Plymouth
-
- Posts: 2519
- Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 11:16am
Re: Plymouth
Morning all, At the root of any inadequacies found in the control & vetting of shotgun & firearms entitlement the pressure on police budgets, which face multiple pressures!
If I may stray from direct topic line, I would have to say that the Covid pandemic has shown one area of the budget that actually saw an improvement?
The area I mean is the high cost & man hours consumed by the policing of urban area of the so called "Nightlife Economy", the bars & clubs that have expanded since the ludicrous alcohol licensing laws changes!
The 22-30hrs -23-00hrs closing times were cited as to cause rushed drinking and subsequent incidents of social disorder, we were told things would be much better with the new later closing times?
Well, in most cities the problems which police face got much worse with far too many major incidents, usually involving serious injury and death! The blue & white tape stretched around great areas , with many folk on hands and knees seeking forensic evidence to bring offenders to book, we become blaise about the sheer number of times I meet it as I go about my city.
During the shut-down imposed by Covid control the police were clearly having to deal will far fewer such scenes, but since lock-down has been lifted the the tape & knee pads is back out there, the officers are suffering the horrors of having to deal with the alcohol induced mayhem yet again, families again face the fearful knock and the reality that their lives will be changed from that moment forward!
So, forces that have to struggle with the task of shotgun and firearms certification control and vetting, they again face the ridiculous cost of the "Night-time Economy" and it's human tragedy cost! MM
If I may stray from direct topic line, I would have to say that the Covid pandemic has shown one area of the budget that actually saw an improvement?
The area I mean is the high cost & man hours consumed by the policing of urban area of the so called "Nightlife Economy", the bars & clubs that have expanded since the ludicrous alcohol licensing laws changes!
The 22-30hrs -23-00hrs closing times were cited as to cause rushed drinking and subsequent incidents of social disorder, we were told things would be much better with the new later closing times?
Well, in most cities the problems which police face got much worse with far too many major incidents, usually involving serious injury and death! The blue & white tape stretched around great areas , with many folk on hands and knees seeking forensic evidence to bring offenders to book, we become blaise about the sheer number of times I meet it as I go about my city.
During the shut-down imposed by Covid control the police were clearly having to deal will far fewer such scenes, but since lock-down has been lifted the the tape & knee pads is back out there, the officers are suffering the horrors of having to deal with the alcohol induced mayhem yet again, families again face the fearful knock and the reality that their lives will be changed from that moment forward!
So, forces that have to struggle with the task of shotgun and firearms certification control and vetting, they again face the ridiculous cost of the "Night-time Economy" and it's human tragedy cost! MM
-
- Posts: 235
- Joined: 26 Oct 2018, 9:25pm
Re: Plymouth
Oldjohnw wrote: ↑16 Aug 2021, 8:50am Interesting article
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... SApp_Other
It seems strange rather than interesting. It sets forth on the presumption because he was an ‘incel’ and ‘misogynist’ his crime was motivated by this - except his victims appear to be his two adult females (one his mother) two adult males and a child. Which simply doesn’t fit the premise, does it?
My feeling remains that this is another case of the newspapers ‘solving the crime’ and pointing the finger at something in just the same way they did with Rambo and SWAT magazine after Hungerford, and with video nasties after the tragic Jamie Bulger killing x Hugely complex social issues reduced down to a bite sized chunk of one minute hate and a public sacrifice.
Re: Plymouth
Which is why I made my initial comment that it is all to easy just to say, “He must have mental health issues”. My posting the Guardian article was not my endorsement of it. I found it interesting; you found it strange.
John
Re: Plymouth
After such events I think we are all entitled to hold our own opinions about the cause and not try to force our own opinion on others. The truth is no one knows. What is debateable is what should be done to prevent attrocities like this.
Al
Al
Reuse, recycle, thus do your bit to save the planet.... Get stuff at auctions, Dump, Charity Shops, Facebook Marketplace, Ebay, Car Boots. Choose an Old House, and a Banger ..... And cycle as often as you can......
-
- Posts: 36778
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Plymouth
I see it's now being reported as fact that licensing procedures are being reviewed ad the police have been told to carry out social media checks on licence applicants
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58226072
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58226072
Re: Plymouth
I haven’t seen anyone trying to do that. I have seen some good comments. But as has been said by others, ‘we are entitled to our own opinions but not our own facts’.
John
Re: Plymouth
thirdcrank wrote: ↑16 Aug 2021, 10:18am I see it's now being reported as fact that licensing procedures are being reviewed ad the police have been told to carry out social media checks on licence applicants
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58226072
Do they need RIPA permission to access what's available publicly?
Thanks
Jonathan
Re: Plymouth
Just as I said a few posts agoHellhound wrote: ↑16 Aug 2021, 2:22amWhat is your definition of 'a lot more'?Psamathe wrote: ↑15 Aug 2021, 8:22pmMy thought was in response to the workload issues. Charging a lot more allows the checking processes to be more extensive and properly resourced.Zulu Eleven wrote: ↑15 Aug 2021, 8:13pm
Because everyone who shoots is rich, and nobody uses one for work or any other perfectly legitimate purpose.
You do realise we’re talking about over half a million certificate holders here, right?
