Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by mattyg, 12 Aug 2021.
“I will draw for the Glock and aim for your block”
that was an actual song a few years back.
That's not at all true mate. Depends on the force - some will require the mags limited, others won't. The law doesn't stipulate one way or the other.
Well this was about ten years ago and the guy 100% has a Glock automatic variant. I asked him once if I could see and he was stood behind a counter at the time, he took the gun out of the holster and removed the magazine and the chambered round then showed me up close. I didn't bother asking to hold it as it was clear as day he wasn't comfortable showing me. I've never seen a hand gun before so I was curious.
In your dreams.
You won't get one, it's as simple as that.
Yeah, there's a bloke in my local pub like that. He often alludes to the stuff he's 'not allowed to talk about' and like 20,000 other people, he was first into the Embassy.
There are photos of him in his regiment all over his office wall and tours he did during his time as a para, he certainly wasn't full of **** and didn't run his mouth telling wild stories etc. I just wanted to know how he would be able to have a hand gun that was all.
I'm not aware of any regulations that allow an ex squaddie or a civilian to carry a holstered handgun around with them. I recall seeing quite a few cases of ex-forces members being prosecuted for having unlicensed firearms so it's not a case of the laws not applying to them.
On the range, it's a different matter. If he's the range owner and his range is approved for Section 5 use, he might well have some weapons there.
I think that Leicester Shooting Centre is one of the few ranges approved for Section 5.
Ok fair enough.
Anyway, sorry to drag this even further off topic. I'm done here.
His weapons were taken away because of an allegation of an assault. They were given back, presumably, because that didn’t go anywhere. How were police to know he was a fruitcake?
gotta agree with Feek on this one, there’s no way he’d be getting away with that, ex para or not.
No, it was given back because he had attended an anger management course.
if someone needs an anger management course, they are not a suitable person to own a pump action shotgun ffs
And to top it off, his own family had been pleadingly the NHS and the police for him to receive mental health care. This had **** all to do with the government, it’s a failure of the system and pure negligence.
And another thing, his own father had contacted police to tell them he didn’t think he was a fit person to own a gun.
I believe vets are allowed to own handguns for the purpose of 'humane destruction' of animals. Are you a vet?
Lets just say the very few people (civilian with a military/intelligence background) who were, or are (not sure if it is still the case), permitted to carry handguns in this country do so for security reasons which mean they wouldn't be showing those weapons off as their (and/or other peoples') security depends on being incognito. In a previous job I worked on the development of special requirement equipment related to this so I have a vague idea but don't know details.
(Mostly it was stuff like this https://corporate.pittards.com/pittards-makes-a-stitch-in-time-for-local-olympian/ ).
Aside from that the only people who'd realistically be licensed for stuff like that would be weapon dealers or developers/manufacturers, some very limited movie use and stuff like that and they wouldn't be permitted to just carry them on them.
Well I’ve had my hands up a fair few old cows, but I’m not a vet, no.
I'm pretty sure he was more than just a para and had it for reprisals or something along those lines. As I I have posted above he wasn't full of **** and didn't tell stories! The gun was the real deal and he showed me across a counter top about two feet from me. The club had a huge walk in armoury to house the usual rifles, shotguns and ammunition which was alarmed to the local police station so all was above board so I wouldn't have thought he obtained it illegally.
Closest you'd get would be https://youtu.be/Polr6CS8taw?t=459 - .357 revolver or something that loosely resembled a Desert Eagle in .22.
Im ACAB through and through, but so many times initial reports are full of absolute rubbish. So let’s wait to find out who did what.
I’m very very sceptical police will have documented reports from concerned parties that he shouldn’t have a shot gun, but ignored it and granted the licence back anyway. We shall see, shocking if that is the case.
Separate names with a comma.