Shooting incident in Plymouth

[TK421]

8 minutes ago, Bobba said:

Reported in The Telegraph today is that Davison, who had autism, ADHD, and depression, went to Mount Tamar School, a special needs school for children who cannot be dealt with in mainstream education. Jonathan Williams, one of his teachers there, said that “he would have had an education health care (EHC) plan, which should have seen him monitored by the authorities until the age of 25. Someone simply didn’t do their homework on the firearms certificate issue, he warned. The so-called multi-agency approach to safeguarding appears to have failed.”

In such circumstances it does seem to raise a question on the quality of background checks in his SGC grant procedures in the first instance. Perhaps it was one of those cases where the police received no reply to their GP referral so issued the SGC by default. Only time will tell, if at all.

How the **** did he get a license, I had to explain my SP30 from 20 years ago and having no road tax on my bike when I was 16 over 30 years ago, which was frowned upon on my application. Absolutely without doubt a monumental cock up by the force down there if this is true.

[Newbie to this]

16 minutes ago, Bobba said:

Reported in The Telegraph today is that Davison, who had autism, ADHD, and depression, went to Mount Tamar School, a special needs school for children who cannot be dealt with in mainstream education. Jonathan Williams, one of his teachers there, said that “he would have had an education health care (EHC) plan, which should have seen him monitored by the authorities until the age of 25. Someone simply didn’t do their homework on the firearms certificate issue, he warned. The so-called multi-agency approach to safeguarding appears to have failed.”

In such circumstances it does seem to raise a question on the quality of background checks in his SGC grant procedures in the first instance. Perhaps it was one of those cases where the police received no reply to their GP referral so issued the SGC by default. Only time will tell, if at all.

 

5 minutes ago, TK421 said:

How the **** did he get a license, I had to explain my SP30 from 20 years ago and having no road tax on my bike when I was 16 over 30 years ago, which was frowned upon on my application. Absolutely without doubt a monumental cock up by the force down there if this is true.

Yep, if true, someone royally messed up (to put it lightly) and now we will all pay the price for their mistake, not to mention those that have already paid with their lives.

[Gordon R]

Whilst I can't imagine that the Police action has been without fault, I have to agree with a previous poster. Someone in the Firearms Team has made a decision to give him back the guns. Subsequent events make a mockery of that decision, but I share the sentiment about the officer concerned.

Families of the dead have suffered and will continue to do so, but someone has to live with this decision. I can only think that he / she was acting within the policy set by the Chief Constable. Each force seems to operate in isolation, with no common policy on manning, interpreting Home Office guidelines or liaison with other agencies.

I hope that he / she will get a fair hearing, rather than a witch hunt.

[TK421]

6 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

Whilst I can't imagine that the Police action has been without fault, I have to agree with a previous poster. Someone in the Firearms Team has made a decision to give him back the guns. Subsequent events make a mockery of that decision, but I share the sentiment about the officer concerned.

Families of the dead have suffered and will continue to do so, but someone has to live with this decision. I can only think that he / she was acting within the policy set by the Chief Constable. Each force seems to operate in isolation, with no common policy on manning, interpreting Home Office guidelines or liaison with other agencies.

I hope that he / she will get a fair hearing, rather than a witch hunt.

And this goes back to the point I made earlier about consistency across the board with how applications/renewals are processed and or reviewed. There is obviously, for who knows why, a lot being left to interpretation by the forces and also the GP’s. 

[MARSH GUN]

18 hours ago, Dave-G said:

I read (in the SUN I think) that he wasn't charged.

I thought i had heard  the term "Alleged".  I think the details of this, and the police involvement and subsequent actions will come out in the Enquiry in due course.

 

[Vince Green]

36 minutes ago, TK421 said:

How the **** did he get a license, I had to explain my SP30 from 20 years ago and having no road tax on my bike when I was 16 over 30 years ago, which was frowned upon on my application. Absolutely without doubt a monumental cock up by the force down there if this is true.

I got a rollicking for not telling them when I got divorced

Even though it was completely amicable, very happy event from my point of view

[TK421]

Just now, Vince Green said:

I got a rollicking for not telling them when I got divorced

Even though it was completely amicable, very happy event from my point of view

Wow, well that’s one that I got under the radar with them because I’m a divorcee as well. 
mad isn’t it.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

10 minutes ago, TK421 said:

Wow, well that’s one that I got under the radar with them because I’m a divorcee as well. 
mad isn’t it.

