Merseyside Police carry out inspection at Anfield gun club

[Triffid]

The letter from the Home Office reveals sensitive personal information about one of the Club's members - that he has been refused an FAC/SGC and that the Police advise that his sons have links with organised crime. To me this lays them wide open to a complaint under the GDPR and claims for damages against the Home Office.
Triffid

they do not name him.

Roger must know who they are talking about. And now he knows more about him than perhaps he should.

[safetyfirst]

Sounds more like it’s information he should have had some time ago to me!

[GeeRam]

bearing in mind they are both OAP's.

He must still be working as a CEng though as he's not on the retired list.

[HH1]

Roger must know who they are talking about. And now he knows more about him than perhaps he should.

I know who they are on about and probably so do quite a few others in the club.

[Sim G]

This bit from the Home Office letter should be ringing bloddy great alarm bells , “The police checked the list of members which you provided and noted over 100 members who do not appear on the police's records.”

Merseyside Police do not do tick box while drinking coffee visits. If anything they are probably on par with a GCHQ security screening .

So how is it that between the January inspection and the raid in June over 100 members would appear to have joined APC but the police claim no knowledge of them .

My take on it is that quite frankly, Mr Taylor didn't bother informing the police. Every person who formally applies for membership must have their name, address date and place of birth etc submitted to the police. The list of full and probationary members submitted have some 100 individuals who have not had the police informed of their details. Yes the list probably goes back to when the last approval inspection took place, six years ago. But that's still more than one a month since then!

There could actually be full members who have not applied for a FAC not known to the police and could be wholly unsuitable. All the while having access to guns and ammunition of the club. Not to mention almost open access to club firearms an ammo, according to the "letter".

Supplying this information is a requirement under the criteria. This is not negotiable. Not only did he fail in his obligations, 100 times, in this regard, he put the safety of the club, its members and the public at risk. This is not admin errors, this is incompetence leading to culpability.

I'd hazard that the details were gathered in the January and because of anomalies and breaches of legislation/regulation, this is why it's taken six months. They'll have picked through all of the information, bit by bit.

I take Brian's point that you can have a negative spin put on things, but Brian's incident was 12 years ago and trust me, the "job" is a different animal to what it was then. The checks and balances that are in place these days, I'm surprised a decision in this case was made so quickly!

But obviously 280 members now have to be protected. The first thing I would think all should do is join the NRA. For nothing more than this will satisfy the "club" element of the good reason for owning the firearms on ticket. This would also give breathing space so that people could find available clubs.

That said, it only needs a minimum of 10 people to form a Home Office club.... the criteria is relatively simple, a number of clubs could be formed. If commercially viable, then even move to take over the present facilities. But the one thing I would say has to be adhered to. Mr Taylor has to be disassociated with any club in the short term. Currently, he's poison to the formation or continuation of a new or present club. I can't seen his name being helpful with anything, at the moment. And honestly, I think he may have his wn questions to answer in regards to his own FAC and RFD, never mind "defend" club business...

I'm sorry if I come across as damning, but stuff like this really does pi$$ me off! How can the shooting community have any credibility with our points of "the most lawful section of society" when we have this happen? Couple this with rogue RFDs like Paul Edmunds (spit!) and even individual FAC holders who flout the law and their responsibilities, we have no chance in slowing down further legislation never mind attempting the relaxing of some of it.

Roger Taylor might be a "nice" bloke on a personal level, but professionally he hasn't just shafted 280 people, he's put us all at further risk when it comes to our sport...

[MistAgain]

Aintree Pistol Club (bottom Left) after a visit by a German Team , but before the raid by Merseyside Police .

[Sim G]

And that's a very valid point. Stuff was completely different then! Carrying on today as if regulation doesn't matter, or don't bother with it because we never have or have always done it another way, doesn't cut it when crunch comes to crunch...

[HH1]

The wording in the Home Office letter stating that the storage area is left open and that ALL members have assess to those guns is wholly misleading!

I generally sit in the exact same spot every week facing the counter and observing the CCTV screens and what is happening behind the counter (when I'm not shooting on the range). I can state for a fact that very few people ever go around the other side of the counter, especially when Roger or other members of his family / staff aren't sat there.

I've been a member for 15 years and it was only last year when I was on the NRA RCO course that I had, with Roger's permission full access to the other side of the counter in order to use the kettle and let the small number of people attending the course in through the doors via the security system door buttons. All the club guns were securely locked and we were using our own personal guns on the course.

As a qualified RCO (and someone with a dangerous occupation) I am always keeping an eye out towards safe practise and I have no hesitation telling people if they are being unsafe as and when the need arises.

[Sim G]

And if it only ever happened once before, when the inspection team were present, it doesn't matter, it happened. The Home Office decision was based on the sum of its parts, this is not about a single indiscretion or mistake....

[Polchraine]

bearing in mind they are both OAP's.

He must still be working as a CEng though as he's not on the retired list.

Why and how do you make that assumption. Once granted, an individual can keep Chrtered Engineer status for life provided fees are paid and there is no "malpractice" or "criminal offence".