Strange sentencing

[Jaymo]

1 hour ago, Rewulf said:

Thats what I would have done , then informed your FEO that a house move was imminent , paperwork could have been transferred over to new county , or the cert could have been fast tracked or dated forward.

Either way , waiting 7 weeks before expiry is a poor excuse, in Notts you would be housing your guns with an RFD.

They require 3 months minimum for renewals.

Agree and same for Norfolk

[Newbie to this]

4 hours ago, Downforce said:

What is good time?

Someone I know submitted their FAC renewal in excess of 7 weeks before expiry having just moved (not wanting to submit an application to the wrong police force) and after 6 weeks was told that it was unlikely they would get the renewal in time for the expiry 

 

8 weeks is the minimum, as per the guidance. If renewals are in with 8 weeks or more left, then the certs are extended by 8 weeks in the event that the police do not get them renewed in time, the police will write a letter stating such in the event. It's all in the guidance. I'd still get them in way before 8 weeks though.

3 hours ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

In the example posted by downforce I would have notified my current licensing authority and the new licensing authority in good time and sought their guidance. They really can be extremely helpful.

This ^^^

3 hours ago, henry d said:

No, ask the local gun shop to take them in while it gets sorted, fairly cheap to do. 

Then this ^^^ if all else fails.

A mate only got his in with 6 weeks left, he was told by the MET to get them stored with an RFD, I think he only had about a week to get it sorted.

[Downforce]

1 hour ago, Newbie to this said:

8 weeks is the minimum, as per the guidance. If renewals are in with 8 weeks or more left, then the certs are extended by 8 weeks in the event that the police do not get them renewed in time, the police will write a letter stating such in the event. It's all in the guidance. I'd still get them in way before 8 weeks though.

This ^^^

Then this ^^^ if all else fails.

A mate only got his in with 6 weeks left, he was told by the MET to get them stored with an RFD, I think he only had about a week to get it sorted.

No argument here

But same question again - for whatever reason someone hasn’t been negligent but ends up with something that was legit and now isn’t. 
I get everyone can debate the details of how that point should not be the case.
 

Should the criminal justice system recognise the difference in circumstances and prosecute a different offence (maybe something along the lines of failure to comply with the FAC conditions) or should everyone always be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law irrespective of the circumstances of how they got there and specifically regards the circumstances of use (carrying a loaded S5 in public whilst dealing drugs* vs not doing all those things that everyone should do as above and transgressing from being fully licensed and legal to unlicensed) ?

* I’m not saying that was the OP example  just using that as an illustration 

IMHO the precedent is already part of the law

e.g. ABH vs. GBH get sentenced differently depending upon the intent and severity of the attack/injury

Edited December 29, 2022 by Downforce

[Newbie to this]

1 hour ago, Downforce said:

No argument here

But same question again - for whatever reason someone hasn’t been negligent but ends up with something that was legit and now isn’t. 
I get everyone can debate the details of how that point should not be the case.
 

Should the criminal justice system recognise the difference in circumstances and prosecute a different offence (maybe something along the lines of failure to comply with the FAC conditions) or should everyone always be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law irrespective of the circumstances of how they got there and specifically regards the circumstances of use (carrying a loaded S5 in public whilst dealing drugs* vs not doing all those things that everyone should do as above and transgressing from being fully licensed and legal to unlicensed) ?

* I’m not saying that was the OP example  just using that as an illustration 

IMHO the precedent is already part of the law ABH vs. GBH get sentenced differently 

But it's a moot point, once you're certs expire, the law states that you are now in possession of illegally held firearms.

It's down to you as a cert holder to not get in that position, by

A - getting your renewal in in good time

B - if A is not met, lodging your guns at an RFD.

There are other options as well if A is not met, (and the hope that your cert get turned around quick) but RFD is the easiest.

Edited December 29, 2022 by Newbie to this

[Downforce]

Just now, Newbie to this said:

But it's a mooe point, once you're certs expire, the law states that you are now in possession of illegally held firearms.

It's down to you as a cert holder to not get in that position, by

A - getting your renewal in in good time

B - if A is not met, lodging your guns at an RFD.

