Got arrested this morning

A little bit of common sense is required, if I was wandering around Trafalgar Square with a firearm, then an armed response would probably be appropriate, if I’m doing the same thing in darkest rural Englandshire, and the report makes no mention of dangerous conduct a full on armed response may not be.
On the other hand £400 for a certificate is cheap for the entertainment offered the OP
 
Why would you want to do that ?

The officers are only doing their job. And they DO get death threats made against them - the recent murder charge against one Met officer shows that’s a real issue.
I’m not sorry to step up here - I’ve been in similar situation with the blue suit on and we do take our own security quite seriously.
I am sorry someone thinks that to ‘make them famous’ is a good idea.
The above post is in reality a threat to the officers homelife, wife, partner, children.

For just doing his job.

Ask yourself a question - if you were sent to a job with minimal info but you knew someone had a weapon (possibly shotgun possibly rifle) would you be polite but firm ? Would you put them in handcuffs until you were satisfied there wasn’t a threat ?

Or would you let them dictate what was going on and end up on the wrong end of violence (think Manchester Airport recently)

In the US someone would probably have been shot.

How lucky we are in the UK that Police still deal with things with a ‘light touch’ and I read the OP and think it still was lightly handled overall.
Because when l was questioned for going about my legal business in the early hours of the morning with a gun and a lamp,the police flashed a torch around the field and over l walked.You could see the blues flashing.It was a 2 minute conversation with no guns being pointed at me and he was more interested in a silenced 12g than anything else.Handcuffs and screeching,with guns pointed at you is not on,it's in a field not a housing estate.If I was wearing a body cam at least l could prove what happened and it was disproportionate to the perceived threat.As for a threat to someone's family l don't think so do you,it's a saying,a movie quote if you like.Would l have put a post on here with a link to said footage ( if id recorded it) probably yes.I certainly wouldn't want a loaded gun pointed at me with what sounds like an over enthusiastic person with their finger on the trigger.
 
A little bit of common sense is required, if I was wandering around Trafalgar Square with a firearm, then an armed response would probably be appropriate, if I’m doing the same thing in darkest rural Englandshire, and the report makes no mention of dangerous conduct a full on armed response may not be.
On the other hand £400 for a certificate is cheap for the entertainment offered the OP
Sadly we are becoming like the US. Where there is ‘no common sense, just rules and regulations to protect us all’
 
Because when l was questioned for going about my legal business in the early hours of the morning with a gun and a lamp,the police flashed a torch around the field and over l walked.You could see the blues flashing.It was a 2 minute conversation with no guns being pointed at me and he was more interested in a silenced 12g than anything else.Handcuffs and screeching,with guns pointed at you is not on,it's in a field not a housing estate.If I was wearing a body cam at least l could prove what happened and it was disproportionate to the perceived threat.As for a threat to someone's family l don't think so do you,it's a saying,a movie quote if you like.Would l have put a post on here with a link to said footage ( if id recorded it) probably yes.I certainly wouldn't want a loaded gun pointed at me with what sounds like an over enthusiastic person with their finger on the trigger.

I’m confused here. You’re not the original poster but yet you say it happened exactly like that ? Were you there ?
I wasn’t so I made no direct comment about that post. I made a generic statement about it.

And to be clear - once you ‘put a link on here to said footage’ then it’s out there. You can’t get it back, and you cannot control where it goes or who does what with it.

Whatever happened between the OP and the officers concerned is a matter for them. They WOULD have had their body cams activated, just in case things kicked off, so if the OP complains and asks for the BC footage to be reviewed then and only then would we actually know exactly what happened. Only trouble is we won’t get to see that will we.
 
I believe the Police use these opportunities with legit shooters as a training exercise and on this occasion took it one or two ( or three) steps further than they needed to. Totally overboard but training is needed to the max and who better to practice on.
 
