weird 5.56mm round

#43
PTS265 said:
Nige said:
Would the regulations neccessarily apply to civilian empty cases?
If items are left on a trg area, would they not be considered as abandoned by a civil court?

I appreciate the MOD don't want people walking off with brass or rounds, could be dangerous and/or embarrasing. If a civilian film company has been filming on the same area and hasn't bothered to remove it's rubbish I think it would be pretty hard to discipline someone who cleaned up after them... especially if they are cadets...
PTS265 said:
"It Is both a civil and military offence to leave this training area, or any other training area, with ANY live rounds, empty cases, parts of rounds, pyrotechnics or parts of pyrotechnics in your posession. When I come to you, you will declare to this effect

The any covers anything munitions or pyrotechnics wise.

Sure, they may have been abandoned, civvy rounds etc etc..

But the declaration the cadets have to give states they have none of these items in their possession, Civvie, Military or otherwise.

I dont think any sort of prosecution would ever stick, and I've never heard of a case on it, However, the fact remains, It's not allowed.


PTS
The declaration is still done under Pam 21 the same as the regulars. But I'm sure that if a cadet was found to have a casing on his person,the RCO would be in the sh1te for failing to ensure that the was nothing removed from the range under the declaration.
 
#44
It is an offence to take empties from a civvy range without a firearms certificate.

As for cadets and ranges, well, think of the hundreds of rounds from a DCCT/SAT range that they half inch...
 
#45
Sierra_Hotel said:
It is an offence to take empties from a civvy range without a firearms certificate.

As for cadets and ranges, well, think of the hundreds of rounds from a DCCT/SAT range that they half inch...
Act and section?

Sorry the only possible offence could be theft. No firearm certificate is required to possess empty cases. You might as well say it is an offence to take used staples or drawing pins from a civvy range.
 
#46
Thanks for the ID- it was starting to bug me!

For me (and I hope the rest of us) the Lesson Identified should be not to touch, pick up, remove or "play" with anything on a military range or training area unless you know exactly what it is.

[Aren't I responsible & grown up!]
 
#47
#48
Does that mean if you pick up bbs from a fibua complex techinally you could be done under the declaration rule ?
 
#49
EX_STAB said:
PTS265 said:
Nige said:
Would the regulations neccessarily apply to civilian empty cases?
If items are left on a trg area, would they not be considered as abandoned by a civil court?

I appreciate the MOD don't want people walking off with brass or rounds, could be dangerous and/or embarrasing. If a civilian film company has been filming on the same area and hasn't bothered to remove it's rubbish I think it would be pretty hard to discipline someone who cleaned up after them... especially if they are cadets...
PTS265 said:
"It Is both a civil and military offence to leave this training area, or any other training area, with ANY live rounds, empty cases, parts of rounds, pyrotechnics or parts of pyrotechnics in your posession. When I come to you, you will declare to this effect

The any covers anything munitions or pyrotechnics wise.

Sure, they may have been abandoned, civvy rounds etc etc..

But the declaration the cadets have to give states they have none of these items in their possession, Civvie, Military or otherwise.

I dont think any sort of prosecution would ever stick, and I've never heard of a case on it, However, the fact remains, It's not allowed.


PTS
With reference to the above quote, can anybody indicate Act and Section under which removing an item is an offence?

Reason being that I regularly shoot on MOD training areas and depart with live rounds and empty cases etc. in my possession. They belong to me so I never considered it a problem but if there actually is an act prohibiting the removal of "any item" then there are a lot of civvy shooters open to prosecution. It only takes one awkward senior police officer out to make a name for himself....

Can anybody identify the act which makes this an offence?
This is getting a bit carried away isn't it?

You cannot steal property if it has been abandoned - it does not belong to anyone so there can be no theft. s.5 Theft Act.

However, the cases may go to the landowner by default, in which case the cases may be construed as "belonging to another", although Parker v British Airways cast doubt on that line of argument (? - can't remember the citation but it concerened the finding of an item of jewellery in a departures lounge at a BA airport - Parker claimed finders-keepers and BA counterclaimed with the ownership of land argument - Parker won if I recall correctly) - so if this ruling applied there would be no theft.

