NRA email : homeoffice guidlines change random home checks

[Mattnall]

No, you are totally missing the point. You can act on intelligence and get a warrant. The issues then were insane shooters, not issues around firearms storage.

My privacy should not be removed just because I own a gun. How is that fair or reasonable? I know the government has already infringed it, but why the hell should we just lie down each time? The authorities have no basic right to enter my home; warrants are there to provide oversight by a judge. Why do we not deserve the oversight? They still need a warrant if we're talking drugs etc!

They will still need a warrant if you refuse them entry. They are still required to get permission from either the court, yourself or by virtue of a crime being/about to be committed before coming in.

This is advice from the HO for them to come round more often, and the advice of the NRA is to enter in to a spirit of co-operation and let them in (the FEOs will need to give a clear explanation as to why they are there at that time). If you have something out that shouldn't be out at that time then what are you doing with an FAC and not complying with the conditions thereon?
If it is a bad time ask them nicely to go away and come back another day. They will not be allowed to force their way in but you will be allowed to force them off your premises (if you really want to, or have to, do that). That is everyone's legal right.

Let's not get all hot under the collar about this. No one's rights are being trampled on, we haven't lost any more freedom, the World is not coming to an end.

[Gaz]

No, you are totally missing the point. You can act on intelligence and get a warrant. The issues then were insane shooters, not issues around firearms storage.

My privacy should not be removed just because I own a gun. How is that fair or reasonable? I know the government has already infringed it, but why the hell should we just lie down each time? The authorities have no basic right to enter my home; warrants are there to provide oversight by a judge. Why do we not deserve the oversight? They still need a warrant if we're talking drugs etc!

They will still need a warrant if you refuse them entry. They are still required to get permission from either the court, yourself or by virtue of a crime being/about to be committed before coming in.

That's the critical part here. Is the Home Office Guidance being rewritten to give the police more latitude in grounds for demanding entry? Although the statutory powers haven't changed, and you can still tell the police to FO and get a warrant if they're that bothered, the introduction of "crime prevention or public safety concerns" is startlingly broad and could potentially see statutory condition 4b being used as a backdoor power to force unwarranted entry.

Consider this situation. You fall out with your neighbour over a petty dispute. He rings plod and tells them he's seen your guns on the kitchen table at all hours of the day and night. The police, duty bound to investigate, turn up on your doorstep at 8pm and demand to be shown that you're keeping your firearms secured. They don't have a warrant, and the sergeant in charge says "I have received intelligence that the crime of failing to comply with FAC conditions may be being committed here and in accordance with the latest Home Office Guidance I'm coming into your home to check your security arrangements".

What would you do then?

[mag41uk]

And what constitutes security in your home if you are actually there?
What if you are just about to work on a couple of rifles?

[Quarters]

Gaz: I would let them in and show them my guns are secure.
Mag: I would let them in show them that I was responibly working on my guns in place not visible to anybody as that is what I do.

I have never had a problem with the police (firearms wise or any otherwise). Whenever i come in connact with the police I act in a mature, cooperative way and I've ALWAYS found the police to be far and resonable.

In the situtaion with the neighbour I'd be angry with my neighbour not the police or the HO.

I have nothing to fear from this new guidance. I think it will be to the good for the sport that this can be done. I understand why some people don't like it though. It's for each of us to decide what level of "checking up on us" is reasonable. For me I'm happy to give up a small amount of additional personal liberty in exchange for a system that may take guns from an irresponsible shooter before he does something stupid.

[Chuck]

I really don't have a problem with this. Why should I? I don't:
leave firearms unsecured around my house; or

Ahh "nothing to hide nothing to fear eh." It's amazing how many people in the country are happy to let authority just walk all over them no problem at all, all good stuff.

Just hope they don't show up when you're cleaning them or maybe you leave the safe door open whilst you answer the door....or 2 minutes after you come back from the range and everything is wet through...etc etc etc

For me I'm happy to give up a small amount of additional personal liberty in exchange for a system that may take guns from an irresponsible shooter before he does something stupid

. :lol: :lol: :lol: Oh right...why should YOU be inconvenienced because of someone else?? Like trading freedom for security, you end up with NONE! Define irresponsible versus lapse of concentration or circumstantial situation....or sheer bloddy mindedness. Yes the cops "are only doing their job".

[Mr_Logic]

Gaz: I would let them in and show them my guns are secure.
Mag: I would let them in show them that I was responibly working on my guns in place not visible to anybody as that is what I do.

I have never had a problem with the police (firearms wise or any otherwise). Whenever i come in connact with the police I act in a mature, cooperative way and I've ALWAYS found the police to be far and resonable.

In the situtaion with the neighbour I'd be angry with my neighbour not the police or the HO.

I have nothing to fear from this new guidance. I think it will be to the good for the sport that this can be done. I understand why some people don't like it though. It's for each of us to decide what level of "checking up on us" is reasonable. For me I'm happy to give up a small amount of additional personal liberty in exchange for a system that may take guns from an irresponsible shooter before he does something stupid.

Madness. Your sort are the reason so much liberty is routinely taken from us all. You'll agree with me in the end.

[karen]

When I got my first FAC (about 30 years ago) I was under the impression that the police (Thames Valley) could inspect my security any time they liked. I then moved to Northern Ireland where I could not keep my bolt action 7.62 rifle at home (although a Glock PPW, a pump action shotgun, another shotgun, an air rifle and two .22s were considered OK) but again the police could inspect any time they liked.

I don't have a problem with that (especially as I don't keep my rifles at home anyway) but didn't the police used to have a right to inspect without warning years ago or am I imagining it?

It might have been my Dad (also a shooter) telling me porkies to attempt to instill discipline into my looking-after-a-gun habits but would like to know if this was the case for anyone else?

Love

Karen

[Quarters]

All of us trade freedom for security.

All of us are free to say where we draw the line.

For me, and others, this is OK. For many it is not. I understand your point of view and respect it; but it happens to be different to mine.

As far as 'my sort' are concerned which liberties are you referring to?

[Mr_Logic]

Anyone that would trade liberty for security. We have lost freedom of speech, freedom of belief in this country. Hell 'incitement to racial hatred' - what is that, even? Instead of dealing with problems properly we let terrorists win - they want to remove the free, trusting society we once had and replace it with a dictatorship with no trust and no liberty, where the State does what it wants to its citizens.

We must resist this, and those who are OK with state inspection of my home at any time, with snooping on email, search history etc, they are misguided; it IS a slippery slope - name me an Act in the last 50 years which has restored freedom and curtailed the power of government...

[Quarters]

Mr Logic: I think I now know what "your sort" are.