For a relatively new shooter there's some interesting reading here.
With the way things are in this country, I think I agree with what the police did. You could have been a criminal, how were they to know the difference.
I think we need to realise, if we hold firearms there is a cost. If we hold firearms there is a responsability.
When I first read the officer said to inform the police before you go, I thought "Bollocks"
But the more I read, the more I agree it's a good idea.
The problem, for me, is that knowing who to text/notify is not straight forward, nor do people give inexperienced advice on how to go about these things.
This forum is a gold mine for us beginners!
 
I’m confused here. You’re not the original poster but yet you say it happened exactly like that ? Were you there ?
I wasn’t so I made no direct comment about that post. I made a generic statement about it.

And to be clear - once you ‘put a link on here to said footage’ then it’s out there. You can’t get it back, and you cannot control where it goes or who does what with it.

Whatever happened between the OP and the officers concerned is a matter for them. They WOULD have had their body cams activated, just in case things kicked off, so if the OP complains and asks for the BC footage to be reviewed then and only then would we actually know exactly what happened. Only trouble is we won’t get to see that will we.
Further down the post is a link to a simular situation that happened to someone on another forum.l mixed up the two,my mistake,but saying that have a read of it and make up your own mind.
 
What information did the police have to begin with? They can only go on the information available at the time for all you know the person who phone In made up some wildly exaggerated story and they genuinely thought there was a armed robbery taking place.

They well all good with you once the information changed and they found out you wernt an armed criminal.

They can only go on the information at the time. Your real enemy so to speak here is the person who phoned you in

If you still want to complain all the officers involved and bwv will be linked and saved to this occurrence anyway.
 
I suppose I have been lucky. First Incident we were driving in a field Parallel with the road when the jam sandwich pulled up and flashed his blue lights. Stopped got out and walked over. Out got policeman and asked what were up to as someone in the village had seen the lamp. ,"Sorting the rabbits out" says I, "Could I have your name Sir" says he. After he made a call he said " Sorry to have held you up". As he went I said " Do you want a rabbit" Yes please, I gave him two paunched rabbits and away him and his mate went.
The second one was a bit scary as we were stopped for doing 90 on the motorway, I was the spotter but missed seeing them on an elevated pull in. We had been stalking and had two Roe in the back along with the rifles. We hadn't washed and had a lot of dried blood up our arms. They took my pal to their car and remarked on the blood. He explained and they brought him back. We had quite a chat, they were interested and looked at the deer through the windows but never even bothered to see the rifles. The upshot was "Get on your way and slow down, we have to do you on the speeding because it's recorded and get a wash at the next services, you stink". We both considered.ourselves very lucky.
All a little bit different when I was caught poaching at 13 and wouldn't give my address, three swipes round the clock from the Bobby with his gauntlets soon changed my mind.😀
 
I understand the OP’s concern and frustration and it’s not a situation I have experienced. Personally I would not be taking the matter further, what if anything are you going to achieve and as an FAC/SC holder the least amount of interaction I have with the police the better. It’s the same with members of the general public when I am stalking I actively avoid them and am polite if I do run in to them.
 
The issue with armed policing now (or any policing) is that there is essentially no discretion available to the people on the ground.
The report will have been seen by a Tactical Firearms Commander who will have used the National decision making model to dictate the tactic involved (probably a challenge from cover rather than and armed enquiry which is a bit more low key) which is then put into place by the ARV officers.
This will involve a controlled walk to them and handcuff. You would be told you are arrested rather than detained because it makes the search powers easier. After establishing your bona fides you can be released.
As a Police Officer If you act outside the designated tactical option and something goes wrong then you may not have any support in any enquiry or as pointed out earlier as a Police officer you may well be subject to legal proceedings .
You can find the NDM on the web and if you want to challenge what occurred the it’s the basis for any explanation of the action that the police took based upon what was known at the time.
I am not sure that you will get anywhere with a complaint, although I would certainly make contact with the police if you are not happy with the contact you have experienced.
 
