76 year old could face 5 years in jail for having unused shotguns in his cellar - Polidicks

I love how in the US you don't even need a license or have an officialy documented sale to buy shotguns or long guns privately, but over there it could land you 5 years. Ah the wonders of gun cultures. I own two rifles that the government doesn't even have documents on and they're completely legal.

[QUOTE=SnakeHead;45644454]I love how in the US you don't even need a license or have an officialy documented sale to buy shotguns or long guns privately, but over there it could land you 5 years. Ah the wonders of gun cultures. I own two rifles that the government doesn't even have documents on and they're completely legal.[/QUOTE] yeah well you live in a country where a million firearms go missing every year and thousands of people die as a result

[QUOTE=Gentry;45644683]yeah well you live in a country where a million firearms go missing every year and thousands of people die as a result[/QUOTE] Million firearms go missing in the UK and people are also killed by guns as much over here. Stop trying to use that as an argument point because it doesn't work.

[QUOTE=Reagy;45644703]Million firearms go missing in the UK and people are also killed by guns as much over here.[/QUOTE] they don't though we don't lose a million firearms every year and thousands don't die to guns and gun deaths are an absolute fraction so you're dumb on multiple accounts well done

How exactly did the police find the weapons in the first place?

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45644805](that honestly probably don't work anymore) [/QUOTE] what % probability are you running here?

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45644862]Considering the article says the sawn off's components were in a bag, i'm going with 100% on the sawn off, and a solid 90% on the other one, as it's apparently in "horrid" condition, which usually means the barrel has been pitted and rusted to the point that using it is almost a fatal error in and of itself.[/QUOTE] sounds rather unsubstantiated to me

[QUOTE=BarnacleDrive;45640280]Frankly, he should have known better than this.[/QUOTE] This is very helpful advice I'm sure he appreciates it

I'm pretty sure the BBC doesn't use the Amerifat gun club ratings when talking about firearms in a story the bottom line is you don't really know the condition and should stop pretending you do leave it for the courts to take into consideration

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45644985]I'm pretty sure if the word "poor" means anything than "oh hey this has been beat to shit and doesn't work" then the BBC doesn't have a clue what poor means. Oh well, at least all the kids are safe from this dangerous man who kept his weapons locked in his basement and hasn't used them, thank god.[/QUOTE] isn't it carelessness that gets a lot of firearms stolen in the first place?

[QUOTE=Gentry;45644708]they don't though we don't lose a million firearms every year and thousands don't die to guns and gun deaths are an absolute fraction so you're dumb on multiple accounts well done[/QUOTE] Well hopefully the numbers aren't the same, because that would make the UK like five times worse, considering the population difference.

[QUOTE=AeroSinthetic;45644993]Well hopefully the numbers aren't the same, because that would make the UK like five times worse, considering the population difference.[/QUOTE] you understand what per capita is right? [editline]10th August 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=ilikecorn;45645014]Yes, we should totally start punishing people based on what could have happened, instead of what did happen. Yes, the guns could have gotten stolen.. but he could have also used them to shoot people.. or he could have killed endangered species.. but he didn't. He let them sit.. unused.. in a room.. in his basement..[/QUOTE] so should speeding be fine because its only based on what could happen?

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45645034]So you should get a ticket when you start your car, because you could start speeding?[/QUOTE] lol what Nothing wrong with using a car correctly Nothing wrong with owning firearms correctly [editline]10th August 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=ilikecorn;45645034]You see, the difference between speeding and leaving a gun to rot in your basement.. speeding you already did something wrong, and something dangerous, leaving a gun to rot in your basement (in the UK) is a paper crime.[/QUOTE] leaving weapons unsecured and 'forgotten' isn't safe either and rightly so

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45645071]"unsecured". Right.. so he didn't own a safe.. because he never intended to use the weapons, and because weapons are so demonized in your country, he didn't go to the police for fear of getting into trouble. The only thing this guy is guilty of is leaving a weapon to rot in his basement, in his "gun room".[/QUOTE] a safe isn't there for if you intend to use the weapons or not that is besides the point lol why would it make a difference if you use them or not if you should secure them? he obviously knew he was doing something wrong as you just said because he didn't want to hand them in to the police ps our ~demonization~ stops people dying we quite enjoy our minute firearm and homicide rates thanks to efforts to prevent it

[QUOTE=darkedone02;45638600]so even if you own a gun, and not fired it or keep it as a decoration... you face prison time in scotland? sounds very stupid... that's like a police searching someone home and arresting the owner for owning a dagger...[/QUOTE] This isn't the US, the gun culture is very different in the UK. Nevertheless, jail time is unnecessary and a simple fine and a warning will suffice to remind this man to deal with the problem the right way next time.

