Jump to content

disgusting action by the police


Funky Bunch

Recommended Posts

I dont know about anyone else but it looks like the police have been looking after one of there own reagrding FAC rules,they could have saved someones life,Now what are the anti gun lobby going to do with this

Obviously should have been remanded and his gun licence removed,people just get accused of an offence and they remove your ticket

Totally wrong and unjust.anyone who has committed an offence or is on bail or even charged should have there ticket taken away

what do you think

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...nweddell114.xml

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WRONG WRONG WRONG one rule for them another for everyone else i had a friend who was arrested and bailed for a crime he did not commit and his fac was revoked there and then and he had to surrender his firearms when he was eventualy found not guilty and the bloke who commited the crime was caught he had to fight tooth and nail along with basc help to get his fac reinstated.

fair enough if you are arrested ect then yes revoke there tickets but if and when you are found to be inocent of any crime they should be reinstated just as quickley as they were taken

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest varmartin

This will be a big black mark against all FAC holders now....instead of a PC that should of had his FAC removed but it was side stepped instead..

 

TOTALLY WRONG

 

Martin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Certainly seems like one rule for some and another for others. I suppose that this was an Inspector may have carried some weight.

 

A friend of mine was accused of rape by his ex wife some years ago, police removed his guns immediatly, spent 3 weeks investigating before deciding that no action would be taken against him. Took him nearly 2 years to get his guns back and he had done nothing.

 

 

 

A

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The guy did the country a financial service even though the mode of operation was not forseen by those in charge.

 

Termination of his Police and State Old Age Pension.

No future health care required.

No costly trial over the previous demise of his wife and latterly that of his mother-in law.

No vast costs incurred by his impending incarceration.

 

HWH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is very easy to comment on a press release, especially when all the facts are not known.

 

The press rarely get things right and are not known for accuracy and attention to detail ;)

 

There does however appear to be a few inconsistancies in normal proceedure.

 

Any person - no matter what the occupation, if charged with murder as this fellow has been is usually remanded in custody - "to prevent harm to others" as his mother in law was a prosecution witness, it stands to reason she was "at risk"

 

The person concerned was indeed remanded, but a bail bond was put up and he was released on that surety of that bond - anyone is entitled to this (so long as there are sufficient funds available and the person is not / has not threatened others) thats for the court to decide if they are released on bail, not the police or anyone else, no matter who they are.

 

Now, as far as I am aware, if someone who is a firearms holder is charged with a violent offence (offences against the person act/ manslaughter / murder etc) or one of threatening behaviour towards others (public order act/ harrassment), they could have their FAC / SGC revoked temporarily pending the result of trial - why this was not done in this case is beyond me.

 

Although as I said at the start - not all the facts are known, was his FAC / SGC revoked ?

 

Did this person have access to other weapons elswhere through a third party - who knows- the sueth sayers amongst you will no doubt know that one!

 

Will it affect other FAC / SGC holders?

 

Well I doubt it very much - unless of course you go out and committ a criminal offence of violence towards another - in which case should you be the holder of a weapon in the first place?

 

 

I am aware of one person who is a contributor to the forums who has a conviction - does that mean he should have his firearms taken from him?

 

 

Hindsight is indeed a wonderful and remarkable gift.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but being charged and bailed doesnt mean a person should lose their FAC/SGC until proven guilty. Losing your ticket when charged or bailed is horsesh*t and no better than those making the laws up as they go along...Innocent until proven guilty, the minute we lose that we lose it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally believe this man should have had his guns temporarily removed. He was accused of murdering his wife after all.There is no more serious crime, and everyone else has the same, usually just for a "domestic" never mind a murder accusation.If he was innocent, he would have got them back.

Unfortunatly when the powers that be , "f**k up" to this degree, someone usually ends up paying with their life, or has everyone forgotten dunblane?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally believe this man should have had his guns temporarily removed. He was accused of murdering his wife after all.There is no more serious crime, and everyone else has the same, usually just for a "domestic" never mind a murder accusation.If he was innocent, he would have got them back.

Unfortunatly when the powers that be , "f**k up" to this degree, someone usually ends up paying with their life, or has everyone forgotten dunblane?

 

 

Exactly Baldie, remove the firearms and or access thereof until it satifies the individual is either innocent and not a threat to the public. The ar*eholses that cock this sh*t up should be made to pay for their part in the injustice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you obviously dont know the law and have never has dealings with the police,as soon as a person is arrested they take there guns and for some very very silly reasons

example you could call the police and say i have thrested to harm you.next thing there knocking on my door and they arrest me and take my guns,I havnt been charged just arrested

anyone who has been charged with an offence which constuites removal should have there guns taken,who ever they may be

 

 

I think you misread my post...

