Plymouth Shooting Enquiry

[Scully]

There is absolutely nothing preventing anyone from writing to Pollard and pointing out to him the errors by licensing which led to this outrage, and ensuring this was completely avoidable if the police had carried out their function in the correct manner. They could also point out that D&C chief Constable sits on the board ( as pointed out by Charlie T ) which in part forms licensing policy. 
The only thing stopping anyone from doing this is apathy and indifference, so we’re ****** basically. 

[Genghis]

31 minutes ago, Scully said:

There is absolutely nothing preventing anyone from writing to Pollard and pointing out to him the errors by licensing which led to this outrage, and ensuring this was completely avoidable if the police had carried out their function in the correct manner. They could also point out that D&C chief Constable sits on the board ( as pointed out by Charlie T ) which in part forms licensing policy. 
The only thing stopping anyone from doing this is apathy and indifference, so we’re ****** basically. 

He was being challenged on his Facebook page by multiple gun owners, his replies suggested that he thinks that a pump-action shotgun is the only gun capable of discharging ‘multiple rounds very quickly’.

 

He’s showing himself to be wilfully ignorant on the issue, I don’t think that any letter would change his mind.

 

Any gun owner who votes Labour in the next election is nuts.

[Scully]

6 minutes ago, Genghis said:

I don’t think that any letter would change his mind.

 

I have no doubt you’re right, but that’s never stopped me writing to politicians, HO ministers, MP’s, newspapers etc etc in the past, and it won’t stop me writing to him now. 
One of the biggest threats to shooting is apathy and indifference on the part of shooters to engage with those who threaten our way of life. 
If no one responds then there is no alternative view and the belief that ‘no one seems bothered’ anyhow. 
If you care then do something about it, if you don’t care, then do nothing. 
I’ll be writing to him and my own MP. 

Edited February 22, 2023 by Scully

[GHE]

59 minutes ago, Scully said:

I have no doubt you’re right, but that’s never stopped me writing to politicians, HO ministers, MP’s, newspapers etc etc in the past, and it won’t stop me writing to him now. 
One of the biggest threats to shooting is apathy and indifference on the part of shooters to engage with those who threaten our way of life. 
If no one responds then there is no alternative view and the belief that ‘no one seems bothered’ anyhow. 
If you care then do something about it, if you don’t care, then do nothing. 
I’ll be writing to him and my own MP. 

I agree, and kudos to you for your efforts.

 

BUT - will any politician take any notice of me, and ordinary guy who has no influence and who doesn't even live in their constituency?

The only people who they may listen to, in my opinion, is our shooting organisations, who need to contact the right people in the right way, on a regular basis.

There are about 650 members of parliament and they all matter, because we don't know who will be in power next time around. 

And then there are the newspapers, thousands of them https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_United_Kingdom

And TV channels, again a very long list https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_television_channels_in_the_United_Kingdom

And of course, plenty of radio stations too.

Just contacting all of these influencers just once - never mind on a regular basis - is a massive job, well beyond the resources of individuals. And of course contacts need to be developed, it's useless just sending press releases and general information, these never actually get read, let alone acted on. Only our shooting organisations are able to do this, but from their deafening silence I'm not sure that they do.

[Scully]

Just now, GHE said:

I agree, and kudos to you for your efforts.

 

BUT - will any politician take any notice of me, and ordinary guy who has no influence and who doesn't even live in their constituency?

The only people who they may listen to, in my opinion, is our shooting organisations, who need to contact the right people in the right way, on a regular basis.

There are about 650 members of parliament and they all matter, because we don't know who will be in power next time around. 

And then there are the newspapers, thousands of them https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_United_Kingdom

And TV channels, again a very long list https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_television_channels_in_the_United_Kingdom

And of course, plenty of radio stations too.

Just contacting all of these influencers just once - never mind on a regular basis - is a massive job, well beyond the resources of individuals. And of course contacts need to be developed, it's useless just sending press releases and general information, these never actually get read, let alone acted on. Only our shooting organisations are able to do this, but from their deafening silence I'm not sure that they do.

