Known to police

[ips]

I don't see why someone else's criminal record would reflect on you unless you have also in some way been linked to crime and known to the police but have never been convicted. If the police ask you about these people just answer their questions honestly and I don't see you having a problem.

I think maybe you could be perceived as guilty by association with unsavoury charcters, said characters could theoretically coherence you into "lending" your gun.

 

[Finners]

I think maybe you could be perceived as guilty by association with unsavoury charcters, said characters could theoretically coherence you into "lending" your gun.

By that logic, if my mate or Brother drinks and drives then I get a ban? 

 

[ips]

I said unsavoury characters, your being pedantic

dunc is spot on and anyone who thinks the police take your written deceleration as gospel without checking is deluded.

no offence intended dinners.

furthermore the doc that dunc has posted does without doubt Imo substantiate everything dunc has said

 

[Wonko the Sane]

Who isn't known to the police?

 

[Finners]

I said unsavoury characters, your being pedantic

dunc is spot on and anyone who thinks the police take your written deceleration as gospel without checking is deluded.

no offence intended dinners.

furthermore the doc that dunc has posted does without doubt Imo substantiate everything dunc has said

:lol:  Pedantic......... moi? Anyway, who's dinners?

The argument is a bit pointless really, Peter is right. None of us actually know for sure. All I was saying is that I doubt the fact that someone being a mate or related to a "scally" would be likely to affect anything. Obviously, if you happen to live with a family member who was done for armed robbery that might be taken into account.

Done with this now.

Peace and love.

 

[ips]

sorry dinners typo ... Bloody predictive did it again

your right or rather peter is right none of us actually no for sure. I am done too BUT final word is this. Duncs doc does seem comprehensive enough to cover any scenario.

have a good weekend finners me old mate

 

[jwpzx9r]

I think maybe you could be perceived as guilty by association with unsavoury charcters, said characters could theoretically coherence you into "lending" your gun.

Don't get that at all Ian. I can see a situation where someone who is suspected by the police as being a person who actually has criminal tendencies but the are not yet proven in court. This situation as I see it is entirely different here someone know someone who is a criminal or has a record as one. I used to play in a darts team that had some right dodgy members nice enough guys though... and some coppers played for the team too   As to coercion anybody could be coerced to lean a criminal anything it depends how robust the person being coerced is. Not looking for an argument here the guy has asked a question and from what he has revealed I think he has nothing to worry about if the police think he is linked to crime on the other hand...

Not totally on topic, but related .I was asked to attend to be a potential juror at the high court . I went along and one of the cases that was to be heard was an attempted murder knife attack by a middle aged man on another. Anyway I did not get picked and later that day related the story to some members at the bowling club... one of the group came right out and said " he is my brother". No body could believe it because this man was such a quiet spoken upstanding member of the community and kirk elder to boot... his brother on the other hand was a bamstick who had spent more than 17y ears of his life in jail for violent crime offences . The point I am making is just because you know or a member of your direct family is a criminal it does not mean that you have to be in anyway associated with them. I really admired that man for saying what he did, he did not need to nobody at all would have ever put the two together but he had nothing to hide and let everybody know.

 

[westley]

I spent my entire working life associating with criminals and it never stopped me from having both shotgun and firearms certificates.

 

[ips]

john

you may be correct But and its a big but, the licensing dept presumably air on the cautious and if you are documented as socialising with dubious characters it is obvious to me at least that they will not look favourably upon it.

 

[schmokinn]

I said unsavoury characters, your being pedantic

dunc is spot on and anyone who thinks the police take your written deceleration as gospel without checking is deluded.

no offence intended dinners.

furthermore the doc that dunc has posted does without doubt Imo substantiate everything dunc has said

deceleration...dinners

was it a large G&T

 

[ips]

close ..... Single malt

bloody predictive .

 

[Santa2512]

Update to this.. They definatly have a link to me and the sleigh now.

I was at Shoreham airshow yesterday,  and witnessed the tragic accident..  As i had Photographs of the crash, i was asked to contact the Police regarding the pictures.

I had a call this morning, which was to go through  some questions.

Prelim stuff, was name address, phone numbers etc etc

Then they wanted car registration  and details etc

Names of people with me etc.  

Just waiting a callback or further interview

:santa:

 

[jwpzx9r]

Terrible situation there. I don't know why on gods good earth these idiots are allowed to perform " stunts" over areas being used by the general public. Fair enough if folks want to go and see an air display.. they do so at their own risk, but some poor unfortunate driving along a public road gets dive bombed by a clown in a lethal weapon is just inexcusable! The government should be made to act on this. Peoples lives should not be at risk because some idiot wants to "show what he can do"... in this case kill 20 innocent people, possibly more... what a great day out.. not!

 

[Les53]

close ..... Single malt

Pissed again Ian? 

 

[RobertBeard]

Terrible situation there. I don't know why on gods good earth these idiots are allowed to perform " stunts" over areas being used by the general public. Fair enough if folks want to go and see an air display.. they do so at their own risk, but some poor unfortunate driving along a public road gets dive bombed by a clown in a lethal weapon is just inexcusable! The government should be made to act on this. Peoples lives should not be at risk because some idiot wants to "show what he can do"... in this case kill 20 innocent people, possibly more... what a great day out.. not!

And its this sort of attitude that leads to gun bans because some lunatic does something that he shouldn't and every gun owner then has to suffer and lose their sport.

