BIG BRUSH WITH THE LAW WHILST SHOOTING TODAY

[Dirty Harry]

Pavman, the point I was making was just because you have a certificate it does not mean you are safe with a gun.

If the police stop someone who is legaly in possession of it how do they know they can handle will handle it safely? Would you take that chance if you were the police officer?

I would probably be able to judge someones ability very quickly because I know what I am doing but for an officer who has little or no experience of firearms they may prefer to have control of the gun. Even though they are not firearms officers I bet they know what the trigger does and which end to avoid.

 

 

Elvis,

 

at the end of the day its the officers choice how they handle the situation and they have to justify it, the same as every other incident they deal with.

For them this incident is just one of many and they probably would not even give it a second thought. For you it is something that would stick in your mind and you may dwell on it for months.

At the end of the day does it really matter if they took hold of your guns while they looked into the matter? They were not confiscated and the matter was resolved quite quickly.

 

 

Harry

[willy1]

Just to show how much knowledge the local bobby has regarding shotguns, or firearms is shown by the events at my location where I live.I live in an area which has a community hall,and we had a local bobby visit to talk about home security,the conversation got round to firearms,and the bobby said that only police are allowed to have pump action or shotguns that fire more than three cartridges,I pointed out that was wrong and he said that's all you are allowed on a certificate,I again pointed out he was wrong as any shotgun capable of holding more than three is put on a firearms certificate,as I have both FAC and SGC,he made a 'phone call to someone else who told him I was correct.I certainly would not like to have been stopped by him if i'd been carrying a 5 shot shotgun!

[Lez325]

Just to show how much knowledge the local bobby has regarding shotguns, or firearms is shown by the events at my location where I live.I live in an area which has a community hall,and we had a local bobby visit to talk about home security,the conversation got round to firearms,and the bobby said that only police are allowed to have pump action or shotguns that fire more than three cartridges,I pointed out that was wrong and he said that's all you are allowed on a certificate,I again pointed out he was wrong as any shotgun capable of holding more than three is put on a firearms certificate,as I have both FAC and SGC,he made a 'phone call to someone else who told him I was correct.I certainly would not like to have been stopped by him if i'd been carrying a 5 shot shotgun!

 

 

if I were you I'd avoid him now at all costs - Police dont like to be corrected fella

 

Les

[willy1]

He was ok about it, and even asked to come out shooting pigeons with the shotgun,and to do some night lamping for rabbits and foxes.So,i'm keeping in there.

[Evil Elvis]

f you remember i posted on this some time back and many said they dont have written permission or maps,,, in such a case you are in smelly brown stuff up to your neck, had there been a real problem and you had no written permission would the land owner backed you up if it looked like it would cost hard cash???

 

I had my membership card with me which has my face on it and the name of the syndicate but not a lot else, so we are going to have one side with all the details on it and the other with a google map of the exact land and laminate it.

 

Harry Im not going to dwell on it as i was partially in the wrong...they didnt know that so i got away with it!!!!

[Mungler]

I can't believe this thread has gone this far - mind you it has meandered along the way.

 

Looking at this independantly; any sounds of shooting near a nursery warrants an investigation. The police will want to protect themselves - who would have wanted to be the copper that went down as the person who ignored or assumed the reports of shooting at Dunblane were legitimate sporting shooters?

 

There appears to be a whiff of awkwardness on all sides here. Indeed, reading this thread there appear to be a few who are itching to get into a "why did you stop me, I'm legal so **** off" confrontation with the police. Why, who knows eh?

 

If the police give me a tug I would be nothing but polite to them even if provoked. Why? Because they have the whip hand and anyone who can't work that one out is an idiot. You want to get into years of formal complaints, writing to your MP and trying to get the press interested - good luck, you have more free time than me.

[Raja Clavata]

I don't think statements like this are high on the list of, "How gain friends and influence people".

 

"I popped over there last week to walk off the effects of the injections from a couple of fillings (my dentist is situated just the over side of the main road up from the station). Happened to have the Urika with me and emptied it close by where you were, nearer the houses by the stream than the nursery though.

 

Heard a few police sirens shortly afterwards and assumed one of them was for me, none about as I crossed the stream but there were quite a few adults and kids about; most of whom with shocked faces. I just wished them all good day and carried on walking back to the motor."

 

Sometimes we don't do ourselves any favours.

 

Yeah,

I thought this one had run it's course by now.

 

Just spotted the above from Cranfield though ...