In any event, there needs to be dishonesty on the part of the finder and in such an instance of finding empty cases, this could be easily displaced by the abandonment argument.

Just my view.
 
#50
Not to add further fuel to this debate but are these ranges subjected to occasional searches for expended brass? When a unit draws out ammunition for training in the US Army, they are required to return a certain weight of brass and will find their budget docked for the differance if less than expected is brought back. The collected debris is recycled.
 
#51
Khyros said:
Not to add further fuel to this debate but are these ranges subjected to occasional searches for expended brass? When a unit draws out ammunition for training in the US Army, they are required to return a certain weight of brass and will find their budget docked for the difference if less than expected is brought back. The collected debris is recycled.
Oh, yes. "Short brass" is handled the same way here.

However, that would never catch a cadet with a couple of cases [or worse!]!
 
#52
woody said:
Does that mean if you pick up bbs from a fibua complex techinally you could be done under the declaration rule ?
What on earth, given the language in the warning during the declaration process and the Theft Act, leads you to believe that you couldn't be?

The ammunition is government property issued to you for a particular purpose. The fact that you will have been warned not to take the ammunition/cases away with you would, in all probability, lead a jury/board to determine that you would be in excess of the permission granted to you by the property's owner to bear said property.

It's much the same principle as a tecchie having away with a tool kit from work to fit out his own garage workshop at home. Aunty Betty authorises him to acquire and use the equipment within a certain area but if he gets stopped on a random search on the way out of camp, he has a lot of explaining to do.
 
#53
crabtastic said:
woody said:
Does that mean if you pick up bbs from a fibua complex techinally you could be done under the declaration rule ?
What on earth, given the language in the warning during the declaration process and the Theft Act, leads you to believe that you couldn't be?
The ammunition is government property issued to you for a particular purpose. The fact that you will have been warned not to take the ammunition/cases away with you would, in all probability, lead a jury/board to determine that you would be in excess of the permission granted to you by the property's owner to bear said property.
Concur fully ... you've been told not to take it. If you do - you're nicked.
 
#54
blue_sophist said:
Khyros said:
Not to add further fuel to this debate but are these ranges subjected to occasional searches for expended brass? When a unit draws out ammunition for training in the US Army, they are required to return a certain weight of brass and will find their budget docked for the difference if less than expected is brought back. The collected debris is recycled.
Oh, yes. "Short brass" is handled the same way here.

However, that would never catch a cadet with a couple of cases [or worse!]!
True... but at the end of every range we ran team leaders and squad leaders would perform a brass and ammo check during which the soldier was required to say "No Brass, No ammo" as a declaration that he was "clean" of contraband. If caught afterwards the individual had no excuse although we did have locked amnesty containers with a small opening in which items that may have inadvertantly been taken off the range could be put free of persecution. Heh... I had a troopie come to me in a panic one night as he had 100 rds of belted 7.62 and a couple 40mm HEDP in his ruck left over from the previous day's live fire...
 
#55
Lance_Bombardier said:
Praetorian said:
Cadets picking up things and then lying on their declarations.....
might have...all the adults know that most cadets are lying through thier teeth anyway. would tell of 1 incident but thats not for here. :wink:
l_bdr, I think you are a total and utter ******* w.a.n.k.e.r. It is a civil and military offence to remove any rounds not olny are you breaking the law but setting a bad picture for cadets. Why remove it, you dont need it do you, unless your thinking of trying to kill yourself. That wouldnt surprise me though by the look of your aviator. What made you want to pick it up aswell, you could of being like the cadet who was blinded when picking up a torch because it was attached to a explosive device. I don't know about you but when we pick up our brass we only pick up ours not any other units therefore you had no need to touch that empty case. The fact that you said you lied knowlingly makes me want to crack you one in the jaw because i dont like liars. The way you say adults know we are lying???? WTF! You must have some very irresponsible adults in your company/county.

You are setting a very very bad picture of cadets and it makes me angry to see you portraying us in such a bad way. Not only are you a decieving little s.h.i.t.e but a liar and i hate liars. You make the rest of us look like fools just because people like you cant follow rules that are there for your own saftey.

"if upon returning home you find rounds or empty cases in your posession, you should hand them in immediatly to an adult"
I suggest you do this, but that ight be hard after what you said about your adults know your lying.
You sound like a fcuked up cadet with a fcuked county!

