Travelling as a passenger with guns after a few drinks

[Corf30]

Iv seen shooting so dangerous the guns must of been ****ed...turned out they stone cold sober and shouldn't be allowed a shotgun in the first place.Never thought I'd say this but I think there should be some kind of course you should attend before your allowed a shotgun.

 

[Dunwaters]

I just can’t think of a good reason to remove a firearm from a cabinet , set out to use it in whatever capacity , and think that adding alcohol to the equation is a good idea.

That’s all.

There are some of us perfectly capable of having a couple of glasses of wine with our lunch, possibly a cigar and a snifter at the end of the day and can still be trusted to safely carry our slipped firearms to the car and from the car to the cabinet and put them away without endangering anyone, not even ourselves.
The whole point of a day’s shooting or stalking is to enjoy yourself, providing safety is not compromised and the law is not being broken I see no reason why a modest amount of alcohol consumption shouldn’t be an option.

 

[Heym SR20]

I have had a good look through the Firearms Act. There is nothing ti say you prohibited from using a shotgun or rifle whilst ****ed or stoned.

However the chief officer of police has the powers to determine whether or not an individual is fit to possess and use firearms or shotguns. And this power can be exercised both at the time when a certificate is issued and whilst you in possession.

So if Chief officer of police is advised that a certain individual who holds a certificate was ****ed out of his head, was drunk and disorderly and somewhat rude to one of his officers, this would be taken into account. If it was then added that the individual was in the back of the pickup sitting next to a number of guns and cartridge bags with his mates and whilst the driver was not over the limit, all the other passengers were pretty intoxicated and swigging out of hip flasks, and that the reason the truck was pulled over was that he was mooning the pub out of the window as they left, it doesn’t paint a very good picture, especially when our ****ed individual the offers to show the female police sergeant his weaponry.

Compared to a police officer pulling a truck over. Driver completely sober, yes passengers had had a few drinks with the after shoot dinner but not intoxicated. Driver, who has a shotgun certificate, informed the police officer that the shotguns were all in the boot safe and secure, and and under three day rule he would ensure they were safely secured when they get to their destination etc.

It is all down to perception and behaviour. These days Police are under a lot of pressure and if there is any doubt as regards behaviour, the guns are removed from the equation immediately and then situation is sorted.

With a shotgun certificate there is three day borrowing rule whereby if you have a certificate you can take possession of shotgun for three days without having to do a formal transfer. I think this could be quite useful at times.

 

[McKenzie]

I have had a good look through the Firearms Act. There is nothing ti say you prohibited from using a shotgun or rifle whilst ****ed or stoned.

However the chief officer of police has the powers to determine whether or not an individual is fit to possess and use firearms or shotguns. And this power can be exercised both at the time when a certificate is issued and whilst you in possession.

So if Chief officer of police is advised that a certain individual who holds a certificate was ****ed out of his head, was drunk and disorderly and somewhat rude to one of his officers, this would be taken into account. If it was then added that the individual was in the back of the pickup sitting next to a number of guns and cartridge bags with his mates and whilst the driver was not over the limit, all the other passengers were pretty intoxicated and swigging out of hip flasks, and that the reason the truck was pulled over was that he was mooning the pub out of the window as they left, it doesn’t paint a very good picture, especially when our ****ed individual the offers to show the female police sergeant his weaponry.

Compared to a police officer pulling a truck over. Driver completely sober, yes passengers had had a few drinks with the after shoot dinner but not intoxicated. Driver, who has a shotgun certificate, informed the police officer that the shotguns were all in the boot safe and secure, and and under three day rule he would ensure they were safely secured when they get to their destination etc.

It is all down to perception and behaviour. These days Police are under a lot of pressure and if there is any doubt as regards behaviour, the guns are removed from the equation immediately and then situation is sorted.

With a shotgun certificate there is three day borrowing rule whereby if you have a certificate you can take possession of shotgun for three days without having to do a formal transfer. I think this could be quite useful at times.

Just so.

 

[TITANIUM]

Firstly, Like many others on this thread, I do not believe that guns and alcohol mix - at all.







The issue for me here is yet again the press misquoting the law. To the extent of my understanding, there is no offence of being drunk in charge of a Firearm - the offence I suspect being referred to is drunk in charge of a loaded firearm. The Licensing Act 1872 makes it an offence to be drunk in charge of a loaded gun. The Firearms Act 1968 makes it an offence to transfer a firearm or ammunition to anyone believed to be drunk. (So loaders beware...)







In the instance referred to, I do not see an offence. In regard to Police measurement, I tend to agree. Their role is to uphold the law - and for me that also means ensuring the law as it stands is carried out, not making it up for their own purposes. As citizens owning legally holding firearms, we have the right of the protection of the law, not just the constant myopic challenging of whether we meet it. Innocent until proven guilty is a founding principle of UK law and the media and others seem to be forgetting this.

Such scenarios could be covered in Scotland by the Common Law crime of 'Culpable and Reckless Conduct'. I am not saying that it is definitively covered, rather, it is not beyond the realms of possibility given the subjective nature of Common Law Crimes in Scotland. In essence, each case is measured on its own merits and at the mercy of the sitting Sheriff at the time. Just saying as another way of looking at this topic.