 

Cranfield,

Either I'm fundamentally missing something or you've made some incorrect, and perhaps rather gross, assumptions based on my words there. Mine was a brief summary of events from which I can't really see how the comment relating to gaining friends and influencing people is in any way justified. <insert ironic emoticon here> Care to elaborate further?

 

Raja

[Mr_Logic]

Come to this thread a bit late, but I've had a few run-ins over the years.

 

Most recent was when I was out with a mate on one of his shoots, the police happened by as they were after a 'white van'. Not us, but when they saw us with teh rifles we were duly questioned.

 

We both happened to have FACs with us (originals, although no requirement so to do). One of the coppers has a look at my FAC, checks who I am etc, and then says "Thanks for that, but I'll have to call an ARV anyway, just to check it's genuine." I asked him why... "I've never seen one, so it could be anything."

 

Oh..

 

I then informed me he could call me in and request a PNC check, which he didn't know either. 10 minutes later while the Berkshire coppers worked out how to access the firearms register ... All OK.

 

In fairness to the guys, they were very polite and courteous and I couldn't ask for more from them. What I could ask for is their Force training them in their jobs!

 

There is a massive amount of ignorance out there, and that's the problem.

 

Years ago the Police were summoned to me twice in two days. One of my shoots is a cricket ground, I was out zeroing the rimmy - lovely place as it's flat and at the time had a massive pile of mud as a backstop. A local took exception to this and stood in front of me and would not vanish. I produced all my permission but he didn't care, as he hated guns. I pointed out that though people walk their dogs etc, it's actually a piece of private land and that he was trespassing. Didn't take any of that so he called the police; an ARV was duly summoned.

 

I didn't have my ticket with me, but did have the permission letter. ARV was one male, one female officer. Bloke knew his stuff, checked the rifle with PNC and no problem, though he did say it would make life easier if I had my ticket with me. The woman, had she been on her own, would have been problematic - she queried whether I could shoot there, as the public had some form of access (ergo, in her eyes, it was 'public land'). Bloke set her straight.

 

Next day, I was out finishing the job, this time police called by the tennis players, who were a hundred or so yards behind me as I was shooting, quite safe with backstops etc. Anyway, I got the traffic boys that day. They treated me like absolute ****, with threats of arrest etc. I had all my paperwork that day, yet none of it counted as they didn't like shooters, clearly.

 

Right PITA, we shouldn't be treated like this...

[al4x]

I've voiced this with a PC aquaintance and his reply was you couldn't expect a beat bobby to know every piece of the law inside out as there is an absolute mountain of it which I can understand. All you can do is be friendly polite and educate them. Then next time they'll be better equipped when they go to a "firearms" incident.

All that said I took an SO19 officer clay shooting to introduce him to shotguns got the auto out and he asked if I was allowed one of them. That took me back for a bit

Edited August 14, 2009 by al4x

[Chard]

I can't believe this thread has gone this far - mind you it has meandered along the way.

 

Looking at this independantly; any sounds of shooting near a nursery warrants an investigation. The police will want to protect themselves - who would have wanted to be the copper that went down as the person who ignored or assumed the reports of shooting at Dunblane were legitimate sporting shooters?

 

There appears to be a whiff of awkwardness on all sides here. Indeed, reading this thread there appear to be a few who are itching to get into a "why did you stop me, I'm legal so **** off" confrontation with the police. Why, who knows eh?

 

If the police give me a tug I would be nothing but polite to them even if provoked. Why? Because they have the whip hand and anyone who can't work that one out is an idiot. You want to get into years of formal complaints, writing to your MP and trying to get the press interested - good luck, you have more free time than me.

 

There's a lot of good sense here.

 

As far as I'm concerned, there's no point in making a big stand with the Police over something like this. I've always had enough between my ears to know when someone has the whip hand, and in those circumstances, there's no point in doing anything other than going along with it and nodding your head in the right places.

 

People bore me to death quoting me their rights in tricky situations, but as far as I can see, it's one of those situations where rights don't mean a damn thing. We can all make rods for our backs by digging in over trivialities, whereas it would have been quicker and easier to bite the bullet.

[Windy]

Dont know about shotgun, but it needs a firearms trained officer to handle any firearm..... "normal" officers are not allowed to touch them .

 

This was explained to me by both a Sergeant of police and on a range when security of firearms came up !..

 

that is ********......AFO needed to certify a weapon is safe, but any Officer can handle if the need arises.

[Bagsy]

There's a lot of good sense here.

