Cybershooters Forum Index Cybershooters
The internet's leading source of information for shooters
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

IPCC recommends firearm licensing changes

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Cybershooters Forum Index -> Legal Proceedings
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
cybershooters
Site Admin


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 4589

PostPosted: Mon Jun 17, 2013 5:57 pm    Post subject: IPCC recommends firearm licensing changes Reply with quote

Article.

IPCC investigation report

Hard to disagree with really, how on Earth did this guy keep his certificates? He was clearly a person of intemperate habits (which is one of the grounds for revocation) not to mention his history of domestic violence.

And I agree, there should be clearer guidance on domestic violence in relation to possession of firearms.
_________________
Steve.

Only three things are certain: death, taxes and stupid gun laws.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
JonathanL
Certified Gun Nut


Joined: 02 Jul 2006
Posts: 1013
Location: North East

PostPosted: Mon Jun 17, 2013 7:24 pm    Post subject: Re: IPCC recommends firearm licensing changes Reply with quote

cybershooters wrote:
Article.

IPCC investigation report

Hard to disagree with really, how on Earth did this guy keep his certificates? He was clearly a person of intemperate habits (which is one of the grounds for revocation) not to mention his history of domestic violence.

And I agree, there should be clearer guidance on domestic violence in relation to possession of firearms.


If the contents of the report are correct, then they had a perfect opportunity to prosecute him because he lied on the the form in saying that he didn't drink. Clearly he did!

It's going to be very difficult to devise comprehensive guidance on how to judge incidents of domestic violence that will serve a useful purpose as regards firearms licensing. I mean, what do you class as 'domestic violnce' that is short of physically hitting someone? Would the recent incident involving Nigella Lawson and her moronic husband count? Should he have his ticket pulled if the has one (probably in my opinion if what has ben said is true)?

As we all know, and you have pointed out, this is a case - yet again - of a person who should not have had a certificate being granted one, and being allowed to keep it after more unpleasantness has come out. Okay, it's very easy to say that, and I'm not the one making the decision, but one only needs to read the HO guidance and the Act to see that he should never have been in possession. If the licensing authority isn't going to follow the guidance or recognised code of practice in the first place then what's the point of devising new one?

J
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cybershooters
Site Admin


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 4589

PostPosted: Tue Jun 18, 2013 6:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well the instances of domestic violence in this case seem to have been blatant, plus he lied on the form, plus he was a person of intemperate habits - er... how much evidence do you need? They sent out five warning letters. Five? Since when do you get a warning letter anyway, either you're a fit person or you're not.

Yes I agree, guidance on domestic violence would be tricky but on the other hand not when it's pretty blatant. Many cases of people moaning to the police just to get their certificates yanked, on that basis alone there should be some sort of formal procedure to follow, the guidance is sketchy.
_________________
Steve.

Only three things are certain: death, taxes and stupid gun laws.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Oddbod



Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 310

PostPosted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 1:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The law doesn't need changing.
It's the lackadaisical attitude of the Police that needs changing.
Both Dunblane & Hungerford could have been prevented had the Police acted in accordance with firearms Law with regard to FAC revocation.
In both cases they had ample opportunity & witnesses to at least temporarily disarm the killers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JonathanL
Certified Gun Nut


Joined: 02 Jul 2006
Posts: 1013
Location: North East

PostPosted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 9:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think you can say that about HUngerford. Yes, Ryan was a total fruitloop and a fantasist but the police didn't know that and had no reason to know it. I don't see what the police could have done to prevent it as there wasn't a reason to pull his ticket that I can see.

In the case of Ryan the people who could have done something about it were the people who knew him. He used to threaten, and even shoot at, his neighbours with airguns. His boss knew he carried a loaded pistol to work with him. Lots of people seemingly knew that he was a wild fantasist.

Nobody said anything to anyone who could have done anything about it.

J.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cybershooters
Site Admin


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 4589

PostPosted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 6:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oddbod wrote:
The law doesn't need changing.


I'm not quite sure what they're on about as regards the test for suitability, both section 27 and 28 say the person must not be a danger to public safety or the peace. That's the same for shotguns and other firearms. The only difference is that it says: "in all the circumstances" for FACs. Fair enough, if they want to put that into section 28 to clarify it, can't see the problem.

As far as I recall "all the circumstances" was put there because of McMurdo having stupid reasons for renewing Thomas Hamilton's FAC, it used to go on about intemperate habits etc. but that was amended out because they didn't want to be too specific.
_________________
Steve.

Only three things are certain: death, taxes and stupid gun laws.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Cybershooters Forum Index -> Legal Proceedings All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group