other than him looking like a total bell-end
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"
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"
Which is a stupid law!
+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. atb TimUsual 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.
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"
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?
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
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!
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.