You're welcome.
Significant incident Plymouth
- Thread starter mattyg
- Start date
You're welcome.
Yet i know people who have had their social media trawled by police before issuing a license and suprise suprise the media is reporting that he recently had his license renewed which means my original post was 100% on point
A very sensible post that will probably go ignored in this thread. There are a couple of points that I'm not entirely sure are accurate, although I guess they may very between police forces.
I've never heard of this before and it's certainly not the case in this area.
Definitely not correct. I used to shoot regularly at locations around the country and none of those were listed on my ticket.
I don't believe this is correct either. When I originally applied for my FAC, all I had to do was list the doctors name and sign a declaration regarding certain conditions. The surgery was never contacted (but see below). I'd have known if they had because they charge a fee for any letters like this.
The police are quite proactive when it comes to firearms certificates and checking up on FAC holders. Some years ago, my daughter was involved in an incident at school that meant she had to go to the local police station and make a statement. A week or so after, I had a phone call from the local firearms officer asking me about it and checking to make sure everything was OK.
When I completed my last renewal, one of the questions was whether I'd been prescribed any medication for depression since the previous renewal. As it happened, I had been prescribed certain medication for depression but I never even took the prescription to the chemist. I declared this and had a call from the FEO telling me that I'd need to arrange a letter from the GP to explain the reason why I'd been prescribed those tablets, even though I'd never had them.
Sadly true. It's like when the air cartridge system was banned a few years ago, totally unnecessarily because an idiot politician with no brain decided that the guns could be converted to fire real .22 ammunition. They couldn't, not without extensive work and then they were more likely to explode anyway due to them being made of monkey metal. I still don't think there was ever any case of a converted Brocock being used to successfully fire real bullets but that made no difference, they were banned. Not only were they banned but it was done without any compensation and I personally know people who lost thousands of pounds worth of equipment.
Once again, legal and responsible firearms owners will get shafted here due to stupid knee-jerk reactions.
I'd have to look it up but I seem to recall there is some stuff that you need to actually use to have on your firearms certificate, it isn't' a blanket policy though.
See this is the problem with recreational gun ownership.
No matter how good the rules and protocols are mistakes are going to occur (human error) and the consequences are innocent people dyeing
Time to ban recreational gun ownership.
We shouldn't be giving up freedoms just because of extremely rare events as tragic as they are.
See this is the problem with recreational gun ownership.
No matter how good the rules and protocols are mistakes are going to occur (human error) and the consequences are innocent people dyeing
Time to ban recreational gun ownership.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56269095
lol
Being able to blast a gun isn't a 'freedom'
Some posts from the sad pathetic virgin:
A vulnerable autistic person brainwashed and polluted by incel ideology!
Being able to blast a gun isn't a 'freedom'
Some posts from the sad pathetic virgin:
A vulnerable autistic person brainwashed and polluted by incel ideology!
[..]
See this is the problem with recreational gun ownership.
No matter how good the rules and protocols are mistakes are going to occur (human error) and the consequences are innocent people dyeing
Time to ban recreational gun ownership.
People have been murdered with sports equipment (cricket bat, baseball bat, etc) as the murder weapon. Time to ban all recreational sports.
Yes it is.
Jesus wept, you people are moronic!
Please link to the last killing spree committed with 'Sports equipment'
Not actually a killing spree but:
If I hadn't have been there he'd have probably killed at least one of them probably more.
EDIT: Actually wish this thread hadn't brought that memory up - that was not a situation I want to relive.
Last edited:
Not in a civilised society where people value human life over someone's hobby!
LOL...
Yeah hilarious
So how could have it ended in your 'story' if the bullied individual had access to a firearm ??
Talk about shooting yourself in the foot
Enjoying things is pointless? Well then isn't life?
So ban all cricket and baseball bats then? Ban dogs?
Yeah hilarious
So how could have it ended in your 'story' if the bullied individual had access to a firearm ??
Talk about shooting yourself in the foot
Or had got into a car and run them down as they were leaving college?
Jesus wept, you people are moronic!
Please link to the last killing spree committed with 'Sports equipment'
Oh, I see. You're OK with people being killed as long as it isn't a spree killing. Other killings aren't a reason to ban things, but spree killings are.
Would you apply that standard regardless of numbers killed? Say, for example, 500 people were killed per year in seperate incidents in which the murder weapon was A and an average of 0.2 people were killed per year in spree killings in which the murder weapon was B. Would you ban B but not A despite A being used in 2500 times as many homicides as B?
I'm not sure you realise how moronic that statement makes you look!
Comparing guns to objects that have a intrinsic rule in society just shows that you are desperately clutching at straws
Just be honest and admit that you believe a fringe hobby is more important than human life!
It's obviously horrifically selfish & morally bankrupt but at least be honest
If you reduce things down enough, nothing has purpose until we give it one. There are many things the only purpose is enjoyment until we weaponise them. A gun is just something which fires a bit of metal very fast, just as a car is just a bit of metal that moves very fast, a baseball bat just a bit of metal we swing fast.
You're seeing yourself projected onto others.
You can't make your argument consistent with anything, including itself, and now you're resorting to nonsense about cricket bats, baseball bats and suchlike having "a intrinsic rule in society". At best that's arguing that something should be legal solely because it's common enough and that not being common enough is a good enough reason to make something illegal. But without actually meaning it, since guns are more common than baseball bats in the USA.
Cricket bats have an intrinsic rule in society?
Cricket bats are killing people though, yet you believe they are more important than human life?