Is this anti mugger spray legal ?

[I_say_again]

Do any of the rozzers that frequent arrse know if this spray is legal in the UK ?

it's being flogged on ebay, say it sprays out a red marker gel.

link to item

 

[Lairdx]

why paint them when we ladies can spray them in the eyes with mace and then stamp on their tatties?

 

[Vegetius]

I think they've taken a view on this from their lawyer and given it a run. After all, it's like wandering aorund with a can of paint I suppose.

It's not, technically, a s.1 firearm (technically, a pepper spray is) and it's not an offensive weapon I think. For example, has it been tested as a non-irritant on the eyes? Then there is the issue of intent....the packaging suggests that the intent to use it on a third party is pretty clear.

If it were used in self-defence then I'd suggest that you would almost certainly be OK but if you were stopped and searched I think there would be a fair chance you'd be nicked (on suspicion, which would be perfectly valid) or the item confiscated for examination by some coppers. After all, it might be a pepper spray disguised as something else (has happened) and in the current CT environment wandering about with a dodgy chemical-looking device in your bag is going to attract comment. FFS, I wouldn't travel through an airport with one!

So the maunfacturers might have satisfied themselves that it's legal, and (hey) it might be, but I'm also saying you need to be careful and expect a copper to raise their eyebrows if they see it. And like most legal answers, it doesn't properly solve the question.

V!

 

[Efargee20]

Do any of the rozzers that frequent arrse know if this spray is legal in the UK ?

it's being flogged on ebay, say it sprays out a red marker gel.

link to item

If you attack anyone with anything at all, fists bricks even a jet of something it could be construed as an assault. The definition of assault being

"Every attack directed to take effect on the person of another is assault, whether or not actual injury is inflicted. There must be criminal intent: an accidental injury does not amount to assault"

Id leave well alone if it was me.

Efargee20

 

[I_say_again]

Thanks for the info. I'll make sure my wife doesn't get any, she can carry brass knucks and a flick knife like the rest of us.

 

[securit]

A while ago I confiscated a can of something or other off a woman who brought it to the police station to ask if she could use it. It was something very similar to this however it made a very loud noise when pressed and created a horrible smell. This got tested and was found to not be a Section 5 Firearm as most spray type incapacitants are however the armorer said it could possibly constitute an assault depending on under what circumstances it was used.

This however I would probably say could be constituted as this. It appears to actually incapacitate the subject by spraying something into their eyes as a marker. I would suggest from that there will be some irritation to the face/eyes possibly making it noxious to the extent that it could incapacitate them even if it does not have the intent too. The example even shows a figure of a face that has been sprayed and it looks a bit nasty, obvious inference being that it is the face that should be sprayed. However this would then be argued out in court etc. It would be said that it is used for causing damage to things as you intend to mark items when someone is attacked etc for identification at a later time however that would mean that carrying it could possible leave you liable for carrying something used in the commission of criminal damage if you were searched. I would also question the use of it for that, although it could be circumstantial evidene there is nothing that specifically links this can of spray to the substance that it ejects.

www.niton999.com used to have some stuff like this a short while ago however it got withdrawn from their web site no explanation given, make what you want of that

 

[OldRedCap]

Whilst I hesitate to get against blokes who police professionally. I raise a grey old head and offer

Section 1 of the Prevention of Crime Act 1953 prohibits the possession in any public place of an offensive weapon without lawful authority or excuse. <Archbold 24-106a>

Definition of an offensive weapon <Archbold 24-115B>:

'Offensive weapon' is defined as any article made or adapted for use to causing injury to the person, or intended by the person having it with him for such use. The courts have been reluctant to find many weapons as falling within the first limb of the definition and reliance should usually be placed upon the second. On that basis it must be shown that the defendant intended to use the article for causing injury.

Lord Lane, CJ, in R v Simpson (C), 78 Cr. App. R. 115, identified three categories of offensive weapons: those made for causing injury to the person, i.e. offensive per se; those adapted for such a purpose; and those not so made or adapted, but carried with the intention of causing injury to the person.

In the first two categories, the prosecution do not have to prove that the defendant had the weapon with him for the purpose of inflicting injury: if the jury are sure that the weapon is offensive per se, the defendant will only be acquitted if he establishes lawful authority or reasonable excuse.

This comes from the CPS site - sorry for bringing them into it.
Chummy with the spray will have to explain why he has the item with him. I think injury is described as

damage or harm caused to the body caused by an outside agent or force, which may be physical or chemical

 

[securit]

Good old case law, can not beat it, shame we dont get updates at work but hey who cares!

