd90 Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 On 11/03/2020 at 01:22, Saltings said: looks like we need to be submissive to keep a licence and the antis know it shame we cant explain they should go home and stay there as most of them are well known to the police and walk away no charge for many different crimes I know mi rights guv I saw a video recently, a bunch of Hunt sabs refusing to leave land, spooking horses, getting in the face of women and a hunter pushing and shoving them. All of a sudden 3 hunt supporters also with their faces covered come over and shove the anti’s, and push them repeatedly towards the gate way. The anti’s are screaming that they’ll leave and how they have been assaulted and how awful it is. They don’t like it when their own tactics are used against them. The police have been absolutely awful at dealing with this issue. The more they fail to act the more people will resort to actions as above. I do not condone it, I would prefer the Police did it. Intentionally sabotaging perfectly legal activities should be a crime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mick miller Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 (edited) I believe that many officers actually sympathise with those wishing to sabotage hunt events or disrupt shooting. It's a social malaise, which needs specific, explicit laws to be prevented. I would not rely on generic laws on trespass to be sufficient, or precise enough not to allow an officer to get away with inaction on the issue. Edited March 12, 2020 by mick miller Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmboy91 Posted March 12, 2020 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 9 minutes ago, mick miller said: I believe that many officers actually sympathise with those wishing to sabotage hunt events or disrupt shooting. It's a social malaise, which needs specific, explicit laws to be prevented. I would not rely on generic laws on trespass to be sufficient, or precise enough not to allow an officer to get away with inaction on the issue. Probably a big part of it, along side with even if a copper is neutral to what's going on, he/she is to scared of any repercussions they might face by being seen to side with a hunt/shooter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 Remember that aggravated trespass is covered under criminal law. An offence is committed when a trespasser in the open air attempts to interfere with a lawful activity such as hunting or shooting for example. 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.