Ian
Added bold and colour to highlight.Psamathe wrote: ↑15 Aug 2021, 8:07pmPut a 0 (before the decimal point) on the end of the cost of a firearms license. It's not a fundamental human right so charge (even make a profit) on thorough processing of applications.ossie wrote: ↑15 Aug 2021, 8:01pmYes. However Devon & Cornwall have also amalgamated their department with Dorset so I simply cannot imagine the workload for these three rural Counties.simonineaston wrote: ↑15 Aug 2021, 7:48pm Oh. And that's just one county... Wiltshire in this instance.
Ian
Ian
-
- Posts: 36778
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Plymouth
Set up a Firearms Licensing Authority to do the job and take it out of the hands of dolts like me. Make it self-financing from the licence fees and in no time at all, few licensed weapons would be in private hands.
-
- Posts: 235
- Joined: 26 Oct 2018, 9:25pm
Re: Plymouth
I’m sure that that won’t have any unplanned outcomes, and that any firearms certificate applicant won’t just either delete any identifiable social media accounts, or set up both a public profile and an anonymous one.thirdcrank wrote: ↑16 Aug 2021, 10:18am I see it's now being reported as fact that licensing procedures are being reviewed ad the police have been told to carry out social media checks on licence applicants
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58226072
-
- Posts: 36778
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Plymouth
Speaking more generally, I suspect that a lot of what's posted on social media is big talk, as in all mouth and no trousers. Some of the danger is that those who are easily led are led by it.
Re: Plymouth
I don't do "Socal Media" but if somebody who does is asked by authorities for their social media accounts what is to stop them saying "I don't have any" - and whatever their posting history will not be considered. I appreciate some social media says you should use your real name but do they veryfy against electoral register (requiring your full address, etc.); what about Burmese people on social media?Zulu Eleven wrote: ↑16 Aug 2021, 10:43amI’m sure that that won’t have any unplanned outcomes, and that any firearms certificate applicant won’t just either delete any identifiable social media accounts, or set up both a public profile and an anonymous one.thirdcrank wrote: ↑16 Aug 2021, 10:18am I see it's now being reported as fact that licensing procedures are being reviewed ad the police have been told to carry out social media checks on licence applicants
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58226072
Ian
Re: Plymouth
We're both using a social medium!Psamathe wrote: ↑16 Aug 2021, 11:02amI don't do "Socal Media" but if somebody who does is asked by authorities for their social media accounts what is to stop them saying "I don't have any" - and whatever their posting history will not be considered. I appreciate some social media says you should use your real name but do they veryfy against electoral register (requiring your full address, etc.); what about Burmese people on social media?
No, authentication is rarely needed.
But the police are very familiar in using computerised information in the investigation and prosecution of crime.
Jonathan
Re: Plymouth
The focus on 'incel' views and what people post on social media is drawing attention from the fact that an allegation of assault was made against Davison which was serious enough for the police to confiscate his gun. That the police returned his gun 'only' after he had completed an anger management course indicates that even though the circumstances of the alleged assault did not result in Davison being charged, there was sufficient cause for the police to be seriously concerned.
It is not yet clear if the assault allegation was for 'domestic violence' (defined as "Any incident or pattern of incidents of controlling, coercive or threatening behaviour, violence or abuse between those aged 16 or over who are or have been intimate partners or family members regardless of gender or sexuality"). If it was, then the Home Office guidelines state that,
But even if it did not involve domestic violence, no one for whom an anger management course is considered necessary or appropriate should be allowed to possess a gun.
It is not yet clear if the assault allegation was for 'domestic violence' (defined as "Any incident or pattern of incidents of controlling, coercive or threatening behaviour, violence or abuse between those aged 16 or over who are or have been intimate partners or family members regardless of gender or sexuality"). If it was, then the Home Office guidelines state that,
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... 16_v20.pdf12.34 In general evidence (including a history) of domestic violence and abuse will indicate that an individual should not be permitted to possess a firearm or shotgun. Each case must be assessed by the police on its merits, on the basis of the strength of the evidence available and all the circumstances of the case.
But even if it did not involve domestic violence, no one for whom an anger management course is considered necessary or appropriate should be allowed to possess a gun.
-
- Posts: 235
- Joined: 26 Oct 2018, 9:25pm
Re: Plymouth
There’s a lot of assumptions there - eg. Seizure is often routine after allegations (so no ‘serious enough to’) and normally voluntary rather than as a result of formal revocation while allegations are investigated, and of course not all allegations are true, plus there are legal defences to allegations of assault (eg. Self defence) and we don’t know if the anger management was something done voluntarily in order to demonstrate/pacify the Licencing peopleslowster wrote: ↑16 Aug 2021, 11:16am the fact that an allegation of assault was made against Davison which was serious enough for the police to confiscate his gun. That the police returned his gun 'only' after he had completed an anger management course indicates that even though the circumstances of the alleged assault did not result in Davison being charged, there was sufficient cause for the police to be seriously concerned.
I know personally one bloke who, in the process of splitting up with his wife, lodged his guns with a dealer - Inevitably the wife made claims that he had threatened her with the gun, and the police came round to find an empty cabinet, guns were proven to be in storage at the time of the allegations - do you think she got in trouble for lying to the police? Of course not - but just think how that could so easily have played out for him?