There are loads of reasons for trying to protect your way of life, and so far in response to me posting just a couple of reasons why we should do so, all we have are two posters who are just giving reasons why they shouldn’t! 🤷‍♂️

Is it me? 

[Walker570]

Well I disagree with you GHE.  I get regular updates via e mails from BASC as to what is going on and only this morning received a full response to the Coroners report etc regarding the complete mis management of Devon and Cornwall Police.  If their Chief Constable had any morals he/she would resign as would any head of a company in charge of a similar disaster.Someone other than the enquiring officer actually signed that certificate off and they should also go in my view. They are almost getting away with manslaughter. There is no grey area here, he was a known nutter BUT not one person in charge of this country seems to care a wick

Edited February 22, 2023 by Walker570

[old man]

47 minutes ago, Walker570 said:

Well I disagree with you GHE.  I get regular updates via e mails from BASC as to what is going on and only this morning received a full response to the Coroners report etc regarding the complete mis management of Devon and Cornwall Police.  If their Chief Constable had any morals he/she would resign as would any head of a company in charge of a similar disaster.Someone other than the enquiring officer actually signed that certificate off and they should also go in my view. They are almost getting away with manslaughter. There is no grey area here, he was a known nutter BUT not one person in charge of this country seems to care a wick

Absolutely correct sir!

[GHE]

1 hour ago, Scully said:

There are loads of reasons for trying to protect your way of life, and so far in response to me posting just a couple of reasons why we should do so, all we have are two posters who are just giving reasons why they shouldn’t! 🤷‍♂️

Is it me? 

No, you're not wrong. My point though is that our shooting organisations are the people who can - and should be - doing the heavy lifting. It's absolutely fine for individuals to do their bit, but it will be far less effective.

 

58 minutes ago, Walker570 said:

Well I disagree with you GHE.  I get regular updates via e mails from BASC as to what is going on and only this morning received a full response to the Coroners report etc regarding the complete mis management of Devon and Cornwall Police.  If their Chief Constable had any morals he/she would resign as would any head of a company in charge of a similar disaster.Someone other than the enquiring officer actually signed that certificate off and they should also go in my view. They are almost getting away with manslaughter. There is no grey area here, he was a known nutter BUT not one person in charge of this country seems to care a wick

It's good if BASC (and perhaps others) are doing their bit, but I haven't seen them on the TV, heard them on the radio or read their input in any newspapers, so query both how much they do and its effectiveness.

By contrast, the infamous Gun Control Network manage to get themselves seen and heard.

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, GHE said:

I haven't seen them on the TV, heard them on the radio or read their input in any newspapers, so query both how much they do and its effectiveness.

By contrast, the infamous Gun Control Network manage to get themselves seen and heard.

That may say more about the BBC/broadcasters than the BASC!

[Genghis]

1 hour ago, Scully said:

There are loads of reasons for trying to protect your way of life, and so far in response to me posting just a couple of reasons why we should do so, all we have are two posters who are just giving reasons why they shouldn’t! 🤷‍♂️

Is it me? 

I'm not saying that you shouldn't, and I wish you the best in doing so. My case is that Pollard as an individual is not interested in the facts of the matter and has been repeatedly dismissive of anyone who has presented shotgun/firearm facts to him. If someone is clearly and obviously anti, then that person is never going to budge. It's those who are ambivalent, those in the middle, that might be better appealing towards. 

[GHE]

11 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

That may say more about the BBC/broadcasters than the BASC!

Fair comment. But the point that I'm trying to make is that BASC has the resources to have an effective PR machine, with 143 paid members of staff. Their Patron is HRH The Princess Royal, has she been asked to make public statements? What about other high-profile people who are known to be shooters and who aren't afraid to speak their mind, Jeremy Clarkson for example?

The opportunities are definitely there!

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, Walker570 said:

Well I disagree with you GHE.  I get regular updates via e mails from BASC as to what is going on and only this morning received a full response to the Coroners report etc regarding the complete mis management of Devon and Cornwall Police. 

