British Firearms training is illegal

[Skyrad 0]

***Terrorist offences
Weapons training. 54. - (1) A person commits an offence if he provides instruction or training in the making or use of-

(a) firearms,
(b) explosives, or
(c) chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.

(2) A person commits an offence if he receives instruction or training in the making or use of-

(a) firearms,
(b) explosives, or
(c) chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.
(3) A person commits an offence if he invites another to receive instruction or training and the receipt-

(a) would constitute an offence under subsection (2), or
(b) would constitute an offence under subsection (2) but for the fact that it is to take place outside the United Kingdom.

(3) A person commits an offence if he invites another to receive instruction or training and the receipt-

(a) would constitute an offence under subsection (2), or
(b) would constitute an offence under subsection (2) but for the fact that it is to take place outside the United Kingdom.

***

OK, I'm concerned, a guy has been arrested for recieving weapons training under the Anti Terrorist Act. He is alleged to have gone to two places in the Uk and there learnt how to use a Firearm. Reading the above it looks like this is a very vague law and open to abuse. I could be done for askiing a friend if they want to come down the range!

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00011--g.htm

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[warpedskydiver 0]

bunch of fucking tossers, Churchill would have had them shot.

[kbordson 8]

WTF! That seems wrong.

[shropshire 0]

Tony's knee jerk reactions - dont y'just love them?

More window shopping for the GWOT -

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Skyrad 0]

Yea but its not funny when you've got a Muslim Arab name, a dark complexion and an interesting bunch of stamps in your passport. Well at least I've never been to Brazil!

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[DZJ 0]

I wouldn't worry too much. Part 5 of that legislation states:

Quote

(5) It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section in relation to instruction or training to prove that his action or involvement was wholly for a purpose other than assisting, preparing for or participating in terrorism.

[Skyrad 0]

So guilty until proven innocent.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[DZJ 0]

It would seem to me to work both ways. The prosecution would surely have to prove that any activity was for terrorist purposes in order to secure a conviction under that legislation.

I used to be a cadet while I was at school, and so I taught skill at arms and marksmanship, that sort of thing. I think you would be very hard pressed to find a court that would presume that (or any other legitimate firearms training) to be preparatory to terrorism.

[shropshire 0]

Nope, not funny at all... irespective of a persons background.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[mr2mk1g 10]

Most anti-terrorism legislation was drafted by retards because retards thought it was necessary.

The only decent anti-terrorism legislation took years to get through parliament against a hostile opposition. This all leads to robust scrutiny of the proposals so that any retarded crayon scribblings get taken care of before the bill gets sent to print. We had an extremely good set of laws in place curtesy of our decades of experiences during the "Troubles". There was no need to change them.

In the aftermath of 9/11, politicians were so eager to make voters believe they were protecting them from terrorists, (and not standing in the way of the government who claimed to be doing just that), that they would have voted for a bill saying their granny had to be butt-searched twice a month if it made them look like they were doing something about the perceived problem.

Under the legislation, if I send you an unsolicited copy of the Anarchists Cook Book... you've committed an offence. That law is an affront to a thousand years of legal doctrine. It needs to be repealed.

[mr2mk1g 10]

Quote

So guilty until proven innocent.

The likelihood is that all the defendant has to do is raise it as a defence and then the prosecution has to disprove it... unless Herr Blair has done some very fundamental fiddling with the system...

[Skyrad 0]

Mate. you're not giving me warm fuzzies here! Right, I'm off to the range, if I haven't posted in four hours someone get Scoop to check if I'm at Paddington Green

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[Sockpuppet 0]

So that technically makes me 100% pure terrorist, given that I am a skill at arms instructor for the Army and also a private gun owner and I teach new people at the club. Neither of which I can 100% prove the other people didnt plan on using for terrorism.

I'm fecked.

------
Two of the three voices in my head agree with you. It might actually be unanimous but voice three only speaks Welsh.

[shropshire 0]

Go directly to prison..do not pass Go etc... etc...

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[kbordson 8]

Quote

I'm fecked.

Nope... not 100% fecked. You just have to get a good enough lawyer (magistrate) to prove you're innocent and get you out of jail. I'll only take a few years and about.... (looking in your bank acount) .... that much to get you free.

[mr2mk1g 10]

Quote

get a good enough lawyer (magistrate)

Small point perhaps, but a magistrate is not even remotely similar to a lawyer.

