Bristol magistrate was fined £300 for breaching the terms of his FAC

other than him looking like a total bell-end
it is certainly food for thought (or at least counting)

bet there are more than a few people over their allowance not least those that still seem to believe loose bullets "don't count until made into full rounds"
 
I want to know how the police knew to visit?
More to this I'd warrant, wife winding the police up through the divorce would be my bet.
 
other than him looking like a total bell-end
it is certainly food for thought (or at least counting)

bet there are more than a few people over their allowance not least those that still seem to believe loose bullets "don't count until made into full rounds"

No problem with your powers of observation then, but someone please enlighten me on precisely how these ammunition limits contribute to the prevention of armed crime? atb Tim
 
Usual caveat about news stories and only seeing part of the picture.

As I read it he had 110 rounds over his permitted holding - so presumably the calibre/ type etc was something he was authorised to possess. The report says it was acknowledged to be a technical error.

Marriage break up is noted - but per the report ( other than excuse for memory lapse ) does not seem to be an issue.

The law is the law and caveat above emphasized - but how exactly has the public good been preserved/ protected and what. In relative terms, what technical and administrative errors have licensing departments made - without any criminal sanction?

If it had been shotgun ammo, there would be zero issue.

I repeat gentlemen, we collectively have allowed the relentless pursuit of minutae, have stood aside and allowed the most outrageous slander to pass unchallenged, have kept quiet whilst the way society thinks about firearms has been changed - and the results are being reaped. I suspect we are by no means toward the end of that process.

As covered in another thread, the potential is there to discuss some changes to firearms administration. The extent and scope of that is hugely restricted by the political perception status which we have. That's reality and not bemoaning that at this time - there is nothing we can do about that today and we are far better achieving the realistic goal here and now. BUT what we choose to do about that future perception is as important and something much closer to home for each and every one of us as an individual.

​Not a manifesto, as always just thinking aloud.
 
A nice easy, and some may say somewhat pointless, conviction for the police and CPS. Would a warning not have sufficed?

All convictions like this achieve is to get the backs up of ordinary law abiding citizens.
 
Usual caveat about news stories and only seeing part of the picture.

As I read it he had 110 rounds over his permitted holding - so presumably the calibre/ type etc was something he was authorised to possess. The report says it was acknowledged to be a technical error.

Marriage break up is noted - but per the report ( other than excuse for memory lapse ) does not seem to be an issue.

The law is the law and caveat above emphasized - but how exactly has the public good been preserved/ protected and what. In relative terms, what technical and administrative errors have licensing departments made - without any criminal sanction?

If it had been shotgun ammo, there would be zero issue.

I repeat gentlemen, we collectively have allowed the relentless pursuit of minutae, have stood aside and allowed the most outrageous slander to pass unchallenged, have kept quiet whilst the way society thinks about firearms has been changed - and the results are being reaped. I suspect we are by no means toward the end of that process.

As covered in another thread, the potential is there to discuss some changes to firearms administration. The extent and scope of that is hugely restricted by the political perception status which we have. That's reality and not bemoaning that at this time - there is nothing we can do about that today and we are far better achieving the realistic goal here and now. BUT what we choose to do about that future perception is as important and something much closer to home for each and every one of us as an individual.

​Not a manifesto, as always just thinking aloud.
+1 I agree but what hope is there for us when our major shooting organisations are too inept to realise that there is a problem and too feeble to do anything about it. :banghead: atb Tim
 
other than him looking like a total bell-end
it is certainly food for thought (or at least counting)

bet there are more than a few people over their allowance not least those that still seem to believe loose bullets "don't count until made into full rounds"

I did not know that ? so in that case a non FAC holder would be guilty of possession of live ammo if he had all the components but unassembled ? What about non FAC inert ammo?
 
other than him looking like a total bell-end
it is certainly food for thought (or at least counting)

bet there are more than a few people over their allowance not least those that still seem to believe loose bullets "don't count until made into full rounds"

I have 2 entry’s on my fac one for expanding heads (licensing departments terming not mine ) of 500
And a total of maximum to be possessed for the same calibre of 350 so my maximum loaded rounds is 350 or maybe 500?
 
