jimbo1984
Well-Known Member
The fact that they’re ignoring HO guidelines should be a good jumping off point , they just need a test case of someone not being granted a cert due to not paying fees
BASC will ensure views on Scotland general licences are expressed “loud and clear”
- Thread starter DebbieBASC
- Start date
- Status
gerarddwatts
Well-Known Member
The HOG has no weight in law at all, therefore no scope for judicial review in that direction.
CarlW
Well-Known Member
There is a case to argue that HOG creates a reasonable expectation, and that by deviating from it so grotesquely, in a way which is so injurious to applicants in some force areas (but not in others) that a given police force is behaving unreasonably.
Whether you win or not is besides the point. You seek permission from the court to apply and then you open negotiations.
gerarddwatts
Well-Known Member
Wrong. To initiate something like that and then to lose is worse than not doing anything.
Don't get me wrong....I'm as cross and upset about all of this crap as anybody, but we must learn to manage what we can expect our organisations to be able to do....to rant about their lunches and vehicles is nonsense.
The blame game as played by some is pointless and unhelpful.
Don't get me wrong....I'm as cross and upset about all of this crap as anybody, but we must learn to manage what we can expect our organisations to be able to do....to rant about their lunches and vehicles is nonsense.
The blame game as played by some is pointless and unhelpful.
CarlW
Well-Known Member
Wrong, defeatist and curt.
The only initiation you need to do is get councils advice, you then make a decision whether or not to take it forward, IF you believe you are on shaky ground obviously don't make the other side aware of your advice. My point was if there are areas that could be exploited as WJ have then spend a few bob and get the advice. Whilst Im no lawyer the fact that some police services are quite openly interpreting the law AND the guidance as they want to and not as it should be I would expect that there could be some avenue to confront them. Firearms licensing are known to run an issue until an individual spends the money to take them to court and then backing off before the case is heard. If their view is not challenged they carry on regardless, hence the vast differences in the way FACs are dealt with.
gerarddwatts
Well-Known Member
I think I shall finish my lunch on the shore of Loch Druidabeg in S Uist and then catch some more brownies. I'll leave the anger and bile to those better at it than I.
gerarddwatts
Well-Known Member
Hadn't realised we'd met.
Prolly a basc on holiday!
Funny enough I have no anger or bile just making an observation about what could be done, your thread on the other hand seems to be the one full of anger.. reminds me of this.......A fly was buzzing around a barn one day when he noticed a pile of fresh cow manure. Due to the fact that it had been hours since his last meal, he flew down and began to eat. He ate and ate and ate. Finally he decided he had eaten enough and tried to fly away. He had eaten too much however and could not get off the ground. As he looked around, wondering what to do, he spotted a pitchfork leaning against the wall. So he climbed to the top of the handle and jumped off, thinking that once he got airborne he would be able to take flight. Unfortunately, he was wrong. He dropped like a rock, splattering hard against the floor. The moral to the story. Never fly off the handle when you know you’re full of $hit.
We havnt needed medical checks for the last 40 years. So why the fook do we need them now?
We've got nearly a full house of f'ing snow flakes, tree huggers and the county has gone PC mad.
The medical doesn't solve any issues as there are no issues to be solved.
It's just a rubber stamp job to make some desk jerk happy.
End of rant.
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
Correct. A Court would look at what was "reasonable" and seek some sort of reference point to define what that "reasonable" was. It is likely that in doing so it would look not only at the intent of Parliament (so would go back to the debate and Committee Stage) but would also look at any associated "Memorandum of Guidance" or "Notes of Best Practice". Which would be likely the Home Office document. It might even if the Chief Constable were, in the Court's opinion, so unreasonable known as "Wednesbury unreasonableness", also have a acted IF ONLY BASC HAD TAKEN THE MATTER THAT FAR. It may have been likely that, indeed, asking for a medical opinion beyond that envisaged by Parliament and/or reference in the Home Office guidance would have been held to be so unreasonable or in excess of powers allowed.
I dont know when you took your law degree but it is the implementation of other than justified guidance issued by a competent authority which can be judicially reviewed e.g. Design Standards issued by the Department for Transport which were amended and a requirement of road schemes local to a public authority were challenged in that an aggrieved person found the public authorities derogation to less than nationally advised standards unacceptable and challenged it. (There was no consultation undertaken locally).
The Public Authority were told to revise their design standards to meet those supplied by DFT because " experts in their field had decided that the standard produced with significant consultation was the national requirement for safety (inter alia).
The challenge was not based on LAW but on abuse of POWER. It succeeded and the local design standard was struck down.