I would suggest that you wait for the result of the inquiry as to the probable cause and what the Civil Aviation authority are going to do about it.  In the meantime there is a sensible temporary ban on Hunters flying and on historic jets performing aerobatics.

The loss of life is a terrible tragedy but please let's not have an over the top knee jerk reaction to something that these jets do as an everyday function.  They were designed to do this to be able to dog fight and air frames are rigorously timed and limited on their hours.

 

[jwpzx9r]

"And its this sort of attitude that leads to gun bans because some lunatic does something that he shouldn't and every gun owner then has to suffer and lose their sport."

That statement is so wrong there is no comparison between the two situations.

I don't give at toss about stunt pilots carrying out stunts within the confines of the airfield. If that aircraft had crashed onto the area of the airfield then while there may have been loss of life it would have been people who knew that they were attending an event at which they were exposing themselves to considerable risks and those risks would have been highlighted to them before they entered the event. It would still be a very sad thing to happen but they knew the risks... a member of the public does not expect some idiot to dive bomb them attempting a stunt over a major highway.

 What I would like to know is why innocent members of the public lose their lives because some clown thinks it is OK to carry out stunts over a busy major highway. Lets be clear on what I am saying I am not against this type of event provided that the stunts are carried out within the area of the airfield. If that aircraft had been flying true and level this would never had happened... yes the aircraft may have crashed but not onto the road.

"I would suggest that you wait for the result of the inquiry as to the probable cause and what the Civil Aviation authority are going to do about it.  In the meantime there is a sensible temporary ban on Hunters flying and on historic jets performing aerobatics."

I don't give a toss about what caused the aircraft to crash what I am concerned about is why it did so out with the confines for the airfield. When you go out shooting on Sunday the organiser of the event goes to every effort to ensure that what you are doing will have no detrimental effect on the public going about their business by keeping all the flying lead within the confines of the shooting ground. An air show should be no different there should be no stunt flying outwith the confines of the airfield.

"The loss of life is a terrible tragedy but please let's not have an over the top knee jerk reaction to something that these jets do as an everyday function.  They were designed to do this to be able to dog fight and air frames are rigorously timed and limited on their hours."

I can tell you right now if I were one of the bereaved and you had uttered that to me you would have been going home in an ambulance.

edit

Just to clarify a point made further down. I am in no way threatening violence toward the poster I am however making the point that the relatives of the poor unfortunates killed in this needless accident.

j

 

[Dunc]

I can tell you right now if I were one of the bereaved and you had uttered that to me you would have been going home in an ambulance.

It is completely out of order to threaten violence to anyone on any forum.  Particularly a shooting one and you the owner of a firearm.

 

[jwpzx9r]

Sorry where at all have I threatened violence?  I said if I had been one of the bereaved that is not threatening violence its making the point that this fellow thinks that some clown taking anywhere up to twenty people to an early grave is ...well just one of those things really and we best wait to find out what caused this piffling accident. I think the relatives of some of these poor people might just have a different take on things and that is the point I am making, not that I am threatening violence get a grip! Maybe I should have said if you had uttered that to one of the bereaved you might have been heading home in an ambulance but the sentiment is the same.

 

[Andy73]

"And its this sort of attitude that leads to gun bans because some lunatic does something that he shouldn't and every gun owner then has to suffer and lose their sport."

That statement is so wrong there is no comparison between the two situations.

I don't give at toss about stunt pilots carrying out stunts within the confines of the airfield. If that aircraft had crashed onto the area of the airfield then while there may have been loss of life it would have been people who knew that they were attending an event at which they were exposing themselves to considerable risks and those risks would have been highlighted to them before they entered the event. It would still be a very sad thing to happen but they knew the risks... a member of the public does not expect some idiot to dive bomb them attempting a stunt over a major highway.

 What I would like to know is why innocent members of the public lose their lives because some clown thinks it is OK to carry out stunts over a busy major highway. Lets be clear on what I am saying I am not against this type of event provided that the stunts are carried out within the area of the airfield. If that aircraft had been flying true and level this would never had happened... yes the aircraft may have crashed but not onto the road.

"I would suggest that you wait for the result of the inquiry as to the probable cause and what the Civil Aviation authority are going to do about it.  In the meantime there is a sensible temporary ban on Hunters flying and on historic jets performing aerobatics."

I don't give a toss about what caused the aircraft to crash what I am concerned about is why it did so out with the confines for the airfield. When you go out shooting on Sunday the organiser of the event goes to every effort to ensure that what you are doing will have no detrimental effect on the public going about their business by keeping all the flying lead within the confines of the shooting ground. An air show should be no different there should be no stunt flying outwith the confines of the airfield.

"The loss of life is a terrible tragedy but please let's not have an over the top knee jerk reaction to something that these jets do as an everyday function.  They were designed to do this to be able to dog fight and air frames are rigorously timed and limited on their hours."

I can tell you right now if I were one of the bereaved and you had uttered that to me you would have been going home in an ambulance.

While no direct threat has been made, there is an implied one by saying that "if i were one of the bereaved and you had uttered that to me you would be going home in an ambulance". Perhaps a better choice of phrase could prevented it being misconstrued 

 

[schmokinn]

harrier pilot,top gun pilot,raf flying instuctor on fast jets,airline pilot on airbus,757,767 and you call him a clown...it was a sad day for everyone but you are not making things any better.

what are your qualifications to use a shotgun or are you a clown too?