I did not know that ? so in that case a non FAC holder would be guilty of possession of live ammo if he had all the components but unassembled ? What about non FAC inert ammo?

The term 'bell-end' is cheap and subjective. The man looks normal to me if someone's appearance is any criteria for an instant judgment. I feel sorry that he's lost his FAC and his hobby for such a trivial slip, but magistrate (or even not) he should have known better.

The vital omission from the descriptor 'loose bullets' is EXPANDING of course..... anyone can hold millions of FMJ bullets and inert rounds made from such. If there's a separate authorisation for Expanding (missiles) on an FAC it's additional and SEPARATE from the assembled ammunition permitted - so where's the confusion here?
 
As a matter of interest, how often have you had your ammunition counted during a regular visit from a FEO? I never have.
 
I hate petty stuff like this. Yes he's in the wrong, but where's the public interest in this? Most of us I would imagine have ammo limits counted well into the hundreds across all our Calibers. Is 110 extra going to make any difference?
Unless there's more we don't know, this seems a ridiculous waste of time effort and money.

If you wanted to commit an atrocity that required thousands of bullets, then surely you'd just make multiple purchases over a few days up to your purchasing allowence and hide them somewhere!! Hence being totally pointless anyway!

Until common sense some day prevails, it just reinforces how careful we need to be!
 
I hate petty stuff like this. Yes he's in the wrong, but where's the public interest in this? Most of us I would imagine have ammo limits counted well into the hundreds across all our Calibers. Is 110 extra going to make any difference?
Unless there's more we don't know, this seems a ridiculous waste of time effort and money.

If you wanted to commit an atrocity that required thousands of bullets, then surely you'd just make multiple purchases over a few days up to your purchasing allowence and hide them somewhere!! Hence being totally pointless anyway!

Until common sense some day prevails, it just reinforces how careful we need to be!


I appreciate what you say but rules are rules and he broke them,significantley......plus he is a magistrate.........harsh but facts!!
 
In my view this is a trivial offense and should not have even gone to court what a waste of time and money have the police got nothing better to do !
I have never had amounts counted or even looked at they just tick off each serial number on each gun !
 
Usual caveat about news stories and only seeing part of the picture.

As I read it he had 110 rounds over his permitted holding - so presumably the calibre/ type etc was something he was authorised to possess. The report says it was acknowledged to be a technical error.

Marriage break up is noted - but per the report ( other than excuse for memory lapse ) does not seem to be an issue.

The law is the law and caveat above emphasized - but how exactly has the public good been preserved/ protected and what. In relative terms, what technical and administrative errors have licensing departments made - without any criminal sanction?

If it had been shotgun ammo, there would be zero issue.

I repeat gentlemen, we collectively have allowed the relentless pursuit of minutae, have stood aside and allowed the most outrageous slander to pass unchallenged, have kept quiet whilst the way society thinks about firearms has been changed - and the results are being reaped. I suspect we are by no means toward the end of that process.



As covered in another thread, the potential is there to discuss some changes to firearms administration. The extent and scope of that is hugely restricted by the political perception status which we have. That's reality and not bemoaning that at this time - there is nothing we can do about that today and we are far better achieving the realistic goal here and now. BUT what we choose to do about that future perception is as important and something much closer to home for each and every one of us as an individual.

​Not a manifesto, as always just thinking aloud.


I don't think for one moment the process is over. I think back to the time when i went to work with my shotgun on to the cross bar of my bike.
The 35 years with a open FAC till moved to Sweden. I wonder if i would need a mentor if i moved back to the UK and started stalking again. Don't worry people moving back aint going to happen
Just look at the self imposed rules that have no weight in law that the stalkers have imposed on themselves. I was asked many times for a piece of named ground.
I refused to give it and still got my open ticket. Would i be silly enough to have more than my quota of ammo for plod to count when they came for a visit? No. If i had a round or two to many i just put them out of sight.
If Plod from England was to look in my ammo safe they would have a fit. What is needed in the UK is a strong hunting Org that can nip in the bud the stupidity that some of the firearm laws are in the UK today.
 
Back
Top