Can't deny it seems to be getting worse and worse though
Car breakdown with rifle
- Thread starter Graycj
- Start date
Morkai
Well-Known Member
A lad at work went to see (and bought) an Evoque, 4 yr old, about 40k on the clock.
Tested it, fine, paid, started the drive home and got 10 miles or so from the garage and it blew an injector and ruined the one cylinder.
The garage took it back the same day.
tackb
Well-Known Member
you can't get there with your vehicle and whilst it would be legal to walk there with a rifle if you had legitimate business being there with a rifle i would guess one of the many armed police would stop you and ask what your legitimate reason is.
John Gryphon
Well-Known Member
I bet you would be on the ground quick smart, arms up back and all.
Ruby Tuesday 2
Well-Known Member
I had a mate that stopped off for a mc Donald's after a stalk, five miles later he was stopped by armed police as someone had seen his knife sheaf on his belt ( it was luckily empty ) and reported it . Police turned up at mc donalds saw his vehicle reg on the the stores camera and tracked him down. If reported that have to show to respond I would have done the same as the op just to save any hassle.
I once received a call from my OH whilst out stalking on syndicate land with a friend. Turns out the police were trying to get in touch as someone had reported a vehicle on the private forestry ground (only accessible to a vehicle if the driver had the keys to the padlocks) that (shock, horror!) had an open gun slip on the back seat 
Wasted an hour of our day calling them back to confirm that, yes we had permission, and yes, the rifles we had in our possession matched their details, and yes, we both had our documents in order.
Absolute waste of time for everyone concerned purely because some busybody couldn't mind their own damn business
Wasted an hour of our day calling them back to confirm that, yes we had permission, and yes, the rifles we had in our possession matched their details, and yes, we both had our documents in order.
Absolute waste of time for everyone concerned purely because some busybody couldn't mind their own damn business
I was once going into Kinross services after stalking. Had forgotten to take the knife off my belt. Policeman came out the door as I was going in. He just cocked an eyebrow at me and pointed at my belt.
I did an about face, went to the truck, removed knife and carried on.
I've actually yet to find any police officer who was anything other than sensible and practical when it comes to things like this. I know many malign them, but for my own part every single interaction I've ever had with the police over the years has been positive.
The general public, however
I even once had some woman mutter 'murderer' at me as she walked past me unlocking a forestry gate
8x57
Distinguished Member
You should have responded back by muttering -dogger.
Hahahaha!!! I wish I'd been that quick
I've yet to find any police officer who's even noticed that I always (and I mean always) have a knife on my belt.I've actually yet to find any police officer who was anything other than sensible and practical when it comes to things like this. I know many malign them, but for my own part every single interaction I've ever had with the police over the years has been positive.
The general public, however
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
Did as you did an called the police. And if necessary as them to take possession of the rifle.
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
More likely in some districts of the latter to ask "Do you need any ammunition for that mate 'cos I've got a friend...."
8x57
Distinguished Member
Oh on a joint agency during performance inspection of a night club I took my knife out to cut a sample of a material and a female police officer who was acting as "my bodyguard" wanted to arrest me or at least take my knife off me. The senior police licensing officer told her to p*ss off and not to be so bloody stupid as I was the one with the warrant and that I was only carrying out my job. He added that they wouldn't be on the premise if it wasn't for me.
Rookandrabbit
Well-Known Member
I personally think you did the right thing in this instance……..as sometimes doing nothing….. just sitting in a car 
…………
can be problematic in itself.
More than one person having a very very bad day ……….I remember being told about this one !!!
Stephen Waldorf was a 26-year-old man who was shot and seriously injured by police officers in London on 14 January 1983 after they mistook him for David Martin, an escaped criminal. The shooting caused a public outcry and led to a series of reforms to the training and authorisation of armed police officers in the United Kingdom. Martin was a cross-dressing thief and fraudster who was known to carry firearms and had previously shot a police officer. He escaped from custody in December 1982 and the police placed his girlfriend under surveillance. On the day of the shooting, they followed her as she travelled in a car whose front-seat passenger (Waldorf) resembled Martin. When the car stopped in traffic, Detective Constable Finch—the only officer present who had met Martin—was sent forward on foot to confirm the passenger's identity.
Finch, an armed officer, incorrectly believed that Waldorf was Martin and that he had been recognised. He fired all six rounds from his revolver, first at the vehicle's tyres and then at the passenger. Another officer, believing that Finch was being shot at, fired through the rear windscreen. As the passenger slumped across the seats and out of the driver's door, a third officer, Detective Constable Jardine, opened fire. Finch, having run out of ammunition, began pistol-whipping the man. Only after he lost consciousness did the officers realise that the man was not Martin. Waldorf suffered five bullet wounds (from fourteen shots fired) and a fractured skull. Finch and Jardine were charged with attempted murder and causing grievous bodily harm. They were acquitted in October 1983 and later reinstated, though their firearms authorisations were revoked.