 

QUOTE(Kaleiderscope @ Jan 14 2008, 05:52 PM)

Sorry but being charged and bailed doesnt mean a person should lose their FAC/SGC until proven guilty. Losing your ticket when charged or bailed is horsesh*t and no better than those making the laws up as they go along...Innocent until proven guilty, the minute we lose that we lose it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahh so if Iam charged with GBH,Murder,drink driving or any serious motoring offence,assult,rape,buggery,ect ect ect thats OK for me to keep my FAC ???

I think you will find mate that anyone charged and bailed should and will have there guns taken,I have a mate who was arrested as a bird he was shagging reported him for aggressive behaviour,no charges no record no nothing 3 years later still no guns,so whast he done wrong,in fact i was at a party only last night with him and hes going to reapply,his sons guns were also taken and hes just had them back as he lived in the same house

Justice there isnt any

 

 

I think your missing the point, nobody should have an FAC/Firearm if they are found GUILTY of the offences you mentioned.

 

Yes you should have your Firearms confiscated in the event anyone has been arrested on suspicion of the said offences but we dont make the laws or enforce them.

 

No, your right there isnt any justice, think of the amount of FAC holders that shouldnt have a spud gun let alone a firearm...life is a bitch.

 

 

Please refer to 2nd paragraph of CLUB SEARCH...

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7185769.stm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only a few months ago i had my SGC/FC removed from my possesion as well as all my gun`s and that was because a complaint had been lodged against me.

An Unsubstantiated claim i might add and i was released later that day without charge.

Probably due to my previous serious convictions the police acted correctly and in my opinion and had my full support and backing of there actions even though my guns and certificates were kept for over another month.

Why in this case was he given or allowed access to any firearms due to the seriousness off his crime`s??

Im my opinion any crime including Drink/Drive should be an instant dismissal or refusal for any type access to licenced weapon`s including membership to gun clubs/ranges..

Ok you cant tar them all with the same brush i hear you say but what you can tar with the same brush is folk who are most probably or liable to suffer from stress or depression from similar serious allegations.

So why take the bungee risk??

I hope we see some resignations and job losses due to serious mis conduct and poor decision that were made..

 

 

Its a good point vim, like you say the police acted correctly in your case its a shame that all constabularys are not singing of the same hymn sheet.

 

Yep I think thats a fair cop, drink driving is total madness and should carry a serious penalty. I dont understand your point on taring folk with the same brush who are under stress from similar allegations... Are you refering to FAC holdrs in general?

 

Yes I think there should be some cases to answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but I can not belive this chap was out on bail never mind having access to firearms. It should matter not if they are a copper.After all the police are there to up hold the law, not make it,The fact remains (and if you don't think its fact go ask BASC how many calls they have had/get about people having there rifles taken of them for far far less)The reason for having your license temperately revoked is simple.Its because you may not be of sound mind, or if anything else goes wrong you could be tipped over the edge.ITS for your safety and the safety of the public. And lets face facts here, the chap in question was up for manslghter,Hell I know people that have had there rifles taken of them for no other reason than some one has rung up the police and said that xxxxx has just threatened me, (and I don't mean with a gun,)I was under the impression that if you where charged or an accusation was made against you, even for drink driving(as this is a criminal offence),you had your rifles taken from you until it was all sorted out.and then and only then did you have the right to get your rifles back.It has nothing to do with being guilty until proven guilty. Its about protecting members of the public from what you could potentially do to them.and protecting you from yourself. A little bit of hardship endured by yourself could have saved a life times suffering for some.ATBColin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but I can not belive this chap was out on bail never mind having access to firearms. It should matter not if they are a copper.After all the police are there to up hold the law, not make it,The fact remains (and if you don't think its fact go ask BASC how many calls they have had/get about people having there rifles taken of them for far far less)The reason for having your license temperately revoked is simple.Its because you may not be of sound mind, or if anything else goes wrong you could be tipped over the edge.ITS for your safety and the safety of the public. And lets face facts here, the chap in question was up for manslghter,Hell I know people that have had there rifles taken of them for no other reason than some one has rung up the police and said that xxxxx has just threatened me, (and I don't mean with a gun,)I was under the impression that if you where charged or an accusation was made against you, even for drink driving(as this is a criminal offence),you had your rifles taken from you until it was all sorted out.and then and only then did you have the right to get your rifles back.It has nothing to do with being guilty until proven guilty. Its about protecting members of the public from what you could potentially do to them.and protecting you from yourself. A little bit of hardship endured by yourself could have saved a life times suffering for some.ATBColin

 

Drink driving seems the order of the day, was this guy also done for that as well...? Good job his FAC was revoked then, cant get my head around anyone that drinks and drives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Drink driving seems the order of the day, was this guy also done for that as well...? Good job his FAC was revoked then, cant get my head around anyone that drinks and drives.