Ive read the BASC response , and while it sounds sensible and rightly points the finger at D and C licencing not implementing HO rules, they have no will to take it further, they just make noise.
Ill go as far as to say , they are offering a path to the firearms licencing and the HO to walk us down .
They will say there needs to be more training , more FEOs.
The police will say thats going to cost money, and thats going to put the cost of our licences up, and thats just for starters, Sec 2 will be removed, thats a virtual certainty.
This means more people will leave shooting, which suits the police and government fine.

BASC and the other orgs will make some squeaky noises, but certainly wont be dipping into their 'fighting funds' to do anything meaningful about it.

[mossy835]

16 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Ive read the BASC response , and while it sounds sensible and rightly points the finger at D and C licencing not implementing HO rules, they have no will to take it further, they just make noise.
Ill go as far as to say , they are offering a path to the firearms licencing and the HO to walk us down .
They will say there needs to be more training , more FEOs.
The police will say thats going to cost money, and thats going to put the cost of our licences up, and thats just for starters, Sec 2 will be removed, thats a virtual certainty.
This means more people will leave shooting, which suits the police and government fine.

BASC and the other orgs will make some squeaky noises, but certainly wont be dipping into their 'fighting funds' to do anything meaningful about it.

 

and it wont stop shootings.

[JohnfromUK]

7 minutes ago, GHE said:

Fair comment. But the point that I'm trying to make is that BASC has the resources to have an effective PR machine, with 143 paid members of staff. Their Patron is HRH The Princess Royal, has she been asked to make public statements? What about other high-profile people who are known to be shooters and who aren't afraid to speak their mind, Jeremy Clarkson for example?

The opportunities are definitely there!

The Royals would not publicly comment.  Their support for field sports in general and particularly shooting is very well known. 

Ian Botham has commented (very positively) on shooting and so has Johnny Scott (but he is getting old now). David Bellamy (though not a shooter) was very positive, but he was 'sent to Coventry' by the BBC (for his views on climate change I believe).  As for the many others, I don't know - but 'getting air time' may be a problem?  That's a guess not a known statement.  They may also be worried about attacks by the antis - it is a serious risk for people in the public eye who hold views that are unpopular with the extremist elements (LACS, ALF, Hunt Sabs, Animal Rights) and these extremist organisations all link up with the whole 'anarchistic underclass' - who have some very nasty members.

Big troubles can happen from upsetting these people - look at the troubles J.K. Rowling has had from expressing her views.

[GHE]

42 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Ive read the BASC response , and while it sounds sensible and rightly points the finger at D and C licencing not implementing HO rules, they have no will to take it further, they just make noise.

And this is what concerns me. It seems to me that they aren't prepared to make waves.

44 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

BASC and the other orgs will make some squeaky noises, but certainly wont be dipping into their 'fighting funds' to do anything meaningful about it.

Another concern. It seems to me that they are reluctant to either do or say anything effective. Maybe I'm wrong about this, but it's up to them to tell us what they actually do, not for us to guess.

 

29 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

The Royals would not publicly comment.  Their support for field sports in general and particularly shooting is very well known. 

 

Fair comment, but although Royals don't comment they do have a considerable level of influence over government (maybe they shouldn't but they do) and our current King in particular is known for making his views known to politicians. Has BASC actually asked the Princess Royal to use her influence?

 

32 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Ian Botham has commented (very positively) on shooting and so has Johnny Scott (but he is getting old now). David Bellamy (though not a shooter) was very positive, but he was 'sent to Coventry' by the BBC (for his views on climate change I believe).  As for the many others, I don't know - but 'getting air time' may be a problem?  That's a guess not a known statement.  They may also be worried about attacks by the antis - it is a serious risk for people in the public eye who hold views that are unpopular with the extremist elements (LACS, ALF, Hunt Sabs, Animal Rights) and these extremist organisations all link up with the whole 'anarchistic underclass' - who have some very nasty members.

Big troubles can happen from upsetting these people - look at the troubles J.K. Rowling has had from expressing her views.

There are always some public figures who are more than happy to express their views, has anyone actually asked them to?

