Incompetent RFD

[brown dog]

What a strange thread.

I think you're all just debating your interpretations of the meaning of the word 'substance'.   ...some seeing it as meaning strength, some see it as meaning material.  

I do think a couple of you have been quite rude to Simgre, who I don't see as being rude, just having a different opinion.

Having sat on courts martial boards for endless weeks watching lawyers spend hours arguing about the meaning of legislative words and phrases, that's precisely the argument that would play out if this were tested in court.

I have to say, without checking wording, if the act says 'substance or strength', to me, the 'or' indicates that substance is not being taken to mean strength, hence the use of differentiator 'or'.   ...and  that's what the courtroom argument would be about.

Time to shake hands all round I think 😊

 

 

[John MH]

Sorry simgre, I apologies for suggesting you were a small songbird.

[brown dog]

8 minutes ago, John MH said:

Sorry simgre, I apologies for suggesting you were a small songbird.

😂 Tit!

[Mattnall]

19 hours ago, saddler said:

....as the "unwitting purchaser" in this I have had personal property seized "so it can be investigated and go to Proof" when the ONLY reason I left it with the RFD in question WAS to have it sent to Proof
 

I thought you were trying to sell the firearm, hence its need for proof.

[saddler]

3 hours ago, Mattnall said:

I thought you were trying to sell the firearm, hence its need for proof.

AFTER it had been Proof Tested it would THEN have been going on its merry way....NOT before
The CORRECT way around selling ANY gun without Proof (though I could name at least one importer I worked for who would have pre-sold/allocated guns before they hit the UK, let alone before they left Proof)

[Roy W]

21 minutes ago, saddler said:

AFTER it had been Proof Tested it would THEN have been going on its merry way....NOT before
The CORRECT way around selling ANY gun without Proof (though I could name at least one importer I worked for who would have pre-sold/allocated guns before they hit the UK, let alone before they left Proof)

Apart from the fact you had already submitted your FAC for a 1-4-1 variation, which can only be done once a firearm is transferred to someone else/sold.

There are gaps in your account which have no doubt led to the questions the FEO is asking. You say the FEO has now committed several criminal offences themselves, I'd be very interested to know what those offences are and what legislation makes them criminal?

I think the only certainty in this whole thread is that it was a complete clusterfcuk!

[Mattnall]

23 hours ago, Mattnall said:

Quote

....as the "unwitting purchaser" in this I have had personal property seized "so it can be investigated and go to Proof" when the ONLY reason I left it with the RFD in question WAS to have it sent to Proof

I thought you were trying to sell the firearm, hence its need for proof.

19 hours ago, saddler said:

AFTER it had been Proof Tested it would THEN have been going on its merry way....NOT before
The CORRECT way around selling ANY gun without Proof (though I could name at least one importer I worked for who would have pre-sold/allocated guns before they hit the UK, let alone before they left Proof)

...but, but, you said you were the unwitting purchaser. 🤔

[Popsbengo]

4 minutes ago, Mattnall said:

...but, but, you said you were the unwitting purchaser. 🤔

here lies madness...    I hoped this thread had died at last 😁

[brown dog]