If you are unable to see the parallels with HO guidance and police abuse of Power by amending National Guidance locally, then you don't see things as I do. BASC should, as a minimum, have tried a JR - its cheap, a quick initial process and you are judged to have a case or not and the case proceed or not on that basis. "The Political Route", was joke to everyone, except BASC.
I am sorry but your statement above is completely wrong and your defence of the indefensible is without justification.
As a final comment on your understanding of this issue, I hope the trout won, in my book it deserved to.
I think the reality is, people rely too much on the organisations to fight their corner and do nothing themselves, the pathetic response to the DEFRA call for evidence once again shows this, 4000 thats all that bothered, while 200,000 signed (well, clicked a box) a petition to have packham sacked from an employer who doesn't employ him. Now imagine if DEFRA or the houses of parliament received 200,000 letters or emails. Perhaps BASC/NGO/CA etc should stop lobbying and invest in adult literacy and get members campaigning
jimbo1984
Well-Known Member
I know anyone would think these organisations you speak of get paid to do so ??? One even has the cheek to call itself the “ voice of shooting
“The best evidence which went before the EFRA Committee was that of songbird survival. Totally impatial, non - aligned with either side in the debate, its information will carry huge weight. BASC should think, as I have already said, about supporting totally independent studies of the effects of all forms of shooting on the environment and the economic impacts - I did say impartial so please dont quote the last study related to economics.
I predict grouse moors should be the next study target. Its the pinnacle of what the RSPB has been or wannabees want to stop, so it should be a primary target for environment assessments on the control of predators and the effects on bio-diversity.
Has anyone gathered accurate information about RSPB corvid culls or other culls on their reserves. Wouldn't it be surprising if there is relatively more biodiversity on shooting land, including moors than set aside reserves managed by amateurs ?
I predict grouse moors should be the next study target. Its the pinnacle of what the RSPB has been or wannabees want to stop, so it should be a primary target for environment assessments on the control of predators and the effects on bio-diversity.
Has anyone gathered accurate information about RSPB corvid culls or other culls on their reserves. Wouldn't it be surprising if there is relatively more biodiversity on shooting land, including moors than set aside reserves managed by amateurs ?
countrryboy
Well-Known Member
Ur dead right kes and greenmist, why it's also very important to be a member of the GWCT which has been producing these studies for decades now.
As well as songbird survival.
As I've said before I really hope studies are continuing at Langholm and at Ilkley where grouse shooting has recently stopped.
Esp so at Ilkley with the recent wildfires
When u read the history of the studies at GWCT site it owns at Allerton too, plenty off decent info out there. Developed a wild bird shoot from nothing then stopped feeding/management just to monitor the decline in bio diversity.
As the whole basc/org thing, Alister Mitchell wrote a good piece in this week's ST's this week (back page so easily read for free while Mrs shops
)
He quite rightly described many posts online as like a terrier race where half the field ignores the fox tail and starts fighting with each other.
Some off the venom u spout is unreal, let people join which ever org they want.
The many shooters not in an org is a bigger problem..
I'm not a big basc supporter nowadays ( but still a member as well as other org) but not going to bully people if they want to be. Just pleased there in an org
JR's and court cases only force their hands if the other side's lawyers have a genuine fear off losing. If they have no fear off losing there never going to change things.
Sadly the time for threatening the polis is long gone, if ANY off the orgs had stood up to polis Scotland right back at the start they would off buckled easily as completely skint. But to late now for simple solutions.
Surely even sacs should off been doing this too as there meant to be strong on firearms laws yet done nothing also.
As well as songbird survival.
As I've said before I really hope studies are continuing at Langholm and at Ilkley where grouse shooting has recently stopped.
Esp so at Ilkley with the recent wildfires
When u read the history of the studies at GWCT site it owns at Allerton too, plenty off decent info out there. Developed a wild bird shoot from nothing then stopped feeding/management just to monitor the decline in bio diversity.
As the whole basc/org thing, Alister Mitchell wrote a good piece in this week's ST's this week (back page so easily read for free while Mrs shops
)He quite rightly described many posts online as like a terrier race where half the field ignores the fox tail and starts fighting with each other.
Some off the venom u spout is unreal, let people join which ever org they want.
The many shooters not in an org is a bigger problem..
I'm not a big basc supporter nowadays ( but still a member as well as other org) but not going to bully people if they want to be. Just pleased there in an org
JR's and court cases only force their hands if the other side's lawyers have a genuine fear off losing. If they have no fear off losing there never going to change things.
Sadly the time for threatening the polis is long gone, if ANY off the orgs had stood up to polis Scotland right back at the start they would off buckled easily as completely skint. But to late now for simple solutions.
Surely even sacs should off been doing this too as there meant to be strong on firearms laws yet done nothing also.
- Status
Similar threads