[QUOTE=Reagy;45644417]Just wanna add its a bit more than just a safe bolted to the floor, it's gotta have at least 2 locks, have reinforced housing or be a Grade 3 ~ 5 safe, be secured in a place that's going bring the least attention if the house is broken into and lastly you can't store more than 2 firearms per safe. The firearms officer will also have to physically check the safe, it's location and deem it if its acceptable or not, the firearms officer will, at random also visit the property to check up on the firearms and their keeping space every few years (however it has been known that you can get weekly or even monthly visits, it depends where you live and how many firearm officers there are in the area, for us we get something a check every 2~3 years with the odd planned check if we end up storing another gun for someone else). It's a fucking pain in the ass having to get another safe if my family wants to get a rifle to go with the 2 muskets and the cannon we've got.[/QUOTE] I'm sorry, no more than 2 guns per safe? That is absolutely fucking retarded. I don't give a shit about "We think of guns differently here" that's just flat-out retarded. So you can get a 24-gun safe, and legally cannot put more than 2 guns in it? That is the stupidest fucking thing I have ever heard. Then the police can search your house without a warrant or notice to check this? And people say we Canadians should be emulating this nonsense?

[QUOTE=Gentry;45645015]so should speeding be fine because its only based on what could happen?[/QUOTE] Terrible fucking comparison. He's not shooting around randomly, the gun was fucking staying still. Rusted weapons in a basement have near zero chance of killing someone, speeding retards on the other hand...

why did he get his house searched anyway? The fact he had a sawn off, a weapon modified to be easily concealed and has been illegal most of the 20th century, is enough to warrant the sentence. There's a good chance it was used in a violent crime at one point, probably by him or his friend. though if his story is true, i wouldn't hand it to the police either unless it was an officer I knew well and trusted. I would destroy all traces of it however, just like he should have done.

[QUOTE=Reagy;45644703]Million firearms go missing in the UK and [B]people are also killed by guns as much over here[/B]. Stop trying to use that as an argument point because it doesn't work.[/QUOTE] Not really. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate[/url] United States: 2.72 people killed for every 100 000 people in 2011 (homicides) (about 8432 people) United Kingdom: 0.04 people killed for every 100 000 people in 2010 (homicides) (about 25 people) [editline]10th August 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=DaCommie1;45645991]I'm sorry, no more than 2 guns per safe? That is absolutely fucking retarded. I don't give a shit about "We think of guns differently here" that's just flat-out retarded. So you can get a 24-gun safe, and legally cannot put more than 2 guns in it? That is the stupidest fucking thing I have ever heard. Then the police can search your house without a warrant or notice to check this? And people say we Canadians should be emulating this nonsense?[/QUOTE] You don't buy a 24 gun safe then.

[QUOTE=Gentry;45644943]I'm pretty sure the BBC doesn't use the Amerifat gun club ratings when talking about firearms in a story the bottom line is you don't really know the condition and should stop pretending you do leave it for the courts to take into consideration[/QUOTE] considering you brits threw a fit over some rusty .22lr in a pond a few years ago I'm pretty sure "horrid" is pretty bad

OK, I can get that the UK doesn't like guns, fine, whatever, but this is ridiculous amounts of paranoia. [QUOTE=Reagy;45644417]Just wanna add its a bit more than just a safe bolted to the floor, it's gotta have at least 2 locks, have reinforced housing or be a Grade 3 ~ 5 safe, be secured in a place that's going bring the least attention if the house is broken into and lastly you can't store more than 2 firearms per safe. The firearms officer will also have to physically check the safe, it's location and deem it if its acceptable or not, the firearms officer will, at random also visit the property to check up on the firearms and their keeping space every few years (however it has been known that you can get weekly or even monthly visits, it depends where you live and how many firearm officers there are in the area, for us we get something a check every 2~3 years with the odd planned check if we end up storing another gun for someone else). It's a fucking pain in the ass having to get another safe if my family wants to get a rifle to go with the 2 muskets and the cannon we've got.[/QUOTE] This is also ridiculous paranoia. (Not on the part of Reagy obv.)

