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

HALODIN wrote:Will this do?

saddler wrote:Barry Manilow?!?!!!

Get some Nolan Sisters on....!

Well, that's me in the mood....

SimG wants his fave tune now!
Billy Connolly, "In the Brownies"
Shabba!

Yep I understand your point and yes this might be the case, but the technology exists to snoop our internet traffic if they want.

bradaz11 wrote:Open your eyes. In Saddler's case, there's enough information in his profile to find out his name in about 10 seconds and he's already said he uses the same username across different forums.

Anyway, that's enough from me today. I'm off to open a beer and light the barbecue.

Take care everyone, you don't know who might be watching...

I agree with JSC, through reading this, the main thing that stands out in saddlers case is....

It was a post about the local FEO's themselves - so if tipped off the posts are out there, and FEO's informed, highly likely one of them might take a look

It was about a shotty, able to slamfire, highly likely to be a 1897. if he said he had one on the post, then that limits the police's scope to who it might be. same as if in a post I said I have a delisle and live in Luton, it wouldn't take Beds an awfully long time to narrow it down.

third, his profile generally links to his trade page, that gives away an even bigger clue to who he is, especially if through many meetings with FEO's they know what he does...

and lastly, you seem surprised that the FEO's picked up on the thread at all, yet how many times (especially when discussing certain constabularies) are we warned that FEO's do come and look on here/ are told by others what goes on on here. same way as certain retailers (non members) who are discussed on here might come and read said posts occasionally

thats my thoughts anyway[/quote]

breacher wrote:

Sim G wrote: The Chief Constable does not have to give a reason if he revokes your ticket

Actually he does. In writing at time of revocation.

No, he doesn't. Under the provisions of s30 Firearms Act 1968, the Chief Officer has to give notice that the certificate is revoked. There is no legislative requirement to state the reason why.

s10.39 of the 2016 Guidance says that the Chief "should", not "must" give reason.https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... 16_v20.pdf

And QEB Hollis Whiteman, one of the most senior criminal chambers agrees, there is no requirement.
"Failed applications
• Providing reasons – good practice but not a legal requirement
Whilst it is good practice to furnish an applicant with reasons for why their application was unsuccessful, in order for them to assess whether the decision was justified and possibly appealable, there is no statutory requirement that reasons be given."

http://www.qebholliswhiteman.co.uk/arti ... rooney.pdf page 9.

I agree, although I can't see them shifting through the forum trying to work out who is who, as Sim says they don't have the time.

I'll see my FEO in the next couple of weeks, so I'll ask him if I can see my file...

RDC wrote:It's easy to find out quite a bit about some forum members just based on thier post content rather than anything like real name or an email address.

Everything we post will give something away. Discussion of a range or a shop we have visited will give a assumed region to work from. Hints at employer or job role will also help. Then throw in events or comps you have attended, along with a picture of your rifle setup.

It's like a giant jigsaw puzzle but the pieces aren't all there at the start. Patience will give you lots of info though.

Edit: - by some people, I mean those who attempt to keep thier identity secret. Obviously there are those who are happy to reveal lots, but some who try to reveal little tend to give a lot away indirectly.

By the power of Greyskull...

saddler wrote:Well, that's me in the mood....

SimG wants his fave tune now!
Billy Connolly, "In the Brownies"
Shabba!

HALODIN wrote:By the power of Greyskull...

saddler wrote:Well, that's me in the mood....

SimG wants his fave tune now!
Billy Connolly, "In the Brownies"
Shabba!

Ah - his Mrs will be getting all romantic now it was the first dance at their wedding!
Well, I say "wedding"....not much of a direct translation into English for "Goat bartering woman exchange festival/market/disco" - still, when in Kazakhstan....

Sim G wrote:

breacher wrote:

Sim G wrote: The Chief Constable does not have to give a reason if he revokes your ticket

Actually he does. In writing at time of revocation.

No, he doesn't. Under the provisions of s30 Firearms Act 1968, the Chief Officer has to give notice that the certificate is revoked. There is no legislative requirement to state the reason why.

s10.39 of the 2016 Guidance says that the Chief "should", not "must" give reason.https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... 16_v20.pdf

And QEB Hollis Whiteman, one of the most senior criminal chambers agrees, there is no requirement.
"Failed applications
• Providing reasons – good practice but not a legal requirement
Whilst it is good practice to furnish an applicant with reasons for why their application was unsuccessful, in order for them to assess whether the decision was justified and possibly appealable, there is no statutory requirement that reasons be given."

http://www.qebholliswhiteman.co.uk/arti ... rooney.pdf page 9.

BUT..
If the failed applicant takes it to court, the Chief Constable will have to give his reasons.

Freedom of information request?

HALODIN wrote: We have a forum member who was shown a print out of their internet activity by their "Inspector & Sgt from the Firearms Dept," how did they get it? This isn't the first time I've heard the police monitor the internet airwaves, which is why the words on the NRA site stood out to me.

I was in a meeting a while ago with firearms licensing department and counter terrorism types and the CT team made it quite clear the intelligence they gathered was not automatically shared with FL, far from it in fact. Here at the new place our latest CT contacts have told us to always contact them first as the local FLD will not have been made aware of stuff.

Bottom line is CT or similar certainly would not be pointing out posts on forums to the local firearms team.