To the rest of ARRSE:
I am very sorry for the imaturity shown by this young man, i hope he follows my advice and hands that round back in. Cadets are not all like this, there are many who wish to do well in cadets and do not lie, like this pr.i.ck. It makes me embarrased that we have being portrayed like this, and sets a bad image for us. Like someone said earlier in this thread how can we expect to be trusted when people like dic.k head over here cant follow rules.

L_Bdr give the round back in or hand your kit in, personally I would prefer it if you did both as you make us look like iressponsible, imature and lyeing people.
 
#56
Sammy The Cat said:
EX_STAB said:
PTS265 said:
Nige said:
Would the regulations neccessarily apply to civilian empty cases?
If items are left on a trg area, would they not be considered as abandoned by a civil court?

I appreciate the MOD don't want people walking off with brass or rounds, could be dangerous and/or embarrasing. If a civilian film company has been filming on the same area and hasn't bothered to remove it's rubbish I think it would be pretty hard to discipline someone who cleaned up after them... especially if they are cadets...
PTS265 said:
"It Is both a civil and military offence to leave this training area, or any other training area, with ANY live rounds, empty cases, parts of rounds, pyrotechnics or parts of pyrotechnics in your posession. When I come to you, you will declare to this effect

The any covers anything munitions or pyrotechnics wise.

Sure, they may have been abandoned, civvy rounds etc etc..

But the declaration the cadets have to give states they have none of these items in their possession, Civvie, Military or otherwise.

I dont think any sort of prosecution would ever stick, and I've never heard of a case on it, However, the fact remains, It's not allowed.


PTS
With reference to the above quote, can anybody indicate Act and Section under which removing an item is an offence?

Reason being that I regularly shoot on MOD training areas and depart with live rounds and empty cases etc. in my possession. They belong to me so I never considered it a problem but if there actually is an act prohibiting the removal of "any item" then there are a lot of civvy shooters open to prosecution. It only takes one awkward senior police officer out to make a name for himself....

Can anybody identify the act which makes this an offence?
This is getting a bit carried away isn't it?

You cannot steal property if it has been abandoned - it does not belong to anyone so there can be no theft. s.5 Theft Act.

However, the cases may go to the landowner by default, in which case the cases may be construed as "belonging to another", although Parker v British Airways cast doubt on that line of argument (? - can't remember the citation but it concerened the finding of an item of jewellery in a departures lounge at a BA airport - Parker claimed finders-keepers and BA counterclaimed with the ownership of land argument - Parker won if I recall correctly) - so if this ruling applied there would be no theft.

In any event, there needs to be dishonesty on the part of the finder and in such an instance of finding empty cases, this could be easily displaced by the abandonment argument.

Just my view.
Ex_Stab. If it's your personal ammunition, purchased privately, then the Theft Act does not apply in your case. If someone pickes up the brass that you left behind, then the abandonment issue raises its head and might confuse things a little. However, from my reading of Parker v British Airways- http://www.umanitoba.ca/Law/Courses/Fainstein/parker.htm , the ruling infers that title may be asserted by the landowner's "manifest intention to exercise control over the [land] and all things which might be in it." One could argue once again, that the declaration process itself represents such a clear intent.

For the overwhelming majority who use MOD ranges though, there are two other important differences from the case mentioned above-

Firstly, the property in the first instance belongs to HMG. 5(3) of the Act states:

Where a person receives property from or on account of another, and is under an obligation to the other to retain and deal with that property or its proceeds in a particular way, the property or proceeds shall be regarded (as against him) as belonging to the other.
There are clear procedures for the issue, control and accounting for ammunition and the following clean-up. The individual is briefed as to the nature of the range practice/exercise; he/she is ordered to return any unused ammunition, empty cases etc. he/she finds at endex and THEN has to make a declaration that they are not in possession of any said items. Under no reasonable circumstances could we expect the individual to be under the impression that the ammunition being issued to them is theirs to do as they wish with.

Secondly, in 99% of instances the range practice/ ex takes place on HMG land and so, in effect, the item would never leave HMG property until it is taken away by some light-fingered souvenir hunter. Try telling a mate that he "abandoned" the £20 note you found underneath a seat cushion at his gaff.

