Gun collector with more than 140 guns jailed for 2 years for owning four air rifles without licence

[Abin Sur]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2058183/Antique-firearms-collector-140-guns-jailed-years-owning-air-rifles-licence.html?ITO=1490

An antiques firearms collector was jailed for two years after he was found to have four air rifles and ammunition without the correct licences. When police raided Karl Blennerhassett's luxury flat in Up Holland, West Lancashire, they found more than 140 guns, including racks of rifles and revolvers, a court heard. Expert examination found that the vast majority were classed as antiques and legally owned but it was the other items which landed him behind bars.

Blennerhassett admitted possessing one air rifle without a certificate, which was just over the permitted velocity limit, and was convicted by a jury of illegally possessing three others which had been modified, and two charges of possessing a bullet.

Judge Brown asked the prosecution to write to the Home Office expressing his concerns over the need for legislation for antique firearms.

(excerpted, more at link)

[baldguy]

1. Responsible gun owners follow the law. If they don't then they are IRRESPONSIBLE gun owners.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

3. Reasonable laws...

...can easily be followed.

Why do people find the slightest administrative violation worthy of severe consequences for a gun owner who has committed no actual harm, yet somehow actions by a criminal which cause real harm seem to be dismissed as minor issues?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

4. good point.

[baldguy]

6. He seemed to be able to adhere to the law for all his other weapons.

Did he have some nefarious purpose in mind for these four rifles? Or was he just being stupid?

And do you really want stupid people to be able to have guns?

[We_Have_A_Problem]

8. Are you serious?

Nobody tests the absolute velocity limits of an air rifle on a regular basis. I'll virtually guarantee those rifles which were deemed "too powerful" broke some arbitrary limitation by a very small amount - an amount easily attributable to manufacturing and environmental differences.

You really think it is odd for a man with over 140 rifles to maybe have a couple bullets lying around he didn't realize he had?

Do you expect perfection from everyone in all things? If you do, bear in mind NOBODY is perfect, and that is what people who bring charges like this count on. They know not everyone can meet every regulation perfectly all the time.

[baldguy]

10. Nobody tests the absolute velocity limits of air rifles? Really?

The UK apparently does.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

12. Obviously the state does...

...when making a case, but the owner? Get real. Besides, simple things like a lighter pellet could easily alter the velocity.

[SteveM]

17. 2 years for "a bullet?" Ah, that's nothing...

In Texas before 1973 the sentence for possessing ANY AMOUNT of marijuana was 2 years to life. And there were people in Texas prisons serving just those sentences.

My, I guess they weren't responsible, either.

[Euromutt]

69. You ignored the bit "on a regular basis"

Whether out of sloppiness or dishonesty, I cannot tell.

[iverglas]

84. whereas you ignored all the facts of the case

The firearms in question had been modified illegally, intentionally and very professionally.

Whether out of sloppiness or dishonesty, I cannot tell.

[iverglas]

83. "a man with over 140 rifles"

ALL of which were allegedly inoperable antiques (other than the air rifles that would have been legally possesssed if they had not been illegally altered).

A permit is required for possession of ammunition.

His firearms permit had been revoked when he was convicted of an offence earlier.

Anything else?

[Abin Sur]

86. Where did it say that his other firearms were inoperable?

They're antiques, yes...but that doesn't mean they won't function properly. I myself own a number of 19th Century firearms which work perfectly well.

Did I miss something in the story?

[iverglas]

87. did you miss something?

Well, to start with, you noticed that his firearms permit had been revoked?

And you grasp that this means that he is not permitted to own operable firearms?

And he was charged in connection with the illegally altered air guns, but none of the other firearms in his "display"?

I may have just assumed that in a place where a permit is required to possess firearms, and there are very stringent regulations about the storage of firearms, a person without a permit who had this in his house and was not charged in connection with any of it:



was not in possession of operable firearms.

Who knows, perhaps I was wrong ... I may well have been, given:

However, Judge Brown asked the prosecution to write to the Home Office expressing his concerns over the need for legislation for antique firearms.

We all do recall that the judge said:

'This is a serious case and I am satisfied you were deliberately flouting the provisions of the Firearms Act,' he said.

and in the circumstances I think anyone who suggested this poor fellow was the victim of some misunderstanding or had committed some unintentional technical breach of a law would just look silly.

