Gun dad gets 5 years.

old_fat_and_hairy

LE
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#1
In a story in today's newspapers, a 55 year old farmer, and father of one, was jailed for 5 years after admitting that he kept a loaded .45 Colt copy next to his bed. He also admitted keeping a loaded rifle in the room. The weapons were kept because the family live in a rural area near a prison.

5 years! And he hadn't shot or threatened anyone. He would have been better off going out, getting pissed and causing deat by dangerous. Would have been unlucky indeed to serve any time for that!
 
#3
Did he have a fiream certificate for the rifle? If not, he's committed an offence under Section 1 of the 1968 act. - Possession without a certificate. I don't see what they're getting at with the copy (replica?). It's only an offence to have it in a public place without Lawful Authority or reasonable excuse. Unless they mean it's a copy in the way that a Taurus is a copy of a Smith and Wesson.
 

old_fat_and_hairy

LE
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#4
It seems it was a copy of some .45 Colt. Actually said 'a loaded replica', but that sounds like journo crapspeak. Didn't specify whether it was a copy of the venerable 1911 semi-auto Colt ( best copies made by Star or Astra) or a copy of the 1878 Peacemaker.

Whoops! Sorry. I slipped into nerd mode. Apologies for that.
 

old_fat_and_hairy

LE
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#6
and no F.A.C. But then, can't get one for a section 1 pistol anyway. Legal ownership of pistols prohibited (except for black powder/muzzle loading). Illegal ownership much cheaper than buying cert, buying weapon, etc.
Agree that it is illegal, just not sure sentence propotionate, especially since bedroom hardly qualifies as public place.
I do condemn keeping a loaded weapon in an open place when a child is about.
 
#7
old_fat_and_hairy said:
In a story in today's newspapers, a 55 year old farmer, and father of one, was jailed for 5 years after admitting that he kept a loaded .45 Colt copy next to his bed. He also admitted keeping a loaded rifle in the room. The weapons were kept because the family live in a rural area near a prison.

5 years! And he hadn't shot or threatened anyone. He would have been better off going out, getting pissed and causing deat by dangerous. Would have been unlucky indeed to serve any time for that!
Wonder if there's more to the story? What led the police to search his bedroom and find them? Have you got a link to the story?
 
#8
You can get an FAC for a section one pistol - it's section five pistols that are hard to get hold of.
Section one pistol is a long barrel or front stuffer.
 
#9
The guy broke the Law, and the Law won ... I have little sympathy, I'm afraid.

His certificate would undoubtedly have required secure and separate storage of arm and ammunition. If he broke the rules, he's done.

And, as OFH said, bludgy stupid with kids around ...
 

old_fat_and_hairy

LE
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#10
Story was in today's edition of 'The Sun' and was underneath an article on page 28 regarding a police Inspector facing charges of kiddy fiddling.
Not a very comprehensive article (about the firearms), and no details of how it came to attention of police.
 
#11
blue_sophist said:
The guy broke the Law, and the Law won ... I have little sympathy, I'm afraid.

His certificate would undoubtedly have required secure and separate storage of arm and ammunition. If he broke the rules, he's done.

And, as OFH said, bludgy stupid with kids around ...


Interestingly, although police usually insist on separate storage facilities being in place when they come to examine security arrangements I've never seen this requirement on a certificate.

The standard is:
4(a) The Firearms and ammunition to which the certificate relates must at all times (except in the circumstances set out in paragraph (b) below) be stored securely so as to prevent, so far as reasonably practicable, access to the firearms or ammunition by an unauthorised person.
The exceptions in para B relate to it being in use or cleaned, repaired etc.

Five years for just breaching a condition of your certificate would seem excessive. A friend of mine had a rifle stolen and never heard a squeak from the police about even losing his cert.. Five years for having a section 1 firearm without a certificate is more understandable.
 
#12
May be more to this than the intellectual staff at The Sun can comprehend ... like what's a pistol?