Yes I agree with these principles 

But that’s not my question and I’m struggling to understand why everyone seems to want to avoid answering the question and debate why it shouldn’t be the case because the admin should be done better

The question I’m asking is if there’s two people one that’s a drug dealer using a never licensed illegally imported S5 9mm auto pistol to underwrite their Illegal drug dealing activities and the other is a lawful owner that doesn’t do their admin properly for whatever reason do they both deserve 5 years, no questions no difference?

Would anyone care to comment? I’ve given my opinion! 

Should it be the same offences and sentencing or should it be different (and by should I mean the opinion of you the public not the legal sentencing guidelines given to judges)??

[Downforce]

PS I’m probably checking out now so don’t be offended if I don’t reply I will be reading replies 

D

[Rewulf]

52 minutes ago, Downforce said:

The question I’m asking is if there’s two people one that’s a drug dealer using a never licensed illegally imported S5 9mm auto pistol to underwrite their Illegal drug dealing activities and the other is a lawful owner that doesn’t do their admin properly for whatever reason do they both deserve 5 years, no questions no difference?

I thought I'd covered this. 

It's about intent, both examples in the OP  had the intent to conceal a sec 5 gun. 

Someone who forgets to renew is clearly not of the same ilk. 

[Gordon R]

Not sure how someone not getting their cert in on time is being compared to two criminals.

In answer to the odd question comparing an admin error to a drug dealer - if neither held a valid certificate, it is down to them and they deserve to be dealt with severely.

If you have put your renewal in on time and the Police can't process it in time, it's up to them to issue a section 7 permit, never mind lodging guns at an RFD - at your expense.

[semi-auto]

Whilst on the subject of sentencing, I watched Traffic Cops last night and laughed out aloud. I know I have banged on before about the 'joke' sentences handed down, but the one last night took the biscuit. A man in his late teens, crossed to the oncoming traffic and collided head-on with a 40 ton HGV. His car was a write off and the front of the HGV looked in a similar state. The driver of the HGV, fortunately was not injured but the teen was carted off to hospital. A blood test showed he was six times over the drug driver limit. He attended a voluntary interview and said he could not remember anything. When he came to court he was banned from driving for a year and fined £153. Some deterrent! You really couldn't make it up! I'd be inclined to give the magistrate/judge a drugs wipe.

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, semi-auto said:

Whilst on the subject of sentencing, I watched Traffic Cops last night and laughed out aloud.

You watch some of these programs and it beggars belief what they get.

Cars full of stolen gear , drugs , drug driving and high speed chases through 30mph areas , usually ending with multiple items of property damage....Repeat offenders ,no licence or insurance...Given 6 months inside if theyre unlucky and banned from driving for a couple of years , like not having a licence ever bothered them ?

More often than not , no prison at all, where is the deterrent ?

[Newbie to this]

1 minute ago, Rewulf said:

You watch some of these programs and it beggars belief what they get.

Cars full of stolen gear , drugs , drug driving and high speed chases through 30mph areas , usually ending with multiple items of property damage....Repeat offenders ,no licence or insurance...Given 6 months inside if theyre unlucky and banned from driving for a couple of years , like not having a licence ever bothered them ?

More often than not , no prison at all, where is the deterrent ?

It's all part of broken Britain, our 'justice' system is broken beyond belief. Almost as broken as our political system.

We've got some calling for no prison time for non-violent offences, it's madness.

[old'un]

Considering the punishment I often wonder if it would not be cheaper to not bother with any road tax, MOT, insurance.

[old man]

3 hours ago, semi-auto said:

Whilst on the subject of sentencing, I watched Traffic Cops last night and laughed out aloud. I know I have banged on before about the 'joke' sentences handed down, but the one last night took the biscuit. A man in his late teens, crossed to the oncoming traffic and collided head-on with a 40 ton HGV. His car was a write off and the front of the HGV looked in a similar state. The driver of the HGV, fortunately was not injured but the teen was carted off to hospital. A blood test showed he was six times over the drug driver limit. He attended a voluntary interview and said he could not remember anything. When he came to court he was banned from driving for a year and fined £153. Some deterrent! You really couldn't make it up! I'd be inclined to give the magistrate/judge a drugs wipe.

You just have to ask WT£ is going on behind the scenes?