[Abin Sur]

89. "Who knows, perhaps I was wrong ... I may well have been"

In other words, neither of us knows, given the information presented in the article. In the United States, firearms manufactured before 1898 are considered antiques. As such, federal laws to not apply to them in the same manner they do to more modern firearms, even if they are completely functional.

Perhaps antique firearms are treated in a similar manner in the UK; I'm not sure.

If those Webley and Adams revolvers have been rendered inoperable, it's a shame.

[Abin Sur]

90. As per your link down-thread, at the very least 4 revolvers were functional.

The link you provide further down the thread: http://www.wishfm.net/news?id=35256

"Officers seized all of Blennerhassett's weapons and ammunition. Later analysis concluded that Blennerhassett had possession of three Colt .32 revolvers, a 500 calibre Tranter style revolver with two live rounds of ammunition, and four air rifles that were each found to be more powerful than legal requirements would allow.

All of the revolvers were fully functioning and the three Colt .32 revolvers were capable of firing modern day ammunition. "

A .500 Tranter, one of the coolest 19th century revolvers ever made...and it's probably going to melted down. :mad:



I'd gladly take it off their hands...I'll even pay for the shipping!

[iverglas]

92. that would be the reason for the judge's request

that the prosecution convey his concerns to the government.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/d_to_g/firearms/ with my emphasis

Firearms Legal Guidance - The Crown Prosecution Service

Antiques

Section 58(2) of the 1968 Act exempts from the provisions of the Act - including certificate controls under sections 1 and 2 and prohibition under section 5 - all antique firearms which are sold, transferred, purchased, acquired or possessed as curiosities or ornaments. The word "antique" is not defined in the Act but Home Office guidance on the subject can be summarised briefly as follows:

- If modern ready made ammunition can be bought and fired using the weapon it cannot be classed as an antique;
- A muzzle loading firearm is antique;
- A breech loading firearm using a rim-fire cartridge exceeding .23 (but not 9mm) is antique;
- A breech loading firearm using an ignition system other than rim-fire or centre is antique;
- A breech loading centre fire firearm originally chambered for cartridges which are now obsolete and retains that original chambering is antique.

However, each case should be dealt with on its merits and advice on individual weapons should be sought from the FSP. The case of R v Burke 67 Cr App R 220 dictates that it is for the Prosecution to prove that the firearm does not come within the ambit of section 58(2) and it is a matter for the jury to decide upon.

So when we have:

All of the revolvers were fully functioning and the three Colt .32 revolvers were capable of firing modern day ammunition.

I'm not seeing them meeting the above requirements, but it seems there may be some issue in the legislation that would explain no prosecution for those weapons.

58(2) of the Firearms Act 1968 says:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/27

(2)Nothing in this Act relating to firearms shall apply to an antique firearm which is sold, transferred, purchased, acquired or possessed as a curiosity or ornament.

If the "antiques" were not considered to be illegally possessed, I wouldn't think they could be seized. You may be able to put in an offer. ;)



html fixed

[Abin Sur]

93. I'm not getting my hopes up on acquiring that Tranter.

If the "antiques" were not considered to be illegally possessed, I wouldn't think they could be seized.

As per the story: "Officers seized all of Blennerhassett's weapons and ammunition."

I don't think he'll be getting any of his property back anytime soon...

[We_Have_A_Problem]

16. As far as allowing stupid people to have guns...

...we let them vote, and that is far more damaging.

The man made a mistake - he did not commit a crime. If you don't see the difference, nothing I can say will enable you to do so.

[iverglas]

33. you really need something to back up your claim

The man made a mistake

How can you say something that makes you look like such a fool? I'm certainly not saying you're a fool. I'm just saying you're making yourself look like one, by making a statement that is simply contrary to all the facts, facts known to anybody who bothered to click a link and read a newspaper report.

I mean, either that or you did click that link and you did read that report, and you are intentionally saying something that you know isn't true.

Quite a choice, eh? Is there another option?

[Tejas]

70. "newspaper report = facts" ........... LOL!

[iverglas]

72. words spoken by judge = facts

I'm not going to say that even the Daily Mail fabricated a quotation from a judge, although I am quite sure it would have no compunction about quoting anyone out of context to make it appear they said something they didn't say. There's no evidence of that in this case.

So your point was ... ? A very dull one, obviously.