 

As far as I'm concerned, there's no point in making a big stand with the Police over something like this. I've always had enough between my ears to know when someone has the whip hand, and in those circumstances, there's no point in doing anything other than going along with it and nodding your head in the right places.

 

People bore me to death quoting me their rights in tricky situations, but as far as I can see, it's one of those situations where rights don't mean a damn thing. We can all make rods for our backs by digging in over trivialities, whereas it would have been quicker and easier to bite the bullet.

 

Amen to that

[Breastman]

There's a lot of good sense here.

 

As far as I'm concerned, there's no point in making a big stand with the Police over something like this. I've always had enough between my ears to know when someone has the whip hand, and in those circumstances, there's no point in doing anything other than going along with it and nodding your head in the right places.

 

People bore me to death quoting me their rights in tricky situations, but as far as I can see, it's one of those situations where rights don't mean a damn thing. We can all make rods for our backs by digging in over trivialities, whereas it would have been quicker and easier to bite the bullet.

 

 

Amen to that

 

Mark

Edited August 15, 2009 by Breastman

[Guest]

I think surely the problem here is that the police need to stop being less panicky and understand that Yes there are NORMAL people out there who have guns and yes they are allowed to possess them and to shoot with them so they need a better education in that respect.

 

I blame the training that they are given and their indoctrination in the training school that sporting shooters and hunters and in general anyone who has a gun must be bad, evil and committing a crime. It all has to do with making guns seem bad and turning public opinion on people who have guns with the ultimate aim of disarming the populace like in Mainland Europe or China.

[Evil Elvis]

We both happened to have FACs with us (originals, although no requirement so to do).

 

You obviously havent read this thread fully.................that was my belief however its is wrong!!! Yes you dont HAVE to carry it but if they ask you to produce it then they are perfectly entitled to confiscaste your guns until you produce your cert!!!!

 

SO my advice to to carry it or at least a copy!!!!

[Guest]

Yeah reminds me of the law that you are allowed to demostrate as long as you have a permit. An oxymoron if I ever heard one.

[Dirty Harry]

I think surely the problem here is that the police need to stop being less panicky and understand that Yes there are NORMAL people out there who have guns and yes they are allowed to possess them and to shoot with them so they need a better education in that respect.

 

I blame the training that they are given and their indoctrination in the training school that sporting shooters and hunters and in general anyone who has a gun must be bad, evil and committing a crime. It all has to do with making guns seem bad and turning public opinion on people who have guns with the ultimate aim of disarming the populace like in Mainland Europe or China.

 

normal people with legaly held firearms were responsible for the Dunblane and Hungerford massacres!

What experience do you speak from when you spout all this **** you are typing?

You sound like a very small man with a very large chip on your shoulder.

 

Harry

Edited August 15, 2009 by Dirty Harry

[Guest]

"normal people with legaly held firearms were responsible for the Dunblane and Hungerford massacres!"

 

The Dunblane guy wasn't normal, he was on psychotropic drugs and medication and had emotional issues. that guy should never have been issued a gun licence.

 

In fact I don't recollect any school or public gun massacres before the intervention of "wonderful medication" such as Ritalin or Prozac.

 

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/febru...tail_killer.htm

 

"What experience do you speak from when you spout all this **** you are typing?"

 

So you're telling me that guns in the Uk are seen in high esteem and hunting is seen as noble and popular?

Maybe if you lived in a small village where everybody shoots yes, but in the major city centres Brits are as much anti-gun as you can get.

[DaveK]

It really pains me to agree with Koz08 but neither Ryan or Hamilton were normal shooters. Both were nutters and known to the police to be nutters. Both had been complained about for wandering round their respective villages/towns with firearms, both had queries raised as to their fitness to own firearms and the rest we know.

 

Hamiltons activities especially were so well known that police officers dealing with him on a licensing basis had recommended that his certificate be revoked. And then of course there was the Masonic connection for conspiracy theorists.

 

Basically neither of them should have had firearms and the police knew it. Also for the conspiracy theorists, what's a few deaths if it supports the political agenda to disarm the public? (not necessarily my view, but a view that has been expressed in shooting circles). Collateral damage isn't something unique to the Septics.

 

But I draw the support line with our Mr 08 where he says that police are indoctrinated in the training school that sporting shooters and hunters and in general anyone who has a gun must be bad, evil and committing a crime.

 

What utter bull. You've been through police training then Koz and experienced this or are you just trolling again? I'm beginning to think you're actually schizophrenic. One minute you're lucid and presenting a reasoned argument and the next you're spouting absolute piffle.

