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

Demonic69 wrote:

Gaz wrote:Internal police documents seen by UK Shooting News have revealed that police firearms licensing employees want to ban: appeals to courts against police decisions.

Isn't that illegal, against our human rights and against our very own constitution?

To be fair they have suggested local tribunals as an alternative cheaper solution so you can't really say banning them.

Chapuis wrote: To be fair they have suggested local tribunals as an alternative cheaper solution so you can't really say banning them.

Not too bad then, unless they choose the attendees...

Demonic69 wrote:

Chapuis wrote: To be fair they have suggested local tribunals as an alternative cheaper solution so you can't really say banning them.

Not too bad then, unless they choose the attendees...

Yes it is very bad why do think they don't want crown court involved ! They want be judge in their own kangaroo
court

Demonic69 wrote:

Chapuis wrote: To be fair they have suggested local tribunals as an alternative cheaper solution so you can't really say banning them.

Not too bad then, unless they choose the attendees...

As someone pointed out to me at the conference, the police would not suggest or endorse this suggestion unless there was a significant benefit to them in terms of skewing the playing field. I think it's because they want to move to a system where no binding decisions exist as they do in a court of law, meaning they can ignore tribunal precedent whenever they feel like it.

At this moment in time the only concerns that Firearms Licencing should have is bloody speeding up the process of renewals, issuing and variations. If only they processed the paperwork as fast as the cheques were cashed If the complaint is "lack of manpower" then why can't they just bring the service into the 21st century by allowing us to make changes via the internet?

It's absolutely disgusting, they are in no position to outright ban these types of firearms without so much as a "good reason." If they don't need a good reason to ban something then why should we need good reason to prove we should have firearms?

The police can't ban anything they will have to convince the home secartary and dave !
They will ban if stupid acpo get the media and sheeple into a frenzie like in 1997 ! Turst me they can and prob will ! Nothing left except for shotguns target shooting no longer a good reason

The compensation bill will prob bankupt the government!

I thought after the Handgun ban they changed the rules so they wouldn't need to pay compensation?
Or am I making that up?

sysreq wrote:I thought after the Handgun ban they changed the rules so they wouldn't need to pay compensation?
Or am I making that up?

And how would that work ! That would be illegal under the UK 'constitution' and under EU law
Confiscation of property by the state !

Unless of course they make owning a firearm treason which allows confiscation of the offenders property

joe wrote:
And how would that work ! That would be illegal under the UK 'constitution' and under EU law
Confiscation of property by the state !

Unless of course they make owning a firearm treason which allows confiscation of the offenders property

Unfortunately, it would work in the same way as the actions of the Scottish Government, who have decided not to pay compensation for air guns for those who can't/won't get a license next April.

We probably do have "human rights" in this area, but if structured in a certain way, any ban can probably find a way around that "right".

The way they would do it without having to pay would be to give everyone temporary Section 5 authority to keep whatever they had at the time the 'ban' came in, the same way they did with Brocock revolvers. You can't sell/transfer etc the gun so effectively it would die with you. No compensation needed and shooters would probably be that relieved that they got to keep their guns they'd go along with it.