Ridiculous leniency

  • Hey Guest, We're having our annual Winter Moot and we'd love you to come. PLEASE LOOK HERE to secure your place and get more information.
    For forum threads CLICK HERE

Broch

Life Member
Jan 18, 2009
8,807
8,759
Mid Wales
www.mont-hmg.co.uk
I just can't follow the plot anymore. How is is possible that someone in possession of a firearms and ammunition just gets a £100 fine? That's just a farce and makes a mockery of the hoops we have to jump through to maintain valid licenses :(

 
Seems kinda strange and somewhat of a weird disparity when juxtaposed against what others have actually been jailed for of late.

Does seem kind odd.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muxley
I think it pays not to jump to conclusions particularity with anything reported by the BBC. What are the Facts? what was the actual fire arm and ammunition? Some air rifles need a firearms license. I do know that if someone gets convicted with bullets and a bang bang gun they WILL get a hefty sentence. There are no exceptions.
 
Well, whereas I agree with your caution, if it's an FAC air rifle it's still classed as a firearm and the article quite explicitly says firearm ammunition. I doubt we'll ever find out the full story :(
 
A complete side issue
but
What has the confiscation cost him? Anyone estimate that?

I suspect that the £300 he’s paying out is only a fraction.

I do trust the BBC - it usually accords with Reuters and AlJezira.
What we don’t know is the context. This isn’t reported as terrorism.
Without knowing more it is indeed very odd.
 
The news story isn't the best reporting, it seems 67 items were perfectly legal so the 70 in the headline rather sensationalist.

It could just be a normal 12 ft/lb air rifle that the police have managed to test as over 12 and therefore the pellets could be viewed an ammunition.

Or perhaps just someone with mental health issues who just collects items?

Hard to tell from the link.
 
Possession of a firearm is usually a 5 year mandatory sentence.
A stun gun, working or not is classed as a s5 firearm.

The fact that this stayed in the mags and wasn’t referred to crown suggests that there is more to the story, such as a vulnerability or other issue.
 
Slightly better details

"On Tuesday 3 December 2024, officers raided a property in Thorne, leading to the discovery of 16 air weapons, a crossbow, a can of CS gas, a stun device, two knuckledusters, two wooden batons, an extendable baton, three throwing stars, five swords and 38 knives."



"After the weapons were seized from the home, < > was arrested and charged with possession of a weapon, namely a knuckle duster, possession ammunition for a firearm without a certificate and possessing a firearm without a certificate

<>
Pleaded guilty to all three offences and was given a 12-month community order during a sentencing hearing at Doncaster Magistrates' Court on Friday 17 January.

He was also fined and ordered to comply with 15 days of rehabilitation activity requirement."

Does make me think due to the seemingly very light sentencing and fine that the firearm was probably an overly zingy/powered air rifle ( yes - still technically a Firearm ) and the firearm ammunition was unrelated to that and quantity wasn't mentioned.

Interesting to see the Knuckle duster was chargeable but the telescopic baton wasn't mentioned- sure someone will enlighten me on the difference in home ownership of two impact type items.


Not criticising police in this matter- just trying to understand the sentencing somewhat.
 
Last edited:
"After the weapons were seized from the home, < > was arrested and charged with possession of a weapon, namely a knuckle duster, possession ammunition for a firearm without a certificate and possessing a firearm without a certificate

<>
Pleaded guilty to all three offences and was given a 12-month community order during a sentencing hearing at Doncaster Magistrates' Court on Friday 17 January.

He was also fined and ordered to comply with 15 days of rehabilitation activity requirement."

Does make me think due to the seemingly very light sentencing and fine that the firearm was probably an overly zingy/powered air rifle ( yes - still technically a Firearm ) and the firearm ammunition was unrelated to that and quantity wasn't mentioned.

Interesting to see the Knuckle duster was chargeable but the telescopic baton wasn't mentioned- sure someone will enlighten me on the difference in home ownership of two impact type items.


Not criticising police in this matter- just trying to understand the sentencing somewhat.
The CS gas is also a s5 firearm.

Both the knuckle duster and baton are offensive weapons, the law changed a little while ago banning ownership even in the home.

Must be more to this
 
  • Like
Reactions: TeeDee
If it was an actual gun or bullets, it would be a mandatory minimum of 5 years.

The sentence suggests an air rifle over the legal limit (perhaps only slightly so), and the ammo would have been pellets.
 
Owning a stun gun, baton, knuckle dusters and throwing stars sounds like someone who's not just been accidentally caught out by a slightly overpowered air rifle.

Those items have been illegal to own for years now. CS Gas hasn't been legal for far longer. Given the lengths responsible gun and knife owners go to in order to stay within the law, this sort of sentence makes a mockery of things.

Innocently owning a slightly overpowered air rifle? Yeah, honestly I'd just hope they were let off with a warning. There's no excuse for the other bits though.

Oh well. At least he wasn't rude on Facebook, or he'd be in prison.
 

BCUK Shop

We have a a number of knives, T-Shirts and other items for sale.

SHOP HERE