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 

A bad year to be a Firearms Licensing Manager.
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Cybershooters Forum Index -> Crime
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Mike



Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 86
Location: North West England

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2006 3:13 pm    Post subject: A bad year to be a Firearms Licensing Manager. Reply with quote

First North Wales, now Devon & Cornwall !
see

http://psa.bizhosting.com/whats_new.html

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Juvenal 55-127 A.D.

(Just to prove I can be as pompous as the next man!)

Mike
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Mick F
Certified Gun Nut


Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 1650
Location: S X

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2006 3:18 pm    Post subject: Re: A bad year to be a Firearms Licensing Manager. Reply with quote

Mike wrote:
First North Wales, now Devon & Cornwall !
see

http://psa.bizhosting.com/whats_new.html

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Juvenal 55-127 A.D.

(Just to prove I can be as pompous as the next man!)

Mike

Old news. You should hear the story that allegedly goes with it! Ask me one on coconut laden swallows!
Cheers
Mick Fidgeon:-)
_________________
"He's more nervous than a very small nun on a penguin shoot."DCI Gene Hunt
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mike



Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 86
Location: North West England

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2006 3:36 pm    Post subject: Old news Reply with quote

I HAVE heard what I believe to be the true story, but I prefer not to spread unconfirmed rumours - and there are MANY rumours.

Old it may be, but then the police don't actively publicise matters like this (why should they?) and now it's in the public domain.

Mike


Last edited by Mike on Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:24 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
mcol



Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 11:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

add West Yorkshire too. Not arrested just sacked. Never liked the guy but he certainly got shafted.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mick F
Certified Gun Nut


Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 1650
Location: S X

PostPosted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 9:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcol wrote:
add West Yorkshire too. Not arrested just sacked. Never liked the guy but he certainly got shafted.

He was, imho. There's a list and it's not an occupation conducive to good health if you include those who have been off with stress.
Cheers
Mick Fidgeon:-)
_________________
"He's more nervous than a very small nun on a penguin shoot."DCI Gene Hunt
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
craggy_steve



Joined: 28 Jun 2006
Posts: 68

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bit out of date here, but I've only had time to check the Field Sports posts in rcent months. What happened re: West Yorkshire?

Ta,

craggy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mike



Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 86
Location: North West England

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:24 pm    Post subject: Devon & Cornwall Reply with quote

I understand that the (ex) Firearms Licensing Manager of Devon & Cornwall police has received A POLICE CAUTION for possessing a Brocock-type pistol without a certificate.

I also understood that there is a mandatory five-year minimum prison sentence for this offence.

so...... What signals does THAT send out !! ??
Evil or Very Mad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Mick F
Certified Gun Nut


Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 1650
Location: S X

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

craggy_steve wrote:
Bit out of date here, but I've only had time to check the Field Sports posts in rcent months. What happened re: West Yorkshire?
Ta,
craggy

I'm not entirely certain it's all in the public domain, but he's no longer in post.
Cheers
Mick Fidgeon:-)
_________________
"He's more nervous than a very small nun on a penguin shoot."DCI Gene Hunt
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mick F
Certified Gun Nut


Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 1650
Location: S X

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:21 pm    Post subject: Re: Devon & Cornwall Reply with quote

Mike wrote:
I understand that the (ex) Firearms Licensing Manager of Devon & Cornwall police has received A POLICE CAUTION for possessing a Brocock-type pistol without a certificate.

I also understood that there is a mandatory five-year minimum prison sentence for this offence.

so...... What signals does THAT send out !! ??
Evil or Very Mad

So you're saying that he should be treated differently to any other member of the public? I'll remember that Mike Twisted Evil
Cheers
Mick Fidgeon:-)
_________________
"He's more nervous than a very small nun on a penguin shoot."DCI Gene Hunt
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mike



Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 86
Location: North West England

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 4:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mick,

If I was saying that, then clearly I'd be suggesting that anyone found in possession of a Brocock should get a caution......
Smile

Mike
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Mick F
Certified Gun Nut


Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 1650
Location: S X

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mike wrote:
Mick,

If I was saying that, then clearly I'd be suggesting that anyone found in possession of a Brocock should get a caution......
Smile
Mike

As you know, there's still the 'unwritten amnesty' and the minimum 5 year is for aggravated offences IIRC ie there is an intent to use. I assume the CPS have recommended a caution in this case as I'm sure (and you're aware), their professional standards dept would have been involved.

By your resoning, if he was to be treated the same as any holder of them who I come across (as I do), he should get exactly the same as the last one I dealt with which was strong words of advice.

I know the signal you (and many others) would probably wish to send, but the fact is he shouldn't be treated any differently. Now, if he had it as alleged, that may be a different story. Perhaps his 'excuse' stood up to examination?

As for treating people differently, should I treat Lord Whatsit differently to Joe Public, or to PC Plod or to the Rt Hon member for dunny on the wold?
Cheers
Mick Fidgeon:-)
_________________
"He's more nervous than a very small nun on a penguin shoot."DCI Gene Hunt
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mike



Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 86
Location: North West England

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mick,

The signal I would wish to send is that there is apparent inconsistancy regardless of profession.

Since no explanation has been forthcoming as to why one person who had a Brocock (in ignorance, and at home) is subjected to court proceedings when another had one in full knowledge of the law, in a night club was given a caution.

If the extenuating circumstances are explained to us we might understand. They haven't been explained, and people are drawing their own conclusions, rightly or wrongly. This does a disservice to the staff in all firearms departments, who many will now believe to be to be implicit in a cover up, despite the facts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Mick F
Certified Gun Nut


Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 1650
Location: S X

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mike wrote:
Mick,
The signal I would wish to send is that there is apparent inconsistancy regardless of profession.

If you believe the original reports.
Mike wrote:
Since no explanation has been forthcoming as to why one person who had a Brocock (in ignorance, and at home) is subjected to court proceedings when another had one in full knowledge of the law, in a night club was given a caution.

Have you ask D & C PSD for one? Do you have evidence of 5(1)(af) prosecutions for simple possession without criminal intent?
Mike wrote:
If the extenuating circumstances are explained to us we might understand. They haven't been explained, and people are drawing their own conclusions, rightly or wrongly. This does a disservice to the staff in all firearms departments, who many will now believe to be to be implicit in a cover up, despite the facts.

Not 'the shooters grapevine' again? Surely members of responsible organisations (who I pay the wages of Wink ) should keep such rumours where they should remain until proven fact? Imagine if I repeated every rumour I'd heard about every cert holder? You'll be saying he was on the square next or cousin to the Chief.

As far as I'm concerned, if the rumour of where he had it and why is correct, he should have gone down. If his explanation stood up, which I assume was contained in the interview and verified for the CPS; he should be treated no differently.
Cheers
Mick Fidgeon:-)
_________________
"He's more nervous than a very small nun on a penguin shoot."DCI Gene Hunt
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mike



Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 86
Location: North West England

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 6:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No Mick,

I said that people are drawing their own conclusions, grapevine or not.

Now, let me see - I ring up the Professional Standards Department at D&C, and ask them for an explanation......

What do you imagine their response might be? You're in a better position than I am to ask them - What do you think ?
Very Happy

All the best !
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Carrot Cruncher



Joined: 17 Sep 2006
Posts: 751

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 6:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I seem to recall that there was a legal principle which went by a Latin or Norman-French tag, which set out that a person with a particular professional knowledge of a subject may be held to have committed a greater offence if hre transgresses in that particular area, as he should have known better.

It's quite understandable that Joe Soap isn't aware of the Brocock ban, and he shouldn't be penalised too hard for falling foul of it.

For a licensing manager to do it is utterly indefensible, and he should have been hit with the full rigour of the law. What would be your take if a dealer did it Mick ?
Question
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Cybershooters Forum Index -> Crime All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5

 
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