But that is down to an individual FEO's interpretation and should have been challenged in Vince's case.

[Walker570]

This needs a massive response from the shooting community and BASC, CRPSA et al. because they are already trying to cover it all up when it is blatantly obviouse it is one serious ,major cock up by Devon and Cornwall Firearms Licensing Department and they should hang their heads in shame.    There was so much evidence that this man was totally unsuitable to be in possession of any firearm it is beyond comprehension that anyone would sign him off as a responsible person.

BUT  like all the other such cases I am betting they will cover it all up.

[Dave-G]

4 minutes ago, Walker570 said:

This needs a massive response from the shooting community and BASC, CRPSA et al. because they are already trying to cover it all up when it is blatantly obviouse it is one serious ,major cock up by Devon and Cornwall Firearms Licensing Department and they should hang their heads in shame.    There was so much evidence that this man was totally unsuitable to be in possession of any firearm it is beyond comprehension that anyone would sign him off as a responsible person.

BUT  like all the other such cases I am betting they will cover it all up.

Great to see an ex - or serving officer not making excuses for the shameful ballsup. 

[old man]

On 13/08/2021 at 20:56, Dave-G said:

In other contexts I could agree with you but on this issue: HE used HIS gun as a weapon to inflict harm and death.

 

On 13/08/2021 at 21:15, welsh1 said:

Nope they are weapons they were designed for a specific purpose to inflict harm.

Nope, sorry to disagree they are just guns, to make them into weapons IMHO comes in the intent from him to use them as such?

No more response from me on this very sad happening.

[Walker570]

8 minutes ago, Dave-G said:

Great to see an ex - or serving officer not making excuses for the shameful ballsup. 

TWO ex serving police officers...my wife is seething and about to write directly to the Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall as a retired Police Officer.

Every gun owner in the country should do the same and also forward that letter to the Daily Telegraph which is about the only paper to give any inches to the shooting community.

[TK421]

34 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

But that is down to an individual FEO's interpretation and should have been challenged in Vince's case.

Oh I agree entirely, but therein is the problem ‘interpretation’. Inconsistencies across all forces shows there is a failing at some level as it’s left to interpretation by all that are involved. Nothing needs changing with regards to the application criteria/guidelines in my opinion, just continuity and consistency with the process in rolling the guidelines and authorisation for the issues of the license.
Nothing should ever be left to interpretation only fact and following the guidelines. If there is any ability to ‘interpret’ anything with regards to a firearms application you (the authorising force/GP) either 1, don’t understand what your roll is within the application process or 2, the guidelines need changing to remove it.

My feeling is it’s numeral uno 

[Dougy]

 

If they extended the referee for cert to 5 years i would have no problem, you could also have it so only another FAC holder can be the referee. Also stipulate that they have a card stamped X amount of times at clay ground to show its not just a short lived wanna be shooter dream they had. 

I had been asked some time ago but turned them down due to not knowing them well enough and it was a Sat night and they had too much to drink for my liking. 

 

 

[screamingdead]

22 minutes ago, Dougy said:

 

If they extended the referee for cert to 5 years i would have no problem, you could also have it so only another FAC holder can be the referee. Also stipulate that they have a card stamped X amount of times at clay ground to show its not just a short lived wanna be shooter dream they had. 

I had been asked some time ago but turned them down due to not knowing them well enough and it was a Sat night and they had too much to drink for my liking. 

 

 

Thanks for that suggestion Dougy, so I would be refused my FAC renewal because I shoot over my own land and don't know any other FAC holders to act as a referee. 

[wymberley]

1 hour ago, TK421 said:

Oh I agree entirely, but therein is the problem ‘interpretation’. Inconsistencies across all forces shows there is a failing at some level as it’s left to interpretation by all that are involved. Nothing needs changing with regards to the application criteria/guidelines in my opinion, just continuity and consistency with the process in rolling the guidelines and authorisation for the issues of the license.
Nothing should ever be left to interpretation only fact and following the guidelines. If there is any ability to ‘interpret’ anything with regards to a firearms application you (the authorising force/GP) either 1, don’t understand what your roll is within the application process or 2, the guidelines need changing to remove it.

