Got arrested this morning

[shakey jake]

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….

Sounds all to familiar.
No police to deal with crime, but tea break cancelled for some one legally out with a gun

 

[ColinJ]

Comedy sketch? e mail control room, do you have to inform them if you are taking a dump in the wood?

Not sure what your point is?

 

[Andydorset]

Are you sure you were Arrested, or just detained, i only ask because what will be attached to your FAC renewel.

 

[artschool]

Are you sure you were Arrested, or just detained, i only ask because what will be attached to your FAC renewel.

i was wondering that as well.

 

[nick.308]

Reading this I am shocked by the story and would not have liked to be put in this position myself. Especially regarding the police pointing their guns at you. It only needs one of them to have a negligent discharge and games over. Remember this is not like the chris Kaba case where it was known his vehicle was involved with a shooting the day before involving illegal firearms. Even if it goes nowhere I support your complaint.

 

[Silvius]

Are you sure you were Arrested, or just detained, i only ask because what will be attached to your FAC renewel.

Good question. We were verbally told we were under arrest. As a FAC holder one really has no idea about the justice system here, because one has not committed any crimes. I think that arresting you then allows them to search you (because then they might find something to justify the hit?) Again I do not think its fair to search you if you have not looked suspicious. Surely the usual rule applies that they have to have suspicion, just like if they are walking down the road they have to smell cannabis to search the person and then it can all still backfire for them?

My friend was very concerned over this as he is in the UK on a work visa and he feared it might effect the renewal of his visa. He was told it would show up on his record but under it would be a note of released without charge (like that is as good as no record. It is like a not proven verdict, it almost says "we didn't get him that time"). It might be worth mentioning that my friend is is black and stopping and searching people for "watching hunting while black" might not be the best look for the police.

 

[Bo Diddley]

Well, this thread is very interesting.
Keep us updated on how it all moves along.

 

[Mickeydredd]

Good question. We were verbally told we were under arrest. As a FAC holder one really has no idea about the justice system here, because one has not committed any crimes. I think that arresting you then allows them to search you (because then they might find something to justify the hit?) Again I do not think its fair to search you if you have not looked suspicious. Surely the usual rule applies that they have to have suspicion, just like if they are walking down the road they have to smell cannabis to search the person and then it can all still backfire for them?

My friend was very concerned over this as he is in the UK on a work visa and he feared it might effect the renewal of his visa. He was told it would show up on his record but under it would be a note of released without charge (like that is as good as no record. It is like a not proven verdict, it almost says "we didn't get him that time"). It might be worth mentioning that my friend is is black and stopping and searching people for "watching hunting while black" might not be the best look for the police.

Presumably you have missed out the word "unlawful" in your opening post - "you are both under arrest under suspicion of possession of a firearm" - given that it is not an offence to be in possession of a firearm?

If you were indeed arrested then I would imagine you would have been de-arrested. In which case surely by right there should be nothing on record against your name come renewal (but there probably will be.).

 

[Twodogs]

Are you sure you were Arrested, or just detained, i only ask because what will be attached to your FAC renewel.

You should have been told not only the reason for your arrest but also the justification for your arrest, as soon as reasonably practicable. Was this done?
Having been told that you were under arrest you should have have been cautioned, often referred to as reading you your rights, as soon as reasonably practicable. Was this done?
Was handcuffing reasonably necessary under the circumstances? As you describe it certainly not.

On the information provided the lawfulness of the arrest is somewhat dubious.

 

[artschool]

Good question. We were verbally told we were under arrest. As a FAC holder one really has no idea about the justice system here, because one has not committed any crimes. I think that arresting you then allows them to search you (because then they might find something to justify the hit?) Again I do not think its fair to search you if you have not looked suspicious. Surely the usual rule applies that they have to have suspicion, just like if they are walking down the road they have to smell cannabis to search the person and then it can all still backfire for them?

My friend was very concerned over this as he is in the UK on a work visa and he feared it might effect the renewal of his visa. He was told it would show up on his record but under it would be a note of released without charge (like that is as good as no record. It is like a not proven verdict, it almost says "we didn't get him that time"). It might be worth mentioning that my friend is is black and stopping and searching people for "watching hunting while black" might not be the best look for the police.

 

[Greenmist]

Are you sure you were Arrested, or just detained, i only ask because what will be attached to your FAC renewel.

Sweet FA, you only have to list convictions

 

[Bo Diddley]

Where is @Stalker62 when you need him .. this thread would be right up his street.

 

[markj1]

I am in two minds about this.

On one hand, I agree with the approach taken by the police in the US, where - for the safety of police officers - armed suspects are treated 'with care' until they are disarmed, and may be placed in handcuffs, again as precaution. This applies also to people with a concealed cary permit, or in states where open carry is allowed

While it can be argued that - unlike in the US - the shooting of police officers by criminals is rare in the UK, it is not unheard of (the shooting of PC David Rathband by Raoul Moat is one example).

But on the other hand, a suspect can be detained, disarmed, and even handcuffed - for the protection of police officers - without actually being arrested. Which, to my mind, this is as far as this incident should have gone.

 

[Jon P]

Locally Anyone requesting Smart Water from the local Rural Policing team were also sent a pack of post it notes with topics already filled in to obtain the information they require to follow up on any reports. Not sure if it a good thing or not, but lots have been sent out throughout this year.

 

[timbrayford]

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

Sounds like your local chief of police might be a guardian reader!

 

[enfieldspares]

Good question. We were verbally told we were under arrest.

Then there has to be AFAIK a written record of this. However an arrest in itself does create a "criminal record". But an arrest itself has to be documented regardless of that.

 

[Pete6.5]

Instead of bothering over the police. Visit any suspected whistle blowers home and tell them you going to legally what ever over there. Record it on your phone and save it.

Bad idea. You won't change their mind and they will call the police and say you threatened them.

 

[markj1]

Then there has to be AFAIK a written record of this. However an arrest in itself does create a "criminal record". But an arrest itself has to be documented regardless of that.

There is a variety of circumstances where you might be asked if you have ever been arrested before.

And while in theory we are all innocent until proven guilty, I suspect that there will be cases where the answer, 'Yes, I was arrested on suspicion of being in possession of an illegal firearm, but released without charge' might still go against you.

As per my post above, I think that in these circumstances they should have been - at most - 'detained', but certainly not arrested.

 

[Twodogs]

Section 48 Firearms Act 1968
…
…
(3) If a constable has reasonable cause to suspect a person of having a firearm with him in a public place, or to be committing or about to commit, elsewhere than in a public place, an offence relevant for the purposes of this section, the constable may search that person and may detain him for the purpose of doing so.
…
…
(6) The offences relevant for the purpose of this section are those under sections 18(1) and (2) and 20 of this Act.

The S47 power still has to be carried out in accordance with PACE. Bet that didn’t occur.

The mere fact that a gun, or more than one gun, was pointed at you would constitute detention.

 

[topscots1]

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.

Yet the RTA does indeed allow for any vehicle been driven on any road to be stopped by any uniformed police officer.
This incident clearly caused fear and alarm to a member of the public, the evidence of this is the initial report.

The police it would appear acted entirely in accordance with the law and standard operating procedures. I’m don’t see any issue other than this efficient and timely intervention causing a little offence. The police would have been working on the information available to them at the time.