Surely the dishonesty aspect of the theft charge can easily be satisfied by the individual declaring that he/she is not in possession of empty cases. Under the terms of the act, the appropriation of the property is not to be regarded as dishonest if:

(a) if he appropriates the property in the belief that he has in law the right to deprive the other of it, on behalf of himself or of a third person;
Well, the individual would have been informed that he/she should not take the items from the range/ex area, so that's that taken care of.

or
(b) if he appropriates the property in the belief that he would have the other’s consent if the other knew of the appropriation and the circumstances of it;
Ditto.

or
(c) (except where the property came to him as trustee or personal representative) if he appropriates the property in the belief that the person to whom the property belongs cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps.
He/she, during the declaration process, is asked to search their person and turn in anything they might find, so no escape there either.

(Christ, whaddya know? Maybe I was listening when I took criminal law as an elective as an undergrad.)
 
#57
That's the closest we've come to a definition of what the "civil and military offence" is so far Crabtastic.

Thanks.

There were some baffled people taking declarations at the Imperial this year ;)
 
#58
plastic bb's are not pyrotechnics empty cases or parts there of so no but why would you want them?
its not about theft or gov property ITS ABOUT SAFETY JUST CAUSE IT MAY HAVE BEEN FIRED DOES'NT MAKE IT SAFE :twisted:
unless your an ATO you don't know what you've picked up. you'd have looked a kunt if they'd been heap 5.56 rounds issued to jedi units would'nt you and one had blown up why you were fondling it
 
#59
EX_STAB said:
That's the closest we've come to a definition of what the "civil and military offence" is so far Crabtastic.

Thanks.

There were some baffled people taking declarations at the Imperial this year ;)
A "Civil Offence" is generally taken to mean an offence that a "civilian" can potentially be guilty of. It is a little confusing because a soldier can be guilty of a "civilian" (Civil) offence - so insofar as law is concerned, the distinction is meainingless.

More specifically, a "civil offence" describes a course of conduct which is in breach of the "civil law". This again raises a few misperceptions amongst the uninformed - as most soldiers believe they cannot be guilty of a civil offence, wrongly believing such an offence also to solely apply to "civilians" as opposed to the military.

This raises the distinction between civil law and military law - and guess what - more misperceptions. The civil law has got nothing to do with civilains, the term is used to make the distinction between civil law and statute law (or common law and statute law).

So........... the appropriation (taking) of the brass cases (property), belonging to another (the MOD, Range etc) with permenant intent to deprive (not intending to give them back), all done dsihonestly - would be a statutory offence (Theft). It could equally be called a military offence - as military law is a phrase coined by the military to apply to specific areas of statute law (importantly - there are pure areas of Military Law which fall within the ambit of the criminal law, but only soliders would be charged with them - e.g. Drunkeness, Failing to Perform a Duty etc - this is what Military Law really refers to).

Additionally, the civil equivalent of conversion, or misappropriation of property (or whatever particular civil offence applies) is equally valid.

A milittary offence (criminal offence) is one that is embodied in statute law (e.g. Theft Act, offences against the person Act etc), and a civil offence (a common law offence) is an offence that is not embodied in statue (e,g, Murder, Negligence etc).

Hope this clears it up.
 
#60
brighton hippy said:
plastic bb's are not pyrotechnics empty cases or parts there of so no but why would you want them?
its not about theft or gov property ITS ABOUT SAFETY JUST CAUSE IT MAY HAVE BEEN FIRED DOES'NT MAKE IT SAFE :twisted:
unless your an ATO you don't know what you've picked up. you'd have looked a kunt if they'd been heap 5.56 rounds issued to jedi units would'nt you and one had blown up why you were fondling it
Heh... reminded me of another entertaining moment. On a hillside at the Yakima training center circa 1988, one jackass private said "Look what I found!" and held up a dud 2.75" FFAR... poor kid was disturbed to see everyone either hit the ground for cover or run like heck. Under advisement from his platoon sergeant (who managed to squeeze his 6'+ frame completely into the tiniest fold in the terrain) the kid gently set the ordinance back down and marked it with a stick. We vacated the hill and EOD came in to take care of business.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top