My feeling is it’s numeral uno 

Yep, all I would change is the bit about following the guidelines. This should be 'instructions'. Guidelines and interpretation should play no part here. Should it be deemed necessary to deviate from said instructions then the Chief Constable should inform the Home Secretary in writing why it was necessary with a copy to the Police Commissioner.

If there was any justice, in this incident the Chief Constable and the Home secretary should have reported to the Labour Exchange first thing this morning clutching their respective P45

[HantsRob]

1 hour ago, old man said:

 

Nope, sorry to disagree they are just guns, to make them into weapons IMHO comes in the intent from him to use them as such?

Legally it is a weapon. A shotgun is a long barrelled firearm. Its creation is to shoot metal pellets with the created purpose to "kill". This may be used for clays only, but by its very creation it is a weapon. Same as a slingshot, bow and arrow, or catapult.

What you are thinking of is when something becomes an offensive weapon. You're thinking S1(4) of the prevention of crime act:

"Section 1(4) defines an offensive weapon as “any article made or adapted for use for causing injury to the person or intended by the person having it with him for such use by him or by some other person”.

Edited August 16, 2021 by HantsRob

[Vince Green]

It's just not possible to be 100% right what ever they try to do

We should reflect on how infrequently these things happen. But happen they will.

The system works pretty well most of the time. It's never going to work every time

[Dougy]

32 minutes ago, screamingdead said:

Thanks for that suggestion Dougy, so I would be refused my FAC renewal because I shoot over my own land and don't know any other FAC holders to act as a referee. 

Possibly not, 

 

Its not law, so dont worry im not qualified to push any law changes before the week end. 

There are allot of opinions regarding possible changes we chuck in, something WILL be done to try and prevent a recurrence of this awful incident.

Whatever changes are made its going to upset some, but they will be made by someone who has the intention to reduce the risk drastically. 

 

[welsh1]

1 hour ago, old man said:

 

Nope, sorry to disagree they are just guns, to make them into weapons IMHO comes in the intent from him to use them as such?

No more response from me on this very sad happening.

nope their sole purpose when they were designed was to cause injury , like it or not they are most definatly weapons.

Just because people call them nice names like sporting rife etc does not change the fact of what they were invented for and that is to cause injury.

 

[wymberley]

A weapon is defined as an instrument of offence or defence.

[bottletopbill]

All shooting organisations should be email the Home Secretary about this incident and work together with shooters to try and explain we are deeply upset about these wasted lives.

And why was he allowed a shotgun  surely some one must have had some concerns about his comments and links.  

Sorry to the Families of those who have lost there lives.

[Vince Green]

Things like this happen daily in US and don't get reported far beyond the local area

tragic as it is our police do a pretty good job of assessing MOST people. We haven't had a shooting like this in ten years

and remember the most dangerous psycho's are often the most convincing liars. People with deep seated problems can be very good at hiding them. I'm sure D&C police didn't know the extent of his problems

Edited August 17, 2021 by Vince Green

[dodgyrog]

On 16/08/2021 at 08:55, steve s×s said:

Yeh that was Rowhule moat another nut job probably on dope 🤪

No that was Northumbria Police. Durham gave guns back to a person who went on to shoot people. Durham got investigated for that and got seriously criticized! They also had two FEO's who were selling guns illegally! They really are a star act. Currently they take up to a year to renew a FAC etc. and blame Covid despite the fact they were dreadful before then. They've had 3 FEO's go earlier than expected but reasons not disclosed! I'll be interested to see what they do to monitor shooters online activity.

[Graham M]

Been reading through this and I just feel numb. Lost my semi-auto fullbore rifles in 89 and then my pistols in 96.

Now what?

I have been talking today to one of my referees who I have know since he was a lad, and is now a deputy head teacher at a local school. He told me that he wasn't contacted by the police at all at my last two FAC renewals. Surely the whole point of the referee system was to get information from people who know you. If this fundamental condition isn't being adhered to what else is being left out, and who will the police blame when their mistakes are uncovered.