If he did have a loaded Colt/Astra/whatever by his bed ... 5 years sounds about right.
 
#13
Even if he had an unlawfully-held pistol and rifle (and ammo for both), this seems a very stiff sentence if he was not posing an immediate threat to the public safety. Apart from the potential risks to children in the house etc., there may have been other factors in his background.

There's no doubt this man broke the law, however. But if people like [Col] Patrick Mercer MP - of recent "bl*ck ba*ta*ds" celebrity - had had their way with their Private Members Bills, we would all be able to keep weapons for home defence, in the aftermath of the Tony Martin case.

The politicians - and the police - will have to confront the reality of a country in which increasing numbers of lawabiding people, especially in country areas, feel that the police cannot or will not protect them adequately. But we don't want a proliferation of uncontrolled guns, as per the USA. Not an easy call . . .
 

old_fat_and_hairy

LE
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#14
Perhaps you are right in that he broke the law and deserved his sentence. It has certainly made me consider my own position, and the old LMG that I have under the bed may have to go. I suppose the 84 may just pass muster as a large flower vase, unless closely inspected, but doubt that the Browning 9 and the SLR could do the same.
 
#17
The farmer obviously felt the need to defend himself. I fully simphathise with him. I keep a loaded pistol next to my bed. If I ever catch myself fancying my missus again I'll f*cking use it.

P.S. Pistols are still legal in Germany because they lost the War!
 

old_fat_and_hairy

LE
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#18
Much is said about the gun culture in America, and how we shouldn't go that way. Actually, per capita, crime is far lower there than here. And Switzerland, where almost every house has a fearsome firearm of some sort has such a low level of armed crime that it goes unreported.

There is a much used saying, attributed to President Roosevelt " when guns are criminalised, only the criminals will have guns".
 
#19
old_fat_and_hairy said:
Much is said about the gun culture in America, and how we shouldn't go that way. Actually, per capita, crime is far lower there than here.

...
The specific things like gun crime and murder aren't lower though.
 
#20
old_fat_and_hairy said:
Much is said about the gun culture in America, and how we shouldn't go that way. Actually, per capita, crime is far lower there than here. And Switzerland, where almost every house has a fearsome firearm of some sort has such a low level of armed crime that it goes unreported.

There is a much used saying, attributed to President Roosevelt " when guns are criminalised, only the criminals will have guns".
But - and I'm doing devil's advocate here - there are circa 10,000 fatalities (or is it total deaths and injuries?) per year in the US from gunshot wounds, and that's the figure the gun-controllers in the UK look at.

I don't think many of us would be comfortable in the kind of climate that prevails in much of the US, but we are restrained by some absurdly harsh GB/UK gun laws. 62,000 lawabiding folks lost their handguns, and we now cannot field an Olympic pistol team - and we were once rather good at that, at international level - and the levels of illegal pistol possesion and use have soared. Same happened when self-loading centrefire rifles were banned after Ryan ran amok in Hungerford.

Since the 19th century, on every single occasion when UK gun laws have been tightened, it has been followed by a period of substantially increased gun crime.

Part of the problem is that many non-shooters have some kind of irrational fear of firearms, as if they had minds of their own. Instead, they should focus on the mindset of people who acquire guns for the wrong reasons. An inert lump of metal and wood/plastic has no moral stature whatsoever, but the person who picks it up and puts his finger on the trigger most certainly does.

The US 2nd Amendment people repeatedly point (as the 1700s founding fathers did) to the importance of the populace having guns, so as to prevent oppression by the government. But that line doesn't play so well in the UK, perhaps because we never had a serious civil war, while most other countries did. (Even the 1640s affair affected very few Englishmen indeed.) Yet, in the UK, the vast bulk of the firepower is in the hands of the govt's agents - police, military etc.

Do we really feel oppressed by this? Answers on a postcard . . .
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
J The Intelligence Cell 15
Ventress The Intelligence Cell 2
Jip Travolta The Intelligence Cell 18

Similar threads

Top