[krispos42]

15. Are you a responsible car owner? n/t

[spin]

2. He was convicted of two charges of possessing a bullet?

And the air rifles were even more dangerous because they had been fitted with a "sound moderator and telescopic sight" OH MY GOD...lethal sniper air rifles.

Blennerhassett admitted possessing one air rifle without a certificate, which was just over the permitted velocity limit, and was convicted by a jury of illegally possessing three others which had been modified, and two charges of possessing a bullet.

'Each of these three rifles are deemed specially dangerous under the legislation,' said Judge Mark Brown.

Each was of high specification in that each had been fitted with a sound moderator and telescopic sight. Each had been modified and modified in a very professional way.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2058183/Antique-firearms-collector-140-guns-jailed-years-owning-air-rifles-licence.html#ixzz1d2SOK2OT

I'm sure that some who post here would love for our nation to have the same laws and restrictions but personally I would not want to live in the Nanny States of America.

[oneshooter]

5. The local sailor man comes to mind. n/t

[Abin Sur]

7. If "possesing a bullet" were a crime in the states, I'd be guilty about 30,000 times over.

Gives one a bit of perspective regarding the differences in the law when it comes to the US vs. the UK.

[spin]

18. OH MY GOD! Imagine what a person could do with a bullet ...

It's hard to believe that a nation that once ruled an empire that the sun never set on could sink to a level where possession of a bullet is a crime.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

22. So, which way are we headed?

• "My concern, Mr. Chairman, is that there’s been a lot said about Fast and Furious, and perhaps mistakes were made," Feinstein said. "But I think this hunt for blame doesn’t really speak about the problem. And the problem is, anybody can walk in and buy anything."
  
  
• Free market.

[Abin Sur]

24. In the United States, the trend for the last 15 years has been for fewer restrictions

on the ability of citizens to keep and bear arms. It seems likely that this will continue to be the case, to the chagrin of some and the jubilation of others.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

29. Vive la liberté. n/t

[iverglas]

31. I wouldn't say "chagrin"

but that would be because I'm like a super-decent human being, I guess.

What I and most Canadians feel when a kid is killed in our city with a firearm trafficked into Canada from some pig-ignorant USAmerican jurisdiction where anybody and their dog can lay hands on any gun they want, "chagrin" isn't the word for what we feel.

First comes the shock and grief, of course, because we're just not really quite used to kids getting shot dead on our streets yet.

Now imagine if your neighbour had a large vicious dog that was known to jump fences and attack children, and it jumped the fence and killed your kid.

I guess you'd be thinking to yourself: gosh, if only I could have afforded to build a 10-foot stone wall around my yard property, with an elevator up over it so we could get in and out. Or maybe I should have just moved. Sure ain't my neighbour's fault for exercising his right to keep a dog, though.

Nah, I don't think that's quite what you'd be thinking.

Analogize, now. Neighbour is to, well, neighbour ...

[Abin Sur]

34. Analogies? Ok...

How exactly is a firearm (an inanimate object) analogous to a large vicious dog with a history of attacking children of its own accord?

[iverglas]

36. concrete thinking? okay

google it ...

The image you present to the world is your choice!

[Abin Sur]

38. If criticizing a poor analogy was an example of concrete thinking, you'd have a point.

Since it's not...thank you for playing, and you'll receive a copy of our home game!

[iverglas]

40. if it were a poor analogy, you'd be getting somewhere

It wasn't.

Owner has control of dog.

Owner relinquishes control of dog.

Amazing, eh?

[Abin Sur]

44. It's amazing that you consider it a good analogy.

I just picked up my Taurus 1911 .45. I have control of it.

I just put the Taurus back in the drawer. I have relinquished control of it.

The dog in this analogy promptly kills a kid, as per your previous post.

My handgun remains in my drawer, since it's an inanimate object.

It would only be amazing if the handgun managed to kill someone on its own...as the dog did. You see, the dog in question is known to attack children of its own volition, as per your description of it. My handgun cannot do such a thing.

Invalid analogy.

[iverglas]

47. oh, my dear young fellow

A handgun in a registered dealer's possession: the state has control of it. It may not be sold to anyone who cannot pass a NICS check (and meet any other local requirements). The dealer exercises that control on the state's behalf, under the terms of its licence, on pain of losing it.