[kallend 2,182]

Clearly it is far better for firearms to be used by people with no training.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kbordson 8]

Quote

Quote

get a good enough lawyer (magistrate)

Small point perhaps, but a magistrate is not even remotely similar to a lawyer.

What I had meant to reply... but couldn't

Lawyer, Magistrate... whatever you can afford.

[Skyrad 0]

A Magistrate is a lay person and not a lawyer they don't represent anyone and act as a judge in minor cases.

From Wikipedia

quote]A solicitor is a type of lawyer in many common law jurisdictions, such as the United Kingdom, Hong Kong, Republic of Ireland, Australia and New Zealand, but not the United States or Canada (in the United States the word has a quite different meaning—see below). In most common law countries the legal profession is split between: solicitors who represent and advise clients, and a barrister who is retained by a solicitor to advocate in a legal hearing or to render a legal opinion.

However in several Australian States (including South Australia), as well as in Canada, the legal profession is "fused" which means that a lawyer can be a solicitor, barrister, and proctor.

Where the legal profession is not "fused" in cases where a trial is necessary a client must retain a solicitor, who will advise him or her and then may deliver a brief to a barrister to act on the solicitor's instructions.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[kbordson 8]

Quote

A Magistrate is a lay person and not a lawyer they don't represent anyone and act as a judge in minor cases.

A lay person... but can act as a judge? Sounds odd.

(sorry about the hijack)

[Skyrad 0]

It seems I was only half right. From the same scorce

Quote

In the courts of England and Wales, magistrates hear prosecutions for and dispose of summary offences, by making orders in regard to and placing additional requirements on offenders. Magistrates' sentencing powers are limited, but extend to shorter periods of custody (maximum of twelve months), fines, community orders which can include requirements to perform unpaid work up to 300 hours or supervision up to 3 years and or a miscellany of other options. Magistrates hear committal proceedings for certain offences, and establish whether sufficient evidence exists to pass the case to a higher court for trial and sentencing. Magistrates have power to pass summary offenders to higher courts for sentencing when, in the opinion of the magistrate, a penalty greater than can be given in magistrates court is warranted. A wide range of other legal matters are within the remit of magistrates. In the past, magistrates have been responsible for granting licences to sell alcohol, for instance, but this function is now exercised by local councils though there is a right of appeal to the magistrates court. Magistrates are also responsible for granting search warrants to the police, therefore it is usually a requirement that they live within a certain distance of the area they preside over in case they are needed to sign a warrant out of hours. (However see section 9 of the Official Secrets Act 1911.)

There are two types of magistrate in England and Wales: lay magistrates and legal professionals permanently employed by the Department for Constitutional Affairs. The first group, known as lay Justices of the Peace, sit voluntarily (though they may receive money for costs incurred) on local benches (a colloquial and legal term for the local court), hearing lesser matters, and are provided with advice, especially on sentencing, by a legally qualified Court Legal Adviser. However, before they can hear cases they must undergo a period of training.

The second group, professional magistrates, are nowadays known as District Judges, although hitherto they were known as Stipendiary Magistrates (which is to say, magistrates who received a stipend or payment). District Judges have the authority to sit in any magistrates' court.

In Scotland, the lowest level of law-court is presided over by a Justice of the Peace.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[mr2mk1g 10]

Quote

A lay person... but can act as a judge?

Yup. Skyrad's text is a good explanation. These days Magistrates are all lay people. Legally trained people doing essentially the same job are called District Judges.

It might sound odd, but it has its merits. The Magistrate is there to consider the facts of the case in the same way as a jury might. The Magistrate's Court's Clerk, (a qualified lawyer), is there to advise the Magistrate as to the applicable law, their powers under the circumstances and what the appropriate range of tariffs that might be applied should the Magistrate find on the facts that an offence has been committed.

As pointed out by Skyrad's text, the cases that end up before Magistrates are only the most minor of matters. Any more serious cases either go straight up to the Crown Court, (full Judge and jury), or are triable either way, (meaning it's up to the defendant which court they want to hear their case, and depending on the case there may be tactical considerations for choosing one court over the other).

[Sockpuppet 0]

Can I apply to a greenie to become "the dz.com offical terrorist?"

------
Two of the three voices in my head agree with you. It might actually be unanimous but voice three only speaks Welsh.

[Skyrad 0]

???

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca