Theft from the NRA Armoury.

Message

#81 Post by **Gaz** » Fri Mar 20, 2015 9:59 am

Well what does it say?!

#82 Post by **Dougan** » Fri Mar 20, 2015 11:33 am

Have you not received your copy of the Journal yet?

#83 Post by **Ovenpaa** » Fri Mar 20, 2015 12:58 pm

Nothing here yet

#84 Post by **Andy632** » Fri Mar 20, 2015 1:04 pm

Mine's arrived up in the Frozen north.

#85 Post by **kennyc** » Fri Mar 20, 2015 2:06 pm

Seems perfectly sensible explanation to me

#86 Post by **M99** » Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:05 pm

Yes and reassuringly frank and honest it would seem.

#87 Post by **HALODIN** » Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:23 pm

Can someone scan it in please?

#88 Post by **Dannywayoflife** » Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:33 pm

Yes please scan it and post on here please :)

#89 Post by **ashmcc** » Fri Mar 20, 2015 5:23 pm

Here you go.

#90 Post by **zanes** » Fri Mar 20, 2015 5:33 pm

"Any assertion that the judge upheld Miss B-L's case because the NRA is not operating a secure section 5 armoury is false".

Whilst this may be true, the whole case came about because the NRA is not operating a secure section 5 armoury.

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

Theft from the NRA Armoury.

Re: Theft from the NRA Armoury.

Re: Theft from the NRA Armoury.

Re: Theft from the NRA Armoury.

Re: Theft from the NRA Armoury.

Re: Theft from the NRA Armoury.

Re: Theft from the NRA Armoury.

Re: Theft from the NRA Armoury.

Re: Theft from the NRA Armoury.

Re: Theft from the NRA Armoury.

Re: Theft from the NRA Armoury.

Who is online