StephenToast
Well-Known Member
I don't know how I feel about this one. What I do know is that I'm glad it isn't me that the final decision came down to.
The most depressing thread ever.
- Thread starter Dunwaters
- Start date
Foxyboy43
Well-Known Member
Hmmm.
Always an easy temptation to sit in judgement on the high morale ground, as indeed was my initial reaction when I read the original thread. However I suspect the only difference between this lad and the rest of us is that he was caught and convicted of doing something which very many people have done and got away with. Yes, an utterly foolish thing to do on both occasions and presumably appropriate sentences were passed for each; I also get it that these behaviours should be considered in the fitness to hold a firearm but I do have an uneasy feeling that to some extent at least he is being punished twice. That to me is not what true justice is about.
Always an easy temptation to sit in judgement on the high morale ground, as indeed was my initial reaction when I read the original thread. However I suspect the only difference between this lad and the rest of us is that he was caught and convicted of doing something which very many people have done and got away with. Yes, an utterly foolish thing to do on both occasions and presumably appropriate sentences were passed for each; I also get it that these behaviours should be considered in the fitness to hold a firearm but I do have an uneasy feeling that to some extent at least he is being punished twice. That to me is not what true justice is about.
Hunter300
Well-Known Member
I have not read through the entire post, however……. I lost a girlfriend to a drunk driver when I was 18, a friend to a knife stabbing of a lad that was OFF his head on crack when I was 25, and finally lost a parent due to alcoholism……
I think you can guess where “I am going” so I’ll stop at NO SUBSTANCE ABUSE IS EXCUSABLE PERIOD.
This lad in question has been caught twice, but how many times did he got away with it…..
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
My sincere condolences for your losses.
However your position is quite extreme, if it were implemented how many people would have anFAC or drivers license?
Had there actually been an accident I would agree with you .
I had my boat broken into twice when it was parked on my driveway, and all my fishing gear stolen out of it. I sold the boat and gave up fishing. For me it is not about who did a "youthful indiscretion", its about the effect it has on me. If you can transgress and later get what you want, it sends a clear message that your earlier actions do not count against you in any way. You can have a "free" go. This particular individual has shown poor judgement with drink, poor judgement with drugs, and poor judgement with driving. He should not get a chance to show poor judgement with a firearm.
RescueMe0007
Well-Known Member
To be fair to Dunwater he was not making the comparison you allege. His point was that young men are prone to risky behaviours and are commonly rambunctious during their late teens and early twenties. That does not preclude them from maturing into thoroughly sensible mature men with time. I'm inclined to agree with his point, as long as the individual's behaviour as a mature adult is responsible. I have experience in the services, lots of young men full of testosterone and energy but often immature and a little wild. Every military in the world takes such raw material and aims to turn them into a product that has great value to society. I have witnessed many such transformations, it leads me to believe that second chances may well be in everyone's interests.
Hunter300
Well-Known Member
I see your point, believe me I do, and I know EVERY situation is quite different. So let me put it this way… YES everyone deserve a second chance I agree, perhaps a “ second chance” with something as potentially dangerous as an FAC should be an “closely monitored” 2nd chance until the candidate has truly shown that he/she can indeed be “trustworthy” of the responsibility…..?
Hunter300
Well-Known Member
This I MUST agree with!!!!
I have discussed this type of situation with an feo and the feedback I got was ( I'm not sure how official it is) that many people end up doing things that they get into trouble for; some quite serious but that if a period of two licence terms (10 years) has passed with out any problems then reapply as it's viewed as a big positive that the person has changed their ways.
Obviously there is no guarantee on getting a license or getting one back but it's was put to me to encourage the individual to apply if they have behaved and had good reason for a certificate.
I do however feel that 2 similar offences in short succession the individual would have to demonstrate a real change in there life choices.
Obviously there is no guarantee on getting a license or getting one back but it's was put to me to encourage the individual to apply if they have behaved and had good reason for a certificate.
I do however feel that 2 similar offences in short succession the individual would have to demonstrate a real change in there life choices.
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
No argument there
MAH
Well-Known Member
That's a good question.
The evidence of recklessness, and disregard for the law is clear, (the 2 conventions), but how does an individual prove that they have changed there lifestyle choices and behaviour?
I agree, people can and do change their behaviour. But whilst the passage of time might allow that to happen, it will not guarantee it.
My apologies for the delay in replying, but I was curious what the view of Home Office was. So Google the Statutory Guidance to Police Chiefs, here a couple of screen shots.