[Guest]

No I admit I haven't been to police training but from what has been said on this thread by numerous shooters who have had some bad encounters with the law, it seems that normal police don't know the law when it comes to firearms and assume that every shooter is out to cause trouble.

 

Take Evil elvis, he was shooting lawfully on the piece of land with the granted permission and then police were called due to the fact that gunshots had been heard near the primary school. OK so police come and check the matter fair enough, but instead of dealing with the matter privately (not in the school car park) and failing to do a simple check which would have confirmed that elvis was the legal owner of the guns and then the police wouldn't have had to confiscate them.

 

I wonder if this matter would have been handed differently in countries with much more tolerant views on guns like Switzerland or America or would police just check who they were and let them get on with their shooting, not making a big fuss as if it was the bloody Taleban.

[mossy835]

I think surely the problem here is that the police need to stop being less panicky and understand that Yes there are NORMAL people out there who have guns and yes they are allowed to possess them and to shoot with them so they need a better education in that respect.

 

I blame the training that they are given and their indoctrination in the training school that sporting shooters and hunters and in general anyone who has a gun must be bad, evil and committing a crime. It all has to do with making guns seem bad and turning public opinion on people who have guns with the ultimate aim of disarming the populace like in Mainland Europe or China.

 

 

 

yes have a gun and you are a bad man,

[Mr_Logic]

Evil Elvis - I have read the thread pretty carefully mate. The simple fact is that you Are not obliged to have your FAC on you in any form when out shooting. You are right in that they can confiscate firearms if you cannot prove they are legally held, but the important distinction which needs to be maintained is that you have NOT committed an offence and therefore cannot be arrested.

 

The police officer who threatened you with arrest was bang out of line, simple as.

 

For all that I agree you should have the ticket on you but we need to keep the distinctions very clear so that anyone reading this knows. Otherwise ******* like this copper end up effectively making laws, and I won't tolerate that.

[starlight32]

Definately makes a difference living in a rural area though-In suffolk the local force are well accustomed to shooting and provided you are not making a nusiance then no problem- any incidents are dealt with very swiftly.

 

But what people must realize, you have to get away from the attitude of I am doing it becuse I am allowed to.......

 

For example, where I live I back out onto open fields-land for which I have permission over. Small field of peas behind me this year but I left it alone as although it was safe to shoot it too small an area to effectively shoot without causing disturbance to other people living nearby. The field was packed with birds everyday, absolutely packed.

 

Anyway- another inspiring individual decided he was going to shoot it and shoot it he did- Best day 170, and another three days to mention of over a hundred birds. However there was a down side-Police called out on three occasions, one of which happened to be attended by the Armed unit- The matters were resolved quite quickly though and on one of the occasions I went out the back over the fence to back him up a bit, but was dubfounded with his attitude.

 

When asked by the officers if he thought it was a good choice to be shooting so near houses his reply was;

 

'I have by certificate,lawful permission to be here and in writing and my shooting is not presenting any issues of safety to the general public-I am doing nothing wrong if they don't like it then stuff them'

 

You know what he was-

 

 

 

 

 

 

A retired police officer.........

[DaveK]

No I admit I haven't been to police training but from what has been said on this thread by numerous shooters who have had some bad encounters with the law, it seems that normal police don't know the law when it comes to firearms and assume that every shooter is out to cause trouble.

 

Take Evil elvis, he was shooting lawfully on the piece of land with the granted permission and then police were called due to the fact that gunshots had been heard near the primary school. OK so police come and check the matter fair enough, but instead of dealing with the matter privately (not in the school car park) and failing to do a simple check which would have confirmed that elvis was the legal owner of the guns and then the police wouldn't have had to confiscate them.

 

I wonder if this matter would have been handed differently in countries with much more tolerant views on guns like Switzerland or America or would police just check who they were and let them get on with their shooting, not making a big fuss as if it was the bloody Taleban.

 

So you don't know then? But a long winded way of saying it.

 

All you have to go on is hearsay and one sided versions of things. I know a man who's brothers friends sisters uncles grandads mothers girlfriends aunties dog has had a run in with the police for shooting legally.

 

Irrelevant how it would have been handled in other countries. We're not in other countries.

[willy1]

All you have to go on is hearsay and one sided versions of things. I know a man who's brothers friends sisters uncles grandads mothers girlfriends aunties dog has had a run in with the police for shooting legally.

 

 

That wouldn't be your dog,would it ,Dave?