A handgun in the first purchaser's possession: the state has no control of it. It can be sold to all comers, outside in the dealer's parking lot or four states north somewhere on the I-75 en route to Canada. No post-facto control, because no way of making the seller admit an illegal act short of torture.

Control, no control.

The state turns its back. The dog owner turns their back.

What happens after that is just none of their concern.

The fact that the dog jumps of its own accord while the gun is chauffeured over the border is a distinction that makes not the slightest difference. The responsible authority has abdicated responsibility before that happens. (But hell, if you like, we'll say that Person X comes along and transports the gun north, and Person Y comes along and lifts the dog over the fence.)

There's no difference for our purposes, except to someone who thinks that "people who live in glass houses should not throw stones" means they might break their windows.

Or somebody who is just trying toooooo hard.

[Abin Sur]

50. The dog owner has a legal responsibility to prevent the dog from leaving his property

and attacking other people. The handgun owner does *not* have any such analogous responsibility. If someone steals the gun and commits a crime with it, he is not responsible. I understand it may well be different in some pig-ignorant Canadian jurisdiction, of course. :P

[iverglas]

58. only if the law says they do, eh?

Funny how that works.

The handgun owner does *not* have any such analogous responsibility. If someone steals the gun and commits a crime with it, he is not responsible.

Now I'm not even going to try to guess what you'e talking about here.

Definitely not anything I was talking about.

Did I say something about somebody stealing the damned dog?

[Abin Sur]

60. We were speaking of control.

The dog can, of its own accord, escape the property and kill someone.

The gun cannot.

Hence, not analogous.

[iverglas]

71. yup, and I was speaking of the state

and firearms trafficking.

Why you would drag thefts from owners in, I had and have no clue.

When you assert a difference as a distinction, in relation to an analogy, you need to show the relevance of the distinction.

A state in the US has options for exercising control over firearms transfers - i.e. over people - to reduce the likelihood that firearms will end up where they don't belong.

A dog owner has options for exercising control over their dog to reduce the likelihood that the dog will end up where it doesn't belong.

Neither has the option of guaranteeing that the thing in question will not end up where it doesn't belong.

The issue is not how it ends up where it doesn't belong, it is how to reduce the likelihood of that happening by whatever method it might happen, and thus reduce the likelihood of the foreseeable harm resulting when it does.

If the party with the authority and ability to do that -- dog owner, state of the US -- doesn't do it ... ?

The neighbour who suffers the harm isn't stupid, and knows who had the authority and ability to reduce the likelihood of it happening, and prevent it from happening in at least some ways/instances.

[Abin Sur]

73. While states do have the option of exercising control over firearms transfers

the vast majority don't (at least not in the way we're speaking of)...whereas in all states (as far as I know) the dog owner does have responsibility for exercising control over his dog. That's why the situations aren't analogous.

Now, you can argue all you like whether or not the states in question should exercise such control...but that's a separate issue.

[iverglas]

74. I'm quite sure you have no actual difficulty with the analogy

So I'll let you play your games with yourself now.

[Abin Sur]

75. I acknowledge and accept your surrender :-)

[iverglas]

76. yuppers

I always surrender to people who make no sense / refuse to address the subject.

I hold up my hands and say: I give up!

[Abin Sur]

77. I thought you were going to let me play my games by myself. Change your mind?

refuse to address the subject

Quite amusing, given that I did nothing *but* that...!

[PavePusher]

55. Civil discou.... aaahhhh, fuck it. n/t

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AtheistCrusader]

68. Secure your border.

I keep getting told the drug problem with our southern neighbors is because of things like the damn dirty users in the US, etc. That it's our fault for ahahaha goddamn..

I can't even fake up the outrage.

But seriously, secure your border. I've walked into your country without disturbing nary a jackrabbit. If you want to control what comes across the border, well, do so. Drying up the gun supply here isn't a prophylactic against people bringing in guns from even south of us, through the US, into your country, if the demand will fetch a high enough price.

[iverglas]

78. oh, take it for a walk somewhere and drop it over a cliff

Fucking USAmerican isolationism, total lack of respect for the rest of the world, is that what you were attempting to convey?

I keep getting told the drug problem with our southern neighbors is because of things like the damn dirty users in the US, etc. That it's our fault for ahahaha goddamn..

By me? No? So take that one for a walk too.


I've walked into your country without disturbing nary a jackrabbit.

