Guest nitevision Posted January 7, 2009 Report Share Posted January 7, 2009 timmy i await the answers to all the questions,as i have stated the post is not there to cause trouble but just to clarify the situation. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
littletimmy 71 Posted January 7, 2009 Report Share Posted January 7, 2009 timmy i await the answers to all the questions,as i have stated the post is not there to cause trouble but just to clarify the situation. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mouse 282 Posted January 7, 2009 Report Share Posted January 7, 2009 with the arsepca then they will use anything they can to get a conviction mate.hope people are not daft enough to even take pictures let alone keep them on there mobile of dodgy digs .im sure they would do anything they could to drop us lads in the shite so just lets all think before we post pictures . Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bullmastiff 615 Posted January 7, 2009 Report Share Posted January 7, 2009 As far as I'm aware if they contact a mod then they'll be directed to Ianb for info. As for Ian, if they contact him with a relevant warrant then it's not a case of him giving info but them taking it. They can take any info put on the forum. Name, age, photo's, IP address, Everything. The Company that supply the mainframe space for this site will be able to access all this info as well, including IP addresses (your computers unique tracing Nº) plus of course they can supply physical archive records (backup's of the site in case of computer failure) so in theory they could look at the PM's you got 6 months ago. The Police probably wouldn't even need to go to Ian for the info. Cheers Luke. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
IanB 0 Posted January 8, 2009 Report Share Posted January 8, 2009 They might possibly email myself for information ,nothing has been given out regarding any member, as anything they need to know is all down in black and white, with the posts they just print them off... A member a couple of years ago had posts printed off he had made on the forum, regarding location, and an incident that occurred, these were used when he was in court.... Its all too easy. Its been said, time and time again... But people don't listen.... Oh well you can lead a horse to water... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest 10/22 Posted January 8, 2009 Report Share Posted January 8, 2009 The authorities do monitor sites all over the web, they do download information and will take this information track you down and prosecute you- be warned its happening all the time and will get worse over the years to come, wildlife crime gains much needed pr for them which gets the public to dig into thier purses, and gives the likes of the rspca,sspca publicity and statistics they need, its propoganda at our cost . Quote Link to post Share on other sites
polecat 1 Posted January 8, 2009 Report Share Posted January 8, 2009 if you dont want them to know dont show them anything that get you in bother stopped a show last year down stranrer area as had a wild life officer and r s p c a bitch with him taking pics off young lad biggin there terriers and lurchers up i asked who and why they where taking pics off and thats when he showed i.d and i told the lads what was going on the bitch with him would,nt show me i.d so they where told to leave bit they still had what they wanted so like i said if you dont want them to no dont show think on folks Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The one 8,473 Posted January 8, 2009 Report Share Posted January 8, 2009 Its been said since the start THINK WHAT YOUR POSTING just think theres a anti or R.S.P.C.A. reading each and every post your telling them your animals name where you go and what you get up to Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MikeTheDog 153 Posted January 8, 2009 Report Share Posted January 8, 2009 Its been said since the start THINK WHAT YOUR POSTING just think theres a anti or R.S.P.C.A. reading each and every post your telling them your animals name where you go and what you get up to Spot on!. ....Trouble is there is a minority on here are really bloody thick when it comes to posting pictures and they are the ones that spoil it for the majority that use their noddle Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ABDog 0 Posted January 8, 2009 Report Share Posted January 8, 2009 Whose the onus on to prove this? The onus is always on you to prove your innocence No it's not. Unless you have a dog siezed under section 1 of the dda, the old innocent until proven guitly still applies. As far as info from the mods/admin, the authorities could apply for a warrant to get pm's and IP addresses (and any other info) from the administrator/owner of the site. If there's no warrant then the Data Protection Act covers the bases Anything posted on the open forum is fair game. . you can assume that, once it's on the 'net, it's there for the world to see/use. . . Quote Link to post Share on other sites
chimp 299 Posted January 8, 2009 Report Share Posted January 8, 2009 I think ABdog hit the nail on the head . if they did ask the owner of any site for information under say a warrant do you think they are going to say no and then be in the firing line ? keep it simple for thl and keep with the normal stupid questions like ' can i feed my dog fox' etc and everyone can stay happy just go easy with the pics and dont tell anyone you are running at 7.30 am on the 15/1/09 on the fens at sucha such place and will be having lunch in the pit and bull at 2pm while your car is full of long eared rabbits Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tuzo 251 Posted January 8, 2009 Report Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) They might possibly email myself for information ,nothing has been given out regarding any member, as anything they need to know is all down in black and white, with the posts they just print them off... A member a couple of years ago had posts printed off he had made on the forum, regarding location, and an incident that occurred, these were used when he was in court.... Its all too easy. Its been said, time and time again...But people don't listen.... Oh well you can lead a horse to water... If its the case i'm thinking of the lad pleaded guilty because there was 4 witnesses against him. I dont think what was on here actually convicted him. If its a different case then i apologise. Edited January 8, 2009 by Ko Shamo Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Malt 379 Posted January 8, 2009 Report Share Posted January 8, 2009 If people post content that gets them in the shit, then they've got no one else to blame but themselves. It's common knowledge that anything you send these days whether by phone, email or anything else can be accessed by certain authorities under the terrorism act. Granted they shouldn't use anti terrorism laws for anything else other then terrorism, but they can and they do. Also it's not hard to print a web page out or save it to a disk.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
polecat 1 Posted January 8, 2009 Report Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) The onus is always on you to prove your innocence No it's not. Unless you have a dog siezed under section 1 of the dda, the old innocent until proven guitly still applies.polecats reply i dont think that d d a applys when its hunting i was done under that act 3 years ago and its was nothing to do with hunting it was an arsehole letting his dog run on my permission and have go at old dog then my pup killed his dog you need be very careful with the act as theres two 1871 and 1971 !!!!!!!!!!! but like ave said if you dont want a chap at door dont give them any cause and that means photos on sites as for folks letting there gobs talk shite they got prove that i know theres a lot of billy liars on here so dont put up just shut up then no one will chap door Edited January 8, 2009 by polecat Quote Link to post Share on other sites
artic 595 Posted January 8, 2009 Report Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) The onus for now is on YOU............. You must satisfy the courts, that your dog was not presenting any danger. Dodgy grounds? Hard to Prove? Muzzling your dog for life? Section 1 of the DDA will soon be written off, as its deemed UNFAIR as too many dogs are being put to death based on what they look like. Stick to the rules, you wont go far wrong. Edited January 8, 2009 by artic Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.