Surprise Visit

[Druid]

Its a shame you laced this post with 'toys and pram'. also there's a difference between criminal and legal and one is against the law and the other isnt.

Absolutely! To keep our certificates we are expected to stick to the letter of the law(hideously complex and sometimes ambiguous though it is) therefore bending the rules on enforcement should not be happening. Police should also stay within the rules.
no fishing trips! If no good reason/intelligence based, then no random checks.

those of you who come out with 'I have nothing to hide so I don't care' are treading on a very slippery slope.

 

[Eddie P]

They are welcome to visit me.

I'm at uni in Liverpool and my guns are in Staffordshire. All they will get is my mum offering them a cup of tea and a guarded conversation (shes a retired health visitor so knows that there is no benign conversation) if she's in. Which she probably won't be.

 

[Whitebeard]

It beggers belief that some FAC holders willingly entertain the police knowing that their visit without specific reason, is an abuse of power and an invasion of privacy of probably the most law abiding group of people in the country!!
Would these same people tolerate the HSE turning up to check what cleaning liquids the have under the sink and make sure they dont have to much BBQ lighting fluid, would they tolerate the ministry of transport turning up out of the blue to inspect their cars on the driveway to see if they are road worthy, i think not especially when their personal transport is under scrutiny, i bet things would become heated very quickly
So why allow unjustified police intrusion into your home without acceptable reason, i dont get it!!!

Ian.

 

[JockStalk]

It beggers belief that some FAC holders willingly entertain the police knowing that their visit without specific reason, is an abuse of power and an invasion of privacy of probably the most law abiding group of people in the country!!
Would these same people tolerate the HSE turning up to check what cleaning liquids the have under the sink and make sure they dont have to much BBQ lighting fluid, would they tolerate the ministry of transport turning up out of the blue to inspect their cars on the driveway to see if they are road worthy, i think not especially when their personal transport is under scrutiny, i bet things would become heated very quickly
So why allow unjustified police intrusion into your home without acceptable reason, i dont get it!!!

Ian.

You don't have to get it. You just have to realize not everyone thinks as you do.

 

[Lupus]

It's a pity the fallacy of 'privilege' is still being mentioned. An FAC is not a privilege but a right if you can demonstrate 'good reason' and are of 'good character'. Privileges can be taken away on a whim, rights cannot. If the shooting community accepts their firearms ownership is a privilege don't be surprised when the authorities decide to take it away from you for what ever reason is in vogue at the time (anti-terrorism, anti-revolution, armed crime reduction, 'for the sake of the children', etc, etc).

And I object to the implication that because I will not sit by and see my rights and freedoms abused that I must be some closet criminal that 'doth protest too much'.

The rights and freedoms we enjoy today have been paid for in blood. Just because we are fortunate to live at a time and place free of tyranny doesn't mean those freedoms/rights are irrelevant. Once gone they are gone for good.

Wolfie

 

[Whitebeard]

You don't have to get it. You just have to realize not everyone thinks as you do.

You are not bothered about unjustified intrusions into your privacy then? Im amazed!!

Ian.

 

[Greymaster]

It beggers belief that some FAC holders willingly entertain the police knowing that their visit without specific reason, is an abuse of power and an invasion of privacy of probably the most law abiding group of people in the country!!
Would these same people tolerate the HSE turning up to check what cleaning liquids the have under the sink and make sure they dont have to much BBQ lighting fluid, would they tolerate the ministry of transport turning up out of the blue to inspect their cars on the driveway to see if they are road worthy, i think not especially when their personal transport is under scrutiny, i bet things would become heated very quickly
So why allow unjustified police intrusion into your home without acceptable reason, i dont get it!!!

Ian.

Some people it seems subscribe to the Blue Lamp nostalgia of George Dixon. If anyone should need proof that the police are not the paragons of law abiding virtue setting a shining example to all of the citizenry then remember Orgreave, Hillsborough, Rotherham -i.e. South Yorkshire Police do not police with the consent of the local citizenry, nor in their interests. Expect that force to be disbanded, lock stock and barrel.

Every day a policeman commits a crime. There are over 3,000 serving officers with criminal records. You have to take each one you meet on his/her own merits, but as an institution the boys in blue are failing the populace. Whether you expect them to jump into a river to rescue a drowning student but they don't because he is having an episode and might attack them. Hello? They are sworn officers with a high degree of expensive training. The fact that they should wish to bend the law on invading the home of any citizen without due cause or due process should be very worrying to the general populace never mind the shooting fraternity.

However, the alright jack mentality of some will prompt them to declare they have nothing to hide and nothing to fear. Never mind that there is no general power of right of entry and for good reason. In a word, it is FREEDOM.

 

[patrickt]

This thread has attracted 7,767 views,and 46 replies thus far. Iam surprised that BASC and our other organisations have not read this thread and the input by site members.

I would certainly welcome David from BASC (of which iam a long standing member of!) for both his input and the official BASC stance

 

[kes]

I suspect we all know the official BASC stance. I think it was altered slightly after the initiative irritated a few people and the CA took up the cudgels for shooters incensed by the initial publicity. BASC are on the FELWG and initially couldnt see the harm in this if I remember correctly - I'll look up the comments on that thread. Wasnt an MP's petition part of the CA response?

