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

Rburro2 wrote:Well this is well and trully a debating society. Hey ho Mr jackermanuk I would if were you take this as a reality check and move swiflty on and draw as little attention to yourself as possible and be nice to the police you want something from them that is in there power to give or deny. Remember were all on the whim of the chief constable

I totally agree, now would be a good time to duck back behind the parapet.

Hear hear.

Ducks, runs and dives for cover.

I've been away from this thread for a while. Ducks? Excellent. Crispy fried please, with pancakes and some sauce.

wtfwtf What does this bullsh#t mean?

"Remember were all on the whim of the chief constable"

From my understanding I have an entitlement to a FAC in accordance with the legal framework of the UK rather than the Chief Constable's unaccountable change of mood or behaviour.

The Police need to provide evidence that I'm a danger to public safety and/or to the peace which would otherwise deny me that right.

In addition, as a community we should be promoting firearm ownership and use.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, the coppers will continue to screw people over based on hearsay and guff.

Common sense required. That is all.

"If we don't act like a fringe society, then we won't be treated like a fringe society" ~ @MrColionNoir

Stop hiding.

SevenSixTwo, lapua338 et al. I think we're :cool2:

Appears to be two schools of thought in this thread:

#1 - we have to hide and be quiet and not upset anyone in authority
#2 - be loud and proud and if authority challenges you, then challenge right back!

FYI: school of thought #2 is how I got Gwent Police to admit their policy on Sec1 shotguns was incorrect and needed changing.

I nearly got into this argument at my clubs last meet with a chap whose attitude was 'Why challenge the police when you could have just joined UKPSA'. I really don't think he got my very short answer 'Because I didn't want to'.

Reason I bit my tongue and didn't get into a longer 'discussion'..... if you believe in school of thought #1 then you are never going to be convinced that any other way is correct....and if you are a follower of school of thought #2 then you know you're right and nothing will ever change your mind emrolleyes

In part it comes down to self interest, keep quiet, stay under the radar and perhaps the rule makers will just let me carry on with what I do. I have no real issue with that as a plan as at there of the day we are a maligned group. However, as a policy it's not worked, no more hand guns, no more self loader full bores, the only result keeping quiet has achieved is a reduction to shooting. The problem that shooting has is that it has no positive role models, all the public see are negative ones so it's no surprise we are either misunderstood, maligned or downright repressed, IMO we need to promote shooting and create positive role models for the public to see. If we keep quiet the visible side to shooting is overwhelmingly negative, what do we think will happen?

The problem is that trying to create a positive image by definition puts individuals in the line of fire (if you pardon the pun) of people who are resolute to stop us and in some instances that includes the police but if that's the case then we have to challenge rather than capitulate but in such a way that tries to create a positive impression.

Someone posted "good luck with that" and I agree, it's a tough call but that's even more reason to try.

However, I agree that security is paramount and sharing details of what you have and where is wrong (not saying the op did, simply that I agree that we have a responsibility on what we own).