Seen on TV. Guns and drugs? Instant FAC / SGC revocation?

[Andy632]

Would this cover it?

"Information contained in criminal intelligence will be assessed paying particular regard to alleged or known involvement in criminal offences, particularly those involving the use of violence or threat of violence, or firearms, or evidence of associations with known criminals."

Does that not bar virtually all cops from ever getting licences????????

[Dark Skies]

Interesting discussion....

I think a few people didn't get what I was amazed about, this wasn't a question about being responsible for passengers or the rights and wrongs of weed etc.

The main point was how can a responsible gun owner take his mates shooting, at night, when they were planning on getting wasted.

In my view, it doesn't matter how they were getting there.....lending some-one who is not in complete control through drugs, or drink, shows a massive error of judgement.

You don't think a more interesting point might be why did plod send them on their way?

[safetyfirst]

I'm pretty sure thousands of people a year take a beer our lampung with their mates, I'd never do it myself, I don't even open the cabinet to fit some new sights or something if I've had a beer but you've seen my username.

Anyhow, I'd be significantly less concerned about someone having a little smoke than a couple of beers.

But yes, it shows poor judgement, no question about that.

A friend of mine had way too much to drink and turned his car over on the way back to his farm. He had a call from his FEO saying "if we find you doing something that irresponsible again, we're taking your ticket" which we all thought showed good sense by the police, we were quite surprised the two departments had spoken in fact!

I think the police simply don't see cannabis as something worth their time and 99% of the time they'd be right. They just ignore it.

[Musclebob]

...

I think the bigger problem with these programs is they show the police just pull people over with no reason, saw one the other day, they just said something like sec137 of the road traffic act, whe asked why he had pulled a guy over. thurns out that act when i looked up the one he said, just says you must stop for a uniformed officer. So there was no mention as to the reason for pulling him. You then add in the highly tuned coppers nose that can smell weed at a thousand yards.... walking up to the car, ooo I can smell weed, oooo that means I can search you and your car if I want, yet without the aid of the smell, no lawfull reason to search.

Section 164 gives a officer the power to stop any vehicle to check driving documents. 163 creates an offence if you then don't stop. You can only search if you have reasonable grounds to suspect they have something illegal in their possession and smell, by itself, is no longer enough.

[ordnance]

correct, very bad judgement call, guns and drugs very bad !
as for associates in the home office guidance, i think it is more about associating in organsised or serious crime rather then a few kids smoking abit pot !


what if cannabis were to be made legal ? that would be interesting can of worms

Not that bad really. It would be the same as drinking

Like that shotgun champ who got his certificate pulled after posting a video of him doing that nek nomination with a bottle of vodka in one hand and a shotgun in the other. It wasn't loaded, but he was still in charge of a firearm whilst necking a bottle of vodka.

Unless you doint drink, sit in your house and have a drink you are drunk in charge of a firearm, and car if you have one.

[Rockhopper]

Thats been tested in court - Intention is the key, if you have no intention of driving the car then you can't be drunk in charge. Sitting at home watching tv and drinking then there is clearly no intention to drive. Same with guns, if the safe is locked and the keys are hidden away in their normal place then there is clearly no intention to be in charge of them.

[joe]

Thats been tested in court - Intention is the key, if you have no intention of driving the car then you can't be drunk in charge. Sitting at home watching tv and drinking then there is clearly no intention to drive. Same with guns, if the safe is locked and the keys are hidden away in their normal place then there is clearly no intention to be in charge of them.

What about cleaning them whlist having a few beers ! As for the key why hide it as opposed being on your person ?

[Rockhopper]

They would have to prove intent.

The keys thing is not relevant, I hide mine, some keep them on them - makes no difference.

Is it a specific offence to be in possession of a firearm whilst drunk?

[Sim G]

Is it a specific offence to be in possession of a firearm whilst drunk?

Possession of a loaded firearm when drunk, yes.

[joe]

They would have to prove intent.

The keys thing is not relevant, I hide mine, some keep them on them - makes no difference.

Is it a specific offence to be in possession of a firearm whilst drunk?

Only in a public place licensing act 1872