The "nothing happened so he shouldn't be punished" logic is so incredibly flawed. These laws are in place to [U]prevent[/U] something from happening - the same reasons we have building codes and a whole host of other security measures. This man's word about the condition of the guns cannot be taken without it being proven. The same way that plenty of 'harmless' dogs have attacked people. If a criminal has a gun in the UK, it has the potential to be even more harmful than in America, as we generally don't have methods to protect ourselves from guns. Gun owners in the UK have a responsibility to ensure that a gun doesn't leave the hands of the rightful, security cleared, owner. That is why these laws are so strict. You cannot hold UK gun culture to the same standards as America - they are completely different countries with completely different gun culture.

[QUOTE=Sio;45646578]Not really. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate[/url] United States: 2.72 people killed for every 100 000 people in 2011 (homicides) (about 8432 people) United Kingdom: 0.04 people killed for every 100 000 people in 2010 (homicides) (about 25 people) [editline]10th August 2014[/editline] You don't buy a 24 gun safe then.[/QUOTE] Informative statistics. Statistics that nobody else has bothered to obtain and present in this thread, despite throwing around statements contrary to them.

[QUOTE=Sio;45646578]Not really. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate[/url] United States: 2.72 people killed for every 100 000 people in 2011 (homicides) (about 8432 people) United Kingdom: 0.04 people killed for every 100 000 people in 2010 (homicides) (about 25 people) [editline]10th August 2014[/editline] You don't buy a 24 gun safe then.[/QUOTE] But of course, its not like our strict gun control works or anything, right?

[QUOTE=Craigewan;45649046]But of course, its not like our strict gun control works or anything, right?[/QUOTE] I mean, if you think your impeccable statistics are enough of a reason to throw an old dude in jail for having two broken guns secured in his attic, go for it I personally believe gun laws in both the US [I]and[/I] the UK are extreme. One gives individuals too much freedom, the other gives them none. A happy medium where it's incredibly difficult to get a gun, but no guns or attachments(within reason, barring explosives and whatnot) are illegal to obtain would be a pretty cool system IMO. I'm fine with background checks, mandates on minimum security, training courses, licenses, registries, etc etc etc but outright banning a weapon because it's scarier than all the others is ridiculous.

[QUOTE=Tacosheller;45649079]I mean, if you think your impeccable statistics are enough of a reason to throw an old dude in jail for having two broken guns secured in his attic, go for it[/QUOTE] they weren't in his attic they weren't broken they weren't secured He almost certainly won't go to jail for this shows how much you know about this story lol Getting advice from people who think the american system is good is an absolute joke - its one of your countries biggest failings.

[QUOTE=Gentry;45649099]they weren't in his attic they weren't broken they weren't secured He almost certainly won't go to jail for this shows how much you know about this story lol Getting advice from people who think the american system is good is an absolute joke - its one of your countries biggest failings.[/QUOTE] Lmao did I say anywhere I supported the american system attic/cellar is literally semantics "horrid" condition is broken. there's no way around it. They were secured in a locked room, weren't they? Don't assume I'm some gun-fucking hillbilly or that I don't favor the UK system just because I find this case laughable.

the story doesn't say "horrid" or "broken" at all nor were they in a locked room have you even read the article?

[QUOTE=Gentry;45649127]the story doesn't say "horrid" or "broken" at all nor were they in a locked room have you even read the article?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]He said the guns had been kept in relatively secure conditions and there was little chance of them "falling into the wrong hands".[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]Police found a corroded sawn-off shotgun, another shotgun in poor condition and an antique pistol at Richard Watt's home.[/QUOTE] try and argue semantics again, i dare you

so no mention of a locked room and "horrid" conditions where did you even get "horrid" from in the first place that you felt the need to quote it lol