The issue with armed policing now (or any policing) is that there is essentially no discretion available to the people on the ground.
The report will have been seen by a Tactical Firearms Commander who will have used the National decision making model to dictate the tactic involved (probably a challenge from cover rather than and armed enquiry which is a bit more low key) which is then put into place by the ARV officers.
This will involve a controlled walk to them and handcuff. You would be told you are arrested rather than detained because it makes the search powers easier. After establishing your bona fides you can be released.
As a Police Officer If you act outside the designated tactical option and something goes wrong then you may not have any support in any enquiry or as pointed out earlier as a Police officer you may well be subject to legal proceedings .
You can find the NDM on the web and if you want to challenge what occurred the it’s the basis for any explanation of the action that the police took based upon what was known at the time.
I am not sure that you will get anywhere with a complaint, although I would certainly make contact with the police if you are not happy with the contact you have experienced.
Good explanation of the logic but there will be probably over 5,000,000 legal sorties with long barrelled weapons into the countryside per year. This is not an unusual activity. This is not a suspicious activity in itself, so it does not merit any of this.

"Has gun" is not a good reason. If it is, we need more than the 6,700 armed police officers that we have and we also need a clear alteration to the human rights act and PACE to allow this change to our rights not an almighty stretch of the acts because "has gun". For comparison there are 2 million new cars sold per year, yet we do not see anyone driving away a new car from a showroom stopped on public report of driving away a new car. This is the more unusual act.
 
@Silvius, some solicitors specialise in taking cases like this on against the police, I'm pretty sure you would win some compensation in a civil case, I'd say 2k +. But it's not about the money, it's the principle, you could if you felt like it donate any money received to a good cause of your choosing.
 
For the information of all the members, on one of my permissions it a requirement for me to email the Police with notification of planned deer management.

I initially objected in principle like many on here so I emailed the Police Control Room (Leics) asking then if they actually took any notice.

I’ve copied their reply below for other members information.

In relation to the below, we would expect the above cc'd email "reporting shooting" to be informed in advance of any shoots, so we can quickly check our shooting diary if there are any reports of "gunshots heard". This often negates the requirement to deploy as we have numbers to contact the relevant people on.

As for the question, "Does that mean you do/do not then despatch a Unit to investigate ?", well it is all very subjective as you would know. We would always conduct enquiries in CMD first and then consider all options. We would ask the following: How many calls have we had? How do they know it is gun shots? Are there farms in the area? What is in the shooting diary? Etc etc. So in light of that, there is no definitive answer. If we cannot offer or give a reasonable account for the sounds and we have had multiple calls, it could be local officers to do a low key area search or it could be an armed deployment. The latter would obviously be a last resort if we don’t have much info.

If calls came in for said remote areas and there was an entry in the diary stating you were shooting in the area, then it would negate the need to ARVs to be deployed.

Hope this helps

Kind regards
 
@Silvius, some solicitors specialise in taking cases like this on against the police, I'm pretty sure you would win some compensation in a civil case, I'd say 2k +. But it's not about the money, it's the principle, you could if you felt like it donate any money received to a good cause of your choosing.
Thanks. If it looked like I had a very strong case it might be a step to take on the behalf of the community but I imagine one could spend a lot on lawyers and get nowhere. I think I need to gather information. I have submitted a request for information to the police for the emergency call that lead to the deployment and the CAD
 
WOW, just read through this. What a SHOCKING reaction by the “people in uniform”
One has to remember that common sense is NOT a common occurrence, ESPECIALLY under those in uniform!!!!
Been working on the underground in London for quite some time and got stopped AND searched at LEAST once every 2 weeks JUST for driving a van. Even though the van was signed with the company logo as well as me wearing company clothing. MOST of the are on “power trips”
 
This morning my friend and I had loaded weapons pointed at us, were told to walk with our hands in the air, were handcuffed, were told "you are both under arrest under suspicion of possession of a firearm", our clothes were searched searched and my car was briefly examined visually inside before "Thank you for your cooperation, sorry for the trouble but you will understand we have to investigate reports" This is not on and I would like advice as to how to stop this happening to others.