One describes factors that indicate "Risk", and behaviours that are likely to prevent a certificate being issued.
The other helps answer your question above, and confirms there is indeed a second chance available to those who can demonstrate that they have changed their behaviour.
Stalker62
Well-Known Member
Sadly, and a lot of damage.
I would also add.
I was once 18...
Been there. Never got caught...
However...
The only possible mitigation for those so inclined to rule out the granting of an FAC to someone who’s had there indiscretion found out is that of how slender is the thread of firearms ownership in the 21st Century. However, I do not subscribe to the non-forgiving narrative and agree with the Op’s we’ll considered concern.
Don’t forget, there are few more self-righteous than those of the good fortune to be an un-chastised repentant sinner.
K
Don’t forget, there are few more self-righteous than those of the good fortune to be an un-chastised repentant sinner.
K
Cumbrian 1
Well-Known Member
Just because someone drink/drug drives doesn’t mean that they will ever commit a crime with a firearm.
I mean how many people who have been caught have been banned from operating heavy plant, using a nail gun, operating a hammer etc
However I do feel some sympathy for the police, if the chap in question went onto commit a crime with a legally held firearm in light of his previous convictions the sh1t storm would be severe with probable further restrictions on legal gun owners.
However if it was down to me, well as an easy going chap I would probably give him the benefit of the doubt.
I mean how many people who have been caught have been banned from operating heavy plant, using a nail gun, operating a hammer etc
However I do feel some sympathy for the police, if the chap in question went onto commit a crime with a legally held firearm in light of his previous convictions the sh1t storm would be severe with probable further restrictions on legal gun owners.
However if it was down to me, well as an easy going chap I would probably give him the benefit of the doubt.
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
Sadly you’re right, young men make a lot of poor choices, many more than any other cohort, but most of them straighten up and fly right in their early 20’s .
If someone has a run in or 2 which doesn’t involve violence or harm to others I’d personally give them a chance provided they’ve been clear of trouble for a couple of years.
TringSaint
Well-Known Member
It’s an interesting thread is this one.
I can see the viewpoint of the ‘he was young and stupid’ group and also the ‘he got caught twice and should have learned his lesson’ group.
The thing is that nowadays everything is decided based on risk, and if any person shows even a slightly elevated risk when applying for a license then the police are going to see that as a red flag and will likely say no.
If you were in their shoes would you grant a license to this chap, given his record?
In terms of the individual in question, two driving convictions for drink /drugs does suggest a cavalier attitude towards to law and the safety of others, plus the potential risks that he associates with drug dealers who may wish to target such an individual if they know them to own firearms.
Yes, most of us have done stupid things and break certain laws (moderate speeding for instance) but there is a huge difference between acting out in the edge of the law and steaming right over it. Twice.
Maybe in time this chap will be able to demonstrate good character and that will allow the police to grant his license, but as it stands, he doesn’t stand a cats change in hell of getting a firearm and he should recognise that and reflect on his life choices.
I can see the viewpoint of the ‘he was young and stupid’ group and also the ‘he got caught twice and should have learned his lesson’ group.
The thing is that nowadays everything is decided based on risk, and if any person shows even a slightly elevated risk when applying for a license then the police are going to see that as a red flag and will likely say no.
If you were in their shoes would you grant a license to this chap, given his record?
In terms of the individual in question, two driving convictions for drink /drugs does suggest a cavalier attitude towards to law and the safety of others, plus the potential risks that he associates with drug dealers who may wish to target such an individual if they know them to own firearms.
Yes, most of us have done stupid things and break certain laws (moderate speeding for instance) but there is a huge difference between acting out in the edge of the law and steaming right over it. Twice.
Maybe in time this chap will be able to demonstrate good character and that will allow the police to grant his license, but as it stands, he doesn’t stand a cats change in hell of getting a firearm and he should recognise that and reflect on his life choices.
Interesting mix of viewpoints on this thread. I would like to return to my original stance. It did not matter to me if the thief was a bishop or a pedophile or anything in between. My boat was still broken into. My property was still stolen. I no longer have it. There is a criminal law system in this country. If you choose to break the law it shows your character. If you choose to break it twice it also shows disregard for law and order. If he is allowed a firearm he is statistically more likely to offend than a person with no criminal convictions. Stop thinking about the offender and concentrate upon the effect of their crimes against society instead.
Similar threads
