Film, Media & TV12 mins ago
Regardless Of This Man's Exemplary Military Career, Surely He Should Have Received A Jail Sentence For Keeping This Stash Of Weapons?
73 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.yet again -
there is a man who is jailed for possession of firearms
and AOG asks in an agonised tone whether he should be jailed
he was... AOG, he was - Laws are there to be obeyed and not flouted
by contrast in the Nasty Neighbours programme
one welsh farmer who has harassing and being nasty to a neighbour. commented: "as soon as the police found the revolver, I knew i would go to prison.... "
there are some small arms you cant get a licence for
and I think our SAS hero had one or a few ....
Erskine childers was shot in 1922 for possession of a firearm
so I think this lot got off lightly
there is a man who is jailed for possession of firearms
and AOG asks in an agonised tone whether he should be jailed
he was... AOG, he was - Laws are there to be obeyed and not flouted
by contrast in the Nasty Neighbours programme
one welsh farmer who has harassing and being nasty to a neighbour. commented: "as soon as the police found the revolver, I knew i would go to prison.... "
there are some small arms you cant get a licence for
and I think our SAS hero had one or a few ....
Erskine childers was shot in 1922 for possession of a firearm
so I think this lot got off lightly
// Why have other people who had guns not gone to prison if there is no alternative?//
on the facts ( which change - Vulcan ) and sentencing policy ( which changes with time too )
and the Daily Mail insisting the facts of two cases are IDENTICAL - because I am old does not automatically persuade me
as for implying that someone should not have to obey firearms laws because he is mad ( or suffering for PTSD ) - this is everyday fodder for AB but still makes no sense to the rest of us ....
on the facts ( which change - Vulcan ) and sentencing policy ( which changes with time too )
and the Daily Mail insisting the facts of two cases are IDENTICAL - because I am old does not automatically persuade me
as for implying that someone should not have to obey firearms laws because he is mad ( or suffering for PTSD ) - this is everyday fodder for AB but still makes no sense to the rest of us ....
Vulcan and others, If it was as the Daily Mail headline said, he had only kept the one pistol as a souvenir he would not been sent to jail.
It is the fact that he had 5 other weapons and over 180 rounds of ammunition including 'expanding ammunition' that meant he had to go to jail.
Expanding ammunition is illegal for private ownership in the UK even with a licence. As I said it is designed ONLY to kill people and to cause the maximum possible damage to the body so that medical help is impossible.
The other weapons he had were not army issue , so he must have bought them from illegal dealers. He had no licence for any of the weapons or ammunition so the only way he could have acquired them was illegally.
It is the fact that he had 5 other weapons and over 180 rounds of ammunition including 'expanding ammunition' that meant he had to go to jail.
Expanding ammunition is illegal for private ownership in the UK even with a licence. As I said it is designed ONLY to kill people and to cause the maximum possible damage to the body so that medical help is impossible.
The other weapons he had were not army issue , so he must have bought them from illegal dealers. He had no licence for any of the weapons or ammunition so the only way he could have acquired them was illegally.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.