Copied from Wikipedia with their highlight in green ink.
…………can be problematic in itself.
More than one person having a very very bad day ……….I remember being told about this one !!!
Stephen Waldorf was a 26-year-old man who was shot and seriously injured by police officers in London on 14 January 1983 after they mistook him for David Martin, an escaped criminal. The shooting caused a public outcry and led to a series of reforms to the training and authorisation of armed police officers in the United Kingdom. Martin was a cross-dressing thief and fraudster who was known to carry firearms and had previously shot a police officer. He escaped from custody in December 1982 and the police placed his girlfriend under surveillance. On the day of the shooting, they followed her as she travelled in a car whose front-seat passenger (Waldorf) resembled Martin. When the car stopped in traffic, Detective Constable Finch—the only officer present who had met Martin—was sent forward on foot to confirm the passenger's identity.
Finch, an armed officer, incorrectly believed that Waldorf was Martin and that he had been recognised. He fired all six rounds from his revolver, first at the vehicle's tyres and then at the passenger. Another officer, believing that Finch was being shot at, fired through the rear windscreen. As the passenger slumped across the seats and out of the driver's door, a third officer, Detective Constable Jardine, opened fire. Finch, having run out of ammunition, began pistol-whipping the man. Only after he lost consciousness did the officers realise that the man was not Martin. Waldorf suffered five bullet wounds (from fourteen shots fired) and a fractured skull. Finch and Jardine were charged with attempted murder and causing grievous bodily harm. They were acquitted in October 1983 and later reinstated, though their firearms authorisations were revoked.
Copied from Wikipedia with their highlight in green ink.
John Gryphon
Well-Known Member
Trollop.
Holy schitt,I cant ever remember reading of that one. Hounds baying for more blood in a frenzy.
8x57
Distinguished Member
If I remember right the standard of marksmanship from very short distances was astoundingly abysmal, the most serious injury to the innocent person was caused by the pistol whipping.I personally think you did the right thing in this instance……..as sometimes doing nothing….. just sitting in a car
can be problematic in itself.
More than one person having a very very bad day ……….I remember being told about this one !!!
Stephen Waldorf was a 26-year-old man who was shot and seriously injured by police officers in London on 14 January 1983 after they mistook him for David Martin, an escaped criminal. The shooting caused a public outcry and led to a series of reforms to the training and authorisation of armed police officers in the United Kingdom. Martin was a cross-dressing thief and fraudster who was known to carry firearms and had previously shot a police officer. He escaped from custody in December 1982 and the police placed his girlfriend under surveillance. On the day of the shooting, they followed her as she travelled in a car whose front-seat passenger (Waldorf) resembled Martin. When the car stopped in traffic, Detective Constable Finch—the only officer present who had met Martin—was sent forward on foot to confirm the passenger's identity.
Finch, an armed officer, incorrectly believed that Waldorf was Martin and that he had been recognised. He fired all six rounds from his revolver, first at the vehicle's tyres and then at the passenger. Another officer, believing that Finch was being shot at, fired through the rear windscreen. As the passenger slumped across the seats and out of the driver's door, a third officer, Detective Constable Jardine, opened fire. Finch, having run out of ammunition, began pistol-whipping the man. Only after he lost consciousness did the officers realise that the man was not Martin. Waldorf suffered five bullet wounds (from fourteen shots fired) and a fractured skull. Finch and Jardine were charged with attempted murder and causing grievous bodily harm. They were acquitted in October 1983 and later reinstated, though their firearms authorisations were revoked.
Copied from Wikipedia with their highlight in green ink.
It was one big foul up from start to finish and led to a major review of the use of firearms by the Metropolitan police.
Hundreds of firearms authorisations were removed.
Firearms training was much improved as a result.
Unsuitable firearms were removed and replaced.
She came stomping past me in her yoga gear with both her cameltoe and prejudice in full view. I would've been glad to see the back of her if it wasn't for the cellulite
John Gryphon
Well-Known Member
I might have mentioned that the toe was that big that if she had sat on a cane chair there be enough hanging down to feed a terrier for a week.She came stomping past me in her yoga gear with both her cameltoe and prejudice in full view. I would've been glad to see the back of her if it wasn't for the cellulite
This
When I picked my new rifle up recently I walked through a busy part of central London with it in a case, admittedly that didn't look much like a rifle case - one benefit of a "modular" rifle I suppose
I boarded a tube and then took a bus for the remainder of the trip home after that
No one batted an eyelid, not even two police officers who spoke to me while I was waiting at a pedestrian crossing. They merely wished to ensure I wasn't about to attempt to cross the road while the King's Guard were going about their duties (some of you might be able to work out where I was from that).
They didn't even enquire as to what was in the case as I gave them no reason to ask, I was in "casual" clothing rather than in my full stalking rig
Similar threads