I would like to say from the start that the officers involved were very polite and I thought them all nice guys but the protocol that allowed this to happen is not fair or proportionate and I think if it is allowed to be considered as OK, then we are on a slippery slope to being guilty until proven innocent, which is a bad position to be in with a gun in your hand.

Of course we had permission, of course we didn't point guns at or near anyone. If fact we didn't point a gun at all -no deer was even seen on the permission where I have shot for years. The policeman in charge told me that he didn't know till they arrived at the scene and he took my registration that I had a FAC. To that point if you want to bring 6 or 7 cars full of armed officers and a dog team to a report of "2 males with a long barrelled weapon seen going into (private) wood (in the countryside with no footpath, exiting car parked within woodland edge from woodland facing side and walking in)" then OK if you can justify the resource allocation but from that point on, when nothing suspicious had been done and I was clearly licensed this was surely heavy handed? Surely a quiet word with an unarmed officer when we emerged from the wood to check we had permission would have been enough? Even then whose business is it to check up on law abiding citizens hunting with a weapon held for only hunting unless there has been poaching in the area or suspicion of poaching? Why should hunting be itself a suspicious activity? Is taking cash out of a bank suspicious in itself? Is driving a car away suspicious in itself?

Did I need to be arrested by armed men? did I need to be handcuffed or searched? The officer in charge said "Sorry we can't be taking chances" but if that sort of thinking is allowed to take root we will all be pushed further and further into corners afraid to assert our rights do do what we have worked hard to be given lawful permission to do. What is suspicious about someone who holds a rifle only for deer stalking to be seen deer stalking? I said to the officer "There are thousands of people out on this Christmas holiday Saturday legally shooting. Would it be right to arrest anyone seen in a field carrying a gun on a sling on their shoulder?" He just said they couldn't take chances and I should phone the police to tell them I am going hunting in advance. This is the state going too far in my opinion.

I expect a number of replies to say "You must have done something suspicious" and "We must all just accept this sort of control and interference in the interests of public safety" but I feel this is going too far. Had it been a report of drug use or burglary the police would likely never have even turned up but more people die from drugs and criminal lifestyles than from guns in this country every year, a lot more. There is a witch hunt out for guns and country sports. If we accept this as OK because we are all too scared to risk going on the naughty list next time we want to renew, where does this end?

In the interests of my fellow sportsmen, I would ideally like someone in charge to simply accept that this was a heavy handed approach and to revise the protocol. I don't know if I really want to go through the misery of pushing for this but right now I feel I should. Can anyone advise me how I would best go about this please?

Thanks

I do see your point & civil claims etc could just come across as pushing back etc. Unless you were thrown about & pistol whipped obviously.


Boot on the other foot though

If my place got broken into & some of my kit was stolen, it is reassuring to know the resources they put into checking it out. The kit would have been out of their hands swiftly & dogs available for any runners.

I can imagine how you felt at the time when surprised though.
 
I have one permission where twice the police have been called but after the first time I started to ring it in the second time we were accused of shooting rabbits with a hand gun with a laser sight lol police rang me and it was soon sorted out with the police realising that the chap who had rang in was a plonker
 
I do see your point & civil claims etc could just come across as pushing back etc. Unless you were thrown about & pistol whipped obviously.


Boot on the other foot though

If my place got broken into & some of my kit was stolen, it is reassuring to know the resources they put into checking it out. The kit would have been out of their hands swiftly & dogs available for any runners.

I can imagine how you felt at the time when surprised though.
Not to be disrespectful towards you nor your opinion, but have you been a victim of burglary before?
My vehicle has been emptied a view years ago and in 2 separate properties has my living courters been evaded by burglars. In NON of the 3 occasions have I even SEEN the police. ALL 3 cases ended with a letter apologizing that I was a victim of crime and case was now CLOSED WITHOUT ANY investigation….
 
Back
Top