finlo Posted February 20, 2020 Share Posted February 20, 2020 14 minutes ago, Derek Flint said: Bit of perspective. PAVA is a prohibited weapon under s.17b of the 1947 Firearms Act. Section 5 in the UK. It is innthe same category as a machine gun. He has got off lightly, Might as well tool yourself up with an Uzi then! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Grumpy Posted February 20, 2020 Share Posted February 20, 2020 8 minutes ago, Derek Flint said: Bit of perspective. PAVA is a prohibited weapon under s.17b of the 1947 Firearms Act. Section 5 in the UK. It is innthe same category as a machine gun. He has got off lightly, Whoa! I had no idea. What about these in my cupboard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piebaps Posted February 20, 2020 Share Posted February 20, 2020 2 hours ago, thesultanofsheight said: He might of been planning to stand again. But now he has a criminal conviction .... In that case he's a shoe-in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted February 20, 2020 Share Posted February 20, 2020 1 hour ago, Derek Flint said: Bit of perspective. PAVA is a prohibited weapon under s.17b of the 1947 Firearms Act. Section 5 in the UK. It is innthe same category as a machine gun. He has got off lightly, How is a PAVA spray a firearm? Especially as it's used by prison officers. Not your fault Derek but even I know a machine gun is lethal and a pepper spray is not.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Down Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 30 minutes ago, P.K. said: How is a PAVA spray a firearm? Especially as it's used by prison officers. Not your fault Derek but even I know a machine gun is lethal and a pepper spray is not.... Banding together it is then... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilligaf Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 4 hours ago, WTF said: if it is a so called important person then it becomes not in the public interest to prosecute them even though they are bang to rights. Yes. Most important people live in the 1970’s Lawyers belt of Falcon Cliff Court. Maybe a sleeper for the CIA or something equally important, or maybe just Blue Peter badge material. Get a grip Miss Marple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gettafa Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 The Use and Legality section from wiki (about 1/3 down the page) is very varied throughout Europe and the world. From the police encouraging it's use as a self-defence weapon, to us lot, likening it to carrying a machine gun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 7 hours ago, Derek Flint said: Bit of perspective. PAVA is a prohibited weapon under s.17b of the 1947 Firearms Act. Section 5 in the UK. It is innthe same category as a machine gun. He has got off lightly, And in your career you never bumped into an MHK/MLC who owned a machine gun? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mollag Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 34 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said: And in your career you never bumped into an MHK/MLC who owned a machine gun? Alex Downie had loads Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holte End Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 It is the waste of money, prosecuting this man that is the worrying thing. With a little misdemeanour like this, it is crazy. What happened to not in the public interest or is that only for the privileged few. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesultanofsheight Posted February 21, 2020 Author Share Posted February 21, 2020 49 minutes ago, Holte End said: It is the waste of money, prosecuting this man that is the worrying thing. With a little misdemeanour like this, it is crazy. What happened to not in the public interest or is that only for the privileged few. That’s very much my point. Surely they could just confiscate the stuff and then either fine him or give him a caution? Now it’s gone through the courts system and he’s got a work issue as well. It’s hard to see how this is in the public interest at all when someone could go out tomorrow with an axe or a knife they can legally possess and kill someone rather than inconveniently sting them in the eyes for 15 seconds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 1 hour ago, mollag said: Alex Downie had loads That thing is the only possible justification for the continued presence of the horse trams. He should be tied by the nads behind one and dragged the length of the 'prom twice daily. IMO he has a "Gawne" value of 0,9 in which a "Gawne" is the unit of total useless wastrel tosser who has cost the island taxpayers a fortune leaving nothing but a total waste in his wake that is costing another fortune to attempt to remedy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 Wow, not often I approve of a Rog post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 12 hours ago, Derek Flint said: Bit of perspective. PAVA is a prohibited weapon under s.17b of the 1947 Firearms Act. Section 5 in the UK. It is innthe same category as a machine gun. He has got off lightly, Which is ludicrous, Pava is not a lethal weapon, it's a temporary incapacitating agent. The legislation was presumably drafted by the same sort of people as our locals who'd try and classify fireworks as being high explosives in order to ban them? Completely OTT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted February 21, 2020 Share Posted February 21, 2020 This seems a bit odd though: Quote He said he was not aware that it was illegal to keep the spray and that he had intended for his stepdaughter to use it for protection. And he told officers said that the bottles had always been kept locked in a safe. So he clearly knew they were dangerous in the wrong hands, otherwise why keep them locked up? Although I can see both sides of the argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.