The simple fact of the matter is that a pseudo "Government Department" of a shooting organisation is no use to man or beast in this situation.  What is needed here is a Pitbull, not a Poodle. We need people who shout loudly, not who whisper sweet nothings, we need people who attack, not who whimper quietly in the background.

[wymberley]

2 hours ago, Walker570 said:

Well I disagree with you GHE.  I get regular updates via e mails from BASC as to what is going on and only this morning received a full response to the Coroners report etc regarding the complete mis management of Devon and Cornwall Police.  If their Chief Constable had any morals he/she would resign as would any head of a company in charge of a similar disaster.Someone other than the enquiring officer actually signed that certificate off and they should also go in my view. They are almost getting away with manslaughter. There is no grey area here, he was a known nutter BUT not one person in charge of this country seems to care a wick

Doesn't the guy deserve a chance, he's only been in post for five minutes.

[Rewulf]

21 minutes ago, GHE said:

Another concern. It seems to me that they are reluctant to either do or say anything effective. Maybe I'm wrong about this, but it's up to them to tell us what they actually do, not for us to guess.

They 'express concern' 
What more do you want for your subs 

[oowee]

1 hour ago, wymberley said:

Doesn't the guy deserve a chance, he's only been in post for five minutes.

[Yellow Bear]

1 hour ago, wymberley said:

Doesn't the guy deserve a chance, he's only been in post for five minutes.

No  -  knowing that it was his men at fault  he tried to deflect blame on the system.

[Agriv8]

So Devon and Cornwall mess up and all us licensed gun owners will end up paying the price. It’s about time that police forces were audited the same way schools are - if they don’t improve the senior management and senior police team loose their jobs. 
 

We are expecting to follow the rules as licence holders but D and C don’t have to abide by their duties they didn’t- if they had they would’ve protected human life ! One of the corner stones of the police force 

rant mode off !

Agriv8

[Dave-G]

I can't help but wonder if there is an agenda to deliberately let some aspects slip past the net in order to ensure periodic incidents occur as a means of occasional drip-drip tightening down on licencees

[Penelope]

17 hours ago, JohnfromUK said:

That may say more about the BBC/broadcasters than the BASC!

Of course it does. They choose who to air.

[GHE]

52 minutes ago, Penelope said:

Of course it does. They choose who to air.

The reality is that the press publish whatever they think the public are interested in. The BBC are a bit different in that they don’t make their living from advertising revenue, but all other media are constantly trying to get more views, more public interaction, more attention and more advertising money.

So, they will publish news items that satisfy that criteria. They go for bold statements, controversy, drama and anything else that will interest their readers/viewers.

Many years ago I had a run-in with a large animal charity. They summonsed me to a meeting in Central London. I knew exactly how it was going to go and prepared for it, and rang the papers to get their attendance.

When I was told to leave the meeting I refused to go, and two dailies photographed me being carried out of the meeting by the security guards. In my interview, they asked me what I thought of the animal charity and my reply made ALL of the papers and our cause then appeared on every TV station and a load of radio stations? What did I say to cause this interest? “This lot claim to care about animal welfare but their real interest is in getting little old ladies into leaving them money, and the closest that they actually get to animals is when they eat their chicken sandwiches”.

Businesses and effective organisations know this, and they allocate the proper resources to getting both the quantity and the quality of publicity they need, usually by employing specialist agencies.

Do our shooting organisations employ skilled professionals to help fight our corner or do they simply have someone sitting behind a desk who sends out boring press releases that nobody bothers  to read?

I don’t know the answer to that one, but  it may be significant that there has, as always, been a deafening silence from the people who claim to represent us. . .

[ordnance]

On 22/02/2023 at 22:43, Dave-G said:

I can't help but wonder if there is an agenda to deliberately let some aspects slip past the net in order to ensure periodic incidents occur as a means of occasional drip-drip tightening down on licencees

Now we are going down the twilight zone route.

 

[discobob]

2 hours ago, ordnance said:

Now we are going down the twilight zone route.

 

Definitely - but perhaps certain people in power do think "Great - we can take advantage of this"....