 

[kes]

BASC were initially supportive of this initiative as they were on FELWG and agreed it. The reaction surprised them and the CA took up cudgels on it and arranged for shooters to contact their MP's. It was subsequently the subject of an 'apology' by Andy Marsh saying it had been taken wrongly. BASC relied on this conferring no new powers on the police.
In a very long discussion on another forum which ran to 17 Pages, BASC did not get involved but a member posted BASC's advice.
I think that's the long and the short of it - I could be wrong.

 

[Orion]

I suspect we all know the official BASC stance. I think it was altered slightly after the initiative irritated a few people and the CA took up the cudgels for shooters incensed by the initial publicity.

More like a complete volte-face if I recall!

There was certainly a time when the organisation were challenging the police and HO over spot checks and a number of very real concerns were identified and presented by Bill Harriman. This SD thread refers to the information, although the original source from BASC is no longer available to read!

http://www.thestalkingdirectory.co.uk/showthread.php/52622-Police-spot-checks

Luckily for us though the BASC press release has been archived in it's entirety at:

http://www.politics.co.uk/opinion-f...sc/article/basc-challenges-police-spot-checks

Some further interesting bedtime reading at:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/10/26/gun_owner_spot_checks_op_solitaire/

And this aricle demonstrates how the senior management of the police inflated the figures relating to thefts of legally held firearms in order to justify the current policy and the (unconsulted) change in the HO Guidance:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/10/20/acpo_claims_nearly_double_number_stolen_firearms_truth/

 

[JockStalk]

'freedoms', 'intrusions', 'police criminality' - what a load of auld wifies.

If the police arrive at my door with a warrant to gain access, they are coming in with or without my say so - though I'd prefer to open the door to save any mess.

If the police arrive at my door requesting to check my firearms I am under no illusion that it is my right to say yes or no, much of that will depend on whether the request is civil, at a reasonable hour etc. There are fewer situations where I can imagine I would refuse access than where I would grant access.

I live in a place where the local force are doing a good job and are under increased pressure. Like every walk in life, SD included, they have their share of eejits. But if they make a polite request I will accommodate if I can.

 

[Archer]

'freedoms', 'intrusions', 'police criminality' - what a load of auld wifies.

If the police arrive at my door with a warrant to gain access, they are coming in with or without my say so - though I'd prefer to open the door to save any mess.

If the police arrive at my door requesting to check my firearms I am under no illusion that it is my right to say yes or no, much of that will depend on whether the request is civil, at a reasonable hour etc. There are fewer situations where I can imagine I would refuse access than where I would grant access.

I live in a place where the local force are doing a good job and are under increased pressure. Like every walk in life, SD included, they have their share of eejits. But if they make a polite request I will accommodate if I can.

Pretty much my thoughts

 

[delta wolf]

Well said, usual police bashers not letting reality get in the way of their always right opinions unfortunately.

'freedoms', 'intrusions', 'police criminality' - what a load of auld wifies.

If the police arrive at my door with a warrant to gain access, they are coming in with or without my say so - though I'd prefer to open the door to save any mess.

If the police arrive at my door requesting to check my firearms I am under no illusion that it is my right to say yes or no, much of that will depend on whether the request is civil, at a reasonable hour etc. There are fewer situations where I can imagine I would refuse access than where I would grant access.

I live in a place where the local force are doing a good job and are under increased pressure. Like every walk in life, SD included, they have their share of eejits. But if they make a polite request I will accommodate if I can.

 

[Druid]

Well said, usual police bashers not letting reality get in the way of their always right opinions unfortunately.

I don't think this is about police bashing. I have family and friends in the police but this is about 'legislation creep'.
if this random checking with no evidence is accepted it will soon become a legal reality that we will have to allow the police access at all hours regardless of circumstances as part of the legal obligations of owning firearms.

if you care so little for the law of the land that you are happy to see those that uphold it, actually starting to make it then you need to think long and hard. No flippant comment required.

 

[kes]

I don't think this is about police bashing. I have family and friends in the police but this is about 'legislation creep'.
if this random checking with no evidence is accepted it will soon become a legal reality that we will have to allow the police access at all hours regardless of circumstances as part of the legal obligations of owning firearms.

if you care so little for the law of the land that you are happy to see those that uphold it, actually starting to make it then you need to think long and hard. No flippant comment required.

Good post and to the point without histrionics. +1

 

[Lupus]

I too am not a police basher and, as I mentioned above, also have relatives in the force. I understand that the officers on the ground have an exceedingly difficult job to do. And I am sure it isn't the officers on the ground who are the ones pushing political agendas, or making up policies in lieu of laws.

Wolfie

 

[wildrover77]

Somhow many legally held guns are actually stolen and used in a murder?

would have though most murders committed with legal held guns were committed by the legal owner.

 

[finnbear270]

Good post and to the point without histrionics. +1

I'll MODERATE the bashing if it's perceived that way, & go politely with the above, ... rather than into the oblivion of blind forelock tugging.

 

[Whitebeard]

I would certainly welcome David from BASC (of which iam a long standing member of!) for both his input and the official BASC stance

I am afraid to say my confidence in BASC is somewhat dimished after David BASC's failure to grasp the whole entirety of Clause 81 in another thread.

Ian.