 

[scalieback]

It's not, technically, a s.1 firearm (technically, a pepper spray is)

Pepper spray as per CS is Section 5, prohibited.

Regarding this spray, if you can prove it was for use in defence, you should be okay imho.

 

[Vegetius]

My bad, s.1 is really nasty stuff of course.

I was thinking what I would do with this operationally and I took the view that I'd use my discretion and confiscate it, unless I'd formed the suspicion that the person carrying it had more sinister motives, then they'd get nicked on suspicion. If the CPS then subsequently told me they were happy that it was an off. wep. then I'd apply for a summons for the person I'd stopped, unless good old s.25 PACE came into play.

Of course, I'm quite old-fashioned and thorough about things like this, couldn't say what some of my younger colleagues might do.

V!

 

[scalieback]

My bad, s.1 is really nasty stuff of course.

Not certain if this is a wah, but Section 1 is bolt action, lever action rifles etc (not really nasty stuff), Section 2 is basic shot guns (smooth bore, 24" barrel, less than 2" bore and no mag or mag restricted to two rounds) and Section 5 is prohibited eg machine guns, rocket launchers, pistols etc.

 

[Vegetius]

I meant that S.1 firearms are "nasty" in that they are bona fide firearms that, if caught with, you are looking at least a five stretch for possessing unlawfully. Unlike a CS spray, which I've seen people get slaps on the wrist for in Magistrates' Court.

V!

 

[OldRedCap]

[off topic](Vegetius - sorry old lad but your latest avatar looks more like a post-mortem photo than an object of desire such as we are accustomed to from you)[/off topic]

 

[crabtastic]

After all, it might be a pepper spray disguised as something else (has happened) and in the current CT environment wandering about with a dodgy chemical-looking device in your bag is going to attract comment.

Just don't get it mixed up with your breath-freshener.

 

[ObnoxiousJockGit]

When this stuff first came out there were questions about the rights of those either accidentally or deliberately sprayed when innocent of anything. I wouldn't like to be on the streets of Glasgow on a Saturday night with "Rapist" sprayed across my coupon.

 

[Vegetius]

[off topic](Vegetius - sorry old lad but your latest avatar looks more like a post-mortem photo than an object of desire such as we are accustomed to from you)[/off topic]

Seen and noted ORC, I will try to do better. I hope this is more up to scratch.

V!

 

[Efargee20]

My bad, s.1 is really nasty stuff of course.

Not certain if this is a wah, but Section 1 is bolt action, lever action rifles etc (not really nasty stuff), Section 2 is basic shot guns (smooth bore, 24" barrel, less than 2" bore and no mag or mag restricted to two rounds) and Section 5 is prohibited eg machine guns, rocket launchers, pistols etc.

CS Spray as used by the British Police is classed as a section 5 Firearm. Like I said before Id stay well clear.

 

[scalieback]

I meant that S.1 firearms are "nasty" in that they are bona fide firearms that, if caught with, you are looking at least a five stretch for possessing unlawfully. Unlike a CS spray, which I've seen people get slaps on the wrist for in Magistrates' Court. V!

The minimum sentence for five years applies to most Section 5 firearms other than CS sprays and the like plus stun guns. There's no minimum sentence for Section 1 firearms. Handguns (less than 30cm barrel and 60cm overall length) are Section 5. There's also an exemption to the 5 year minimum.

 

[gundog]

The wife got me straight in the face with some silvrikin hairspray. I couldn't see sh1t for ages. So do not risk gettting lifted for carrying something dodgy. Ladies have some hairspray in your handbag and you will be safe as houses.

Unless you are Sinead o Connor then you will have some fast talking to do

 

[Vegetius]

I meant that S.1 firearms are "nasty" in that they are bona fide firearms that, if caught with, you are looking at least a five stretch for possessing unlawfully. Unlike a CS spray, which I've seen people get slaps on the wrist for in Magistrates' Court. V!

The minimum sentence for five years applies to most Section 5 firearms other than CS sprays and the like plus stun guns. There's no minimum sentence for Section 1 firearms. Handguns (less than 30cm barrel and 60cm overall length) are Section 5. There's also an exemption to the 5 year minimum.

Mate, you are either (A) studying for your sergeant's exam, (B) a lawyer, (C) in desperate need of a night down the pub looking at girls.

Last job we had with a bloke in possession of a 9mm got a straight-off-the-bat five stretch. I'm only a copper, though, so I defer to your spotting capabilities.

V!