Whats the chance of him getting a firearm ?.

[HUnter_zero 58]

i know a guy who has applied for his shotgun and 22 rim fire but has been turned down due to

(1) Serving 6 months for fighting with 2 policeman over 20 years ago.

(2) threatning to kill his old man over 20 years ago.

(3) various motoring offences from a long time ago.

Whats the chance of him getting a firearm ?.

 

 

None

 

John

[events co-ordinator 353]

Re apply again in three years .A lot of the police forces give you this "option" in Scotland they hope you will forget about it they say if you are refused a cert it will be held against you in future so you withdraw the application you then have no complaint as it was "your" decision to withdraw. In most cases people are better proceeding with their application as if refused they can then appeal. In this case if the person reapplies and puts down his new conviction as well his application will be considered and if refused he can then appeal. The appeal will be considered on the grounds of will he be a danger to the peace or the public if the cert was granted. I know of one person who was charged and convicted of failing to disclose a conviction and got his cert when he re-applied and put in his new conviction and the one he had failed to disclose

[kenny14 656]

When filling in the application form, it states quite clearly that you must declare all convictions, 'spent' or not.

IMO the more fuss he makes with the police, the more chance they'll push for a prosecution. Better to keep quiet, hope they drop it, and re apply in a few years, although I think his chances are pretty slim, especially if he's still got no land to shoot over.

[k9delboy 138]

I'm a little confused over a few points here.

 

First of all, what check has he asked for? A CRB check is not done by individual police forces rather by ACRO in London somewhere. If he has applied to his force for a subject access request then that will tell him what information is held on that forces internal systems for him along with some offences on the Police Computer.

 

Second, three years ago with no convictions for 17 years, he was still asked to wait another three years?

 

Thirdly, where he has got the idea that he can blackmail the police into giving him his certificates I don't know. It quite clearly states on the forms that every offence has to be disclosed on application regardless of how old. He needs to realise that he has committed the offence of not disclosing offences on an application.

 

A subject access request is not a guarantee that you have a clean record it is the information that is held and able to be disclosed at that time. For instance if they knew you were a big time drug dealer they're hardly going to give you all the information they know on you now are they? and they don't have to.

 

There is a lot of missing information here

 

SS, im not sure what he asked for. All i was told is it cost him a tenner at his local to have any info printed off about him. Personally i think that their is a lot more to it than is being told and i may just be getting a small piece. I always say that there are 3 sides to a story, i.e. his, the polices and perhaps the truth ?. I have tried to tell him not to go ahead with it but he will not listen and reckons he can charge the police with fraud. If it had been me, i would'ave backed down and run quietly i think.Y.I.S.

[events co-ordinator 353]

He can't charge the police with fraud he paid for a copy of whats held on computer they have records that go beyond that. When it says have you ANY convictions they mean ANY if he listened to advice he would'nt be in this predicament. As for joining BASC don't make me laugh thats like running into your next door neighbours car then phoning direct line and asking if you take out a policy with them will they fix you'r neighbours car .You tell people to join SACS / BASC /etc they don't and then think they can join after the've made an arse of something join first and get advice BEFORE you apply.

[danw 1,748]

i know a guy who has applied for his shotgun and 22 rim fire but has been turned down due to

(1) Serving 6 months for fighting with 2 policeman over 20 years ago.

(2) threatning to kill his old man over 20 years ago.

(3) various motoring offences from a long time ago.

He applied to the police and paid £10 for some type of background check on himself which came back clear so he stupidly decided not to inform them of any of these past histories. Whilst waiting on the feo coming out to see him He was called in to see them a few weeks later at the local nick. They had somehow found out about his past and have subsequently charged him under the firearms act for failing to disclose previous convictions etc. He now reckons he can take the police to court for fraud as they took his £10 and told him in writing he had no criminal record. He also reckons that they will have to give him his license. What do you think ?. I would assume that, had the police made a mistake and found this information out later then they would give him his £10 back and not be forced into giving him a license to shoot. He also has no ground to shoot on but wants an open ticket. Not a good way to start with the police for a firearm is it.

 

 

 

Isn't it the case that if you do a certain amount of time you get a lifetime ban on firearms ownership anyway?

[keymac88 8]

Anything over 3 years pal and then u cant even hold a firework and as for spent convictions police records are never spent they say you records are gone after 5 years only to people who look i.e new job ect ect police always have the record

[lapin2008 1,587]

He sounds like a total fantasist to be honest, probably safer for everyone if he doesnt get one. The more carry on there is around this 'fraud' thing the less his chances of ever being issued an FAC. as has been said the 10 quid thing sounds like freedom of information act request rather then anything else (i think CRB checks cost more and even then are a fairly low level set of checks). But for him to think that he has a fraud case against them because they failed to tell him about his own background just sounds detached from reality. In reality I think that all he was doing with this check/request that cost him £10 was trying to find out if he could get away with not notifying them on his application form

[k9delboy 138]

He sounds like a total fantasist to be honest, probably safer for everyone if he doesnt get one. The more carry on there is around this 'fraud' thing the less his chances of ever being issued an FAC. as has been said the 10 quid thing sounds like freedom of information act request rather then anything else (i think CRB checks cost more and even then are a fairly low level set of checks). But for him to think that he has a fraud case against them because they failed to tell him about his own background just sounds detached from reality. In reality I think that all he was doing with this check/request that cost him £10 was trying to find out if he could get away with not notifying them on his application form

Exactly what i thought as if you have nothng to hide then why go looking for previous stuff that he should have disclosed. Goes to show that sometimes honesty is the best policy. Made interesting reading this topic though, Thanks again, Y.I.S. Del.

[tanktfb 2]

he should have just put them on the form as a conviction does not mean you cant have an fac .as long as you have good reason to have a firearm and good referees and you can satisfy the police that you are now of good caracter and safe to posses a firearm then sometimes an fac may be granted .But in this case if you can lie on your forms to cover up the truth, what sort of misadventure could be done with a loaded weapon i think the fac liscensing department have made the right call on this one

[SportingShooter 0]

If he is intending to take a fraud case on against the police then i hope he has the money to support a private prosecution and a barrister as it'll be a Crown Court appearance.

 

I wouldn't fancy a £40,000 bill for a £10 access request.

[blunderbust 4]

Tell him not to bother, by failing to mention the crimes he has been involved in, no matter that they were 20 years ago, he has shown that he is dishonest. He will have got a copy of his crime sheet from SCRO which will only go back as far as when the system was first used. However the type of crime he was involved in will have been transferred over from hard copy and will show up on the PNC system. I would love to hear the outcome of his alligations and his intent to fight it. Basically he is having a laugh and I feel there is a lot more to this story than has been stated.

 

ATB,

 

Jimmy

[leeds chimp 0]

pissing into the wind comes to mind......