 

the reason i used drink driving is 99% of people that drive and drink have at one time or another done the at the same time.

you go out on a Friday/sat night and then you drive the next day, and it does not have to be early,guess what you might have been over the limit.

http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/DrivingIs...1127227453.html

 

one thing is for sure though, best thing is to remove the fire arms from anyone who is accused of braking the law.

hell even vim agrees with it, :lol:

 

ATB

Colin :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What im refering to Jame`s is when some one`s been bailed to attend court for a serious offence such as Murder/Man salughter or GBH 18 or 20 then it`s most probably going to end up in a custodial sentance more often than not.

Things such as the loss of marriages/partner`s, jobs, pensions and even home`s let alone children as well as hobby`s place a great burden on the shoulder`s of those charged even if there guilty or not.

The pressure could well send them to act as this coward did.

A serious offence is a serious offence you should`nt be treated diffrently thus tarring the same fecker`s accordingly..

 

 

Ah right im with you now, I thought you was refering to the individual rather than the collective but I guess it makes no odds reading your post.

 

Once all the facts have been established of course you right in saying everyone should be treated accordingly, in this case I think his FAC was revoked but it doesnt help those he managed to murder though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

spiral staircaseing sick

 

the individuals that let him free and the individuals that should have revoked his licence should be held up for manslaughter for they are as twisted and spiral staircaseed up as the murderer

 

what the spiral staircase were they thinking????

 

these bastards think they are above everyone else and they should be made an example of

 

it is us the nations children that are supposed to be in control of the politicians and law enforcers and NOT the other way round

 

they must remember that we have the legal right to over throw spiral staircaseers like this if we feel we are being dictated to and things arnt being done OUR way the fair way

 

they are employed by US

Link to comment
Share on other sites

James

you didnt answer my question

do you think that anyone who is charged or on bail should be allowed to retain there guns if the offence constitute a revoke of the ticket ??

and simple yes or no will do mate

 

 

Ah sorry Pete, I didnt realise we were talking about you...have you been convicted, charged, bailed over I dont know its not my business.

 

I cant answer your question as I dont know what the circumstances are/were and in any case im no Solicitor/Barrister so in any case my answer is/would be worth squat. It would be an opinion mind but purely without fact wouldnt you say.

 

The simple yes/no is far from simple im sure, but I know one thing I wouldnt believe everything you read in the papers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

james

when did i say I was talking about myself ?? please answer the question do you think its OK for someone who has been charged/bailed (not yet convicted as this can takes years) who holds a FAC/SGC to be able to retain there ticket when the offence constitutes for there ticket to be taken away,

The guy who shot his wife and mother in law hadnt been convicted BUT was charged and on bail is this OK ????

 

 

QUOTE(Funky Bunch @ Jan 14 2008, 06:27 PM)

Ahh so if Iam charged with GBH,Murder,drink driving or any serious motoring offence,assult,rape,buggery,ect ect ect thats OK for me to keep my FAC ???

 

 

Pete not sure where this is going really, but how the jam doughnut should I know if its ok, what am I the well of moral justice! Use your own interlect mate.

 

I wasnt privvy to any of the proceedings...or are you up to something? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

James

why so defensive,Iam just curious as you have clearly stated in another post further back you think that its OK to be charged and bailed but not to have your guns removed,I find this fasinating

here it is mate if you have forgoton

Sorry but being charged and bailed doesnt mean a person should lose their FAC/SGC until proven guilty. Losing your ticket when charged or bailed is horsesh*t and no better than those making the laws up as they go along...Innocent until proven guilty, the minute we lose that we lose it all.

 

 

Defensive? Sorry mate im being defensive, you are reading far too much into all this I think. Read the above again mate, ive not said you shouldnt have a firearm confiscated, ive said you shouldnt lose your FAC/SGC until you proven guilty. Surely this is all dependant on the offence? Or are you saying because you got caught speeding you should have your rifle taken...come on Pete use your brains, or have you forgotten. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy