The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

phaedra1106 wrote:Not really, not the same way as you do with an FAC. With an SGC if the police can't give a reason why you shouldn't be granted one then you have the right to be granted one.

So a 'blank stare' and a shrug of the shoulders when the FEO pops round and asks why you want a 2+1 is good enough?

SevenSixTwo wrote:

phaedra1106 wrote:Not really, not the same way as you do with an FAC. With an SGC if the police can't give a reason why you shouldn't be granted one then you have the right to be granted one.

So a 'blank stare' and a shrug of the shoulders when the FEO pops round and asks why you want a 2+1 is good enough?

Technically, yes. The FEO may recommend against the guy from getting an FAC, but unless they can prove there's strong evidence that a cert shouldn't be granted, they'll get one!

And here's the same story with a different twist.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-21658828

'Cobain' and shotguns seem to go together...

My personal view is that a conviction, which would include cautions, for any form of violence or dishonesty should be an automatic bar for life for the grant of a SGC or FAC.

Ceri

That would rule me out then. How many blokes get involved in a punch-up in their teens?... probably a bit unfair to penalise them for something that happened 20-odd years ago (and who have lead exemplarary, 'upstanding' lives ever since (in the service of their country I might add)). I'm glad FEOs don't think like you.

SevenSixTwo wrote:That would rule me out then. How many blokes get involved in a punch-up in their teens?... probably a bit unfair to penalise them for something that happened 20-odd years ago (and who have lead exemplarary, 'upstanding' lives ever since (in the service of their country I might add)). I'm glad FEOs don't think like you.

Not so much the FEOs (though they are mostly decent people trying to protect the public without trampling over us to excess - it's just where you decide to put the boundaries of discretion), more the lawmakers. The FEO in this case seems to have asked a very sensible question. I wonder what level of support he got from senior officers and the police lawyers in answering it? (the police do employ lawyers to assist their front line, yes?)

IainWR wrote:(the police do employ lawyers to assist their front line, yes?)

We would hope so ! We used to get very regular briefings from a Captain in the Army Legal Service on the RoE afore goin' out on patrol in Mesopotamia and Ganniland...

I wonder why his guns were returned in 2008 after being taken away.

Maybe they were homing guns?