Good for you. Perhaps you're aware ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_%E2%80%93_United_States_border

The Canada – United States border, officially known as the International Boundary, is the longest border in the world. The terrestrial boundary (including small portions of maritime boundaries on the Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic coasts, as well as the Great Lakes) is 8,891 kilometers (5,525 mi) long, including 2,475 kilometres (1,538 mi) shared with Alaska. It is Canada's only land border, and Canada is by far the largest nation having a land border with only one country.

Knock out Alaska and you still have about 4,000 miles in your units. Some on land, mainly vast expanses of sparsely inhabited land across BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, a lot in the middle of several bodies of water.

Lemme see. How many unemployed adults do we have at the moment? ... About 1.5 million.
http://www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/labor07a-eng.htm

That would be about 1,500 for every 4 miles of border. If they were there 24/7, of course. Let's say we need 4 per day, to allow for sleeping, days off and sick days. Say 100 for every mile of border. That should about do it, do you think?


Drying up the gun supply here isn't a prophylactic against people bringing in guns from even south of us, through the US, into your country, if the demand will fetch a high enough price.

Well, hey, secure your own damned border and all your own problems will be solved too. One stone, two jackrabbits.

Demand just doesn't do shit if there isn't supply.

[AtheistCrusader]

79. If there is demand

there WILL be supply.

So, you seem to hold us accountable for people who take American guns from domestic sources, to Canada.

Do you hold us responsible for weapons smuggled into the US from abroad, and then into Canada? No big answer needed, just a yes no.

Just recalling the path traveled by a handgun that was illegall imported to the US From Haiti, and then smuggled into Canada and used in a crime.

[iverglas]

81. flunk economics 101?

Supply is virtually never inelastic.

So, you seem to hold us accountable for people who take American guns from domestic sources, to Canada.

Ah. "So ...", "you seem ...". And you're one I don't expect these tricks from. Poor me.

This being your perception, will you quote what you're basing it on?

Do you hold us responsible for weapons smuggled into the US from abroad, and then into Canada? No big answer needed, just a yes no.

Oh, that's cute. Very cute.

Do you hold your neighbour responsible for its dog jumping into your yard?

I wonder whether it might depend on what steps your neighbour took to prevent that happening.

Just recalling the path traveled by a handgun that was illegall imported to the US From Haiti, and then smuggled into Canada and used in a crime.

Hm. That would be kind of like a snake crawling into your neighbour's yard and then under the fence to yours and biting your kid, eh?

Assuming the handgun wasn't legally imported to the US / the snake wasn't invited into the yard.

I do wonder where that gun started its life.

http://www.haiti-info.com/?Guns-smuggled-from-South-Florida

But the ATF has said that 25 percent of the gun-smuggling cases handled by its Miami office during the past three years have involved firearms destined for Haiti. The island is the top foreign destination for guns exported illegally from South Florida.

"The movement of guns from South Florida to Haiti has been going on for a long time, and these cases are almost always linked to unrest in Haiti," said Daniel McBride, who heads technical services for the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office. McBride was in charge of the Miami office of the federal Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms office during the 1990s, when dozens of Haitian gunrunners were prosecuted.

There just ain't much getting around the directions that guns flow from and to as a general rule.

[AtheistCrusader]

85. Post 31.

I don't think it's necessary to copy paste the whole thing. I merely paraphrased and there is no 'trick' involved. Do you seriously contend that I changed the meaning of your post?



As long as there is demand, yes there will be supply. Especially when supply can be ginned up in a middle school metal shop. As supply dwindles, prices go up, increasing the incentive to supply the weapons. People do desire these weapons. Some via illegal channels for noble or benign purposes, some via legal channels for wholly nefarious purposes.

It is within your power to, if not halt, seriously diminish the flow of these weapons from point a to b. If you cannot accept that international trade and travel sometimes involves the flow of contraband, and that some measure of bad people do bad things, perhaps you should just close your border.

[SteveM]

19. It's the "Gateway Theory:" BBs lead to heroin... I mean bullets. nt

[iverglas]

32. actually, it's the "you're a criminal" theory

A criminal, who had previously had his firearms permit revoked because he was convicted of violating it, and who was in possession with full knowledge (as found by the judge: because he himself had the professional modifications done) of four weapons that had been modified to make them illegal for him to possess, that he was trying to conceal as being legal air rifles.

Yup, that's what it actually was.

[ileus]

9. holy shit....a real bullet!

[Abin Sur]

30. There was an incident not too long ago in the UK in which a single .22LR cartridge

was found in a the street. The police were called to dispose of it, and it was newsworthy enough to rate a story in the local paper.

http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/8805022.Fossgate_bullet_find_mystery/

"A North Yorkshire Police spokesman said the bullet had been put into safe storage".

Well thank God. Who knows what carnage would have resulted had the cartridge simply been thrown into the trash. :eyes:

[iverglas]

35. yes, you can only dream

of living in a society where people give that much of a damn, and expect and receive that level of service from police.

Just imagine if everybody in your country called police whenever they saw, oh, an actual gun where it didn't belong.

Well, that would be tough, given as how it's impossible to tell whether most guns you'd be seeing belonged where they were or were about to be used in a mass shooting ... and how pretty soon the police will have been cowed into knowing better than to so much as say good morning to any person with such a gun ...

[Abin Sur]

41. I've found live cartridges "in the wild", as it were, a couple of times.

Both times I simply them into the trash. What should I done, called the police so they could solve some "cold case"? :eyes:

Just imagine if everybody in your country called police whenever they saw, oh, an actual gun where it didn't belong.

Where don't guns "belong"? If you're speaking of them being in an airport terminal or some other area that has been secured, I'm confident that a firearm sighting would be promptly reported.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

52. I remember that story....

Had to make sure it wasn't sourced from The Onion.

[Remmah2]

11. Is this the future trend for America?

Will I no longer be able to buy a BB gun at Wally-World?

Will I have to fill out a 4473 for an airsoft rifle?

[oneshooter]

57. Already done in New Jersey, need to go to a FFL to purchase a bb gun.

You would also need a valid permit to possess, and go through the NCIS check.

Another reason not to go to New Jersey.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Abin Sur]

59. Not to mention billy clubs and sling shots. Good grief...

[slackmaster]

13. I can't see how anyone could view incarceration as a reasonable punishment for something like that

Maybe a fine?

[Iktomiwicasa]

39. I can't see...

...that there should be any violation of the law in the first place. It's absurd.

[slackmaster]

53. It's certainly not malum in se

No harm came to anyone.

[iverglas]

43. maybe if you tried exercising your wrist

and clicking on the link and reading the actual report, the veil would be lifted from your eyes.

Or you could just read my first post in this thread.

[pipoman]

14. Meanwhile in the land of 'reasonable' firearms laws

(or in this case 'reasonable' non-firearms laws), career criminals are given less..


Ms Nicholson was left with scratches to her hand after the attack on February 23 and is now afraid to go out alone, the court was told. Prosecutor Tony Hawks told the court: “She said she was in shock for a couple of days, and crying a lot. She doesn’t like going out in the dark any more

“She has not been to bingo again because she’s got no way to get home, and doesn’t want to be out alone in the dark.”

Hasney, who has previous convictions for violence, admitted robbery.

Judge Michael Cartlidge sentenced him to 18 months behind bars.

http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/crime/mugger_jailed_for_robbing_woman_of_phone_1_3851160

Kelly, 31 and a father-of-one from London, kept his cool and played the part, during the opportunistic sneak-raid while weekending with his mother, who lives in the Yorkshire resort. He went on to steal nearly £13,000 worth of jewellery, cash and Sir Alan's engraved black iPod, while life in the house continued as normal.

York crown court heard yesterday that the thefts were only discovered some hours later, and Kelly's luck ran out rapidly after that. A convicted burglar, he had left his fingerprints on a letterbox. His link to Scarborough was soon traced and police arrested him at his mother's.

He was jailed for 18 months by Judge John Swanson who told him: "You entered a large property where this very successful man entertains many visitors and friends and family. You came across him and he assumed you were visiting someone in the house so there was no confrontation, which is a mercy."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/may/11/alan-ayckbourn-burglar-anthony-kelly-sentenced

[iverglas]

45. hahahaha

"You entered a large property where this very successful man entertains many visitors and friends and family. You came across him and he assumed you were visiting someone in the house so there was no confrontation, which is a mercy."


C'mon now, that's just funny.

Ah, the rich. They aren't like you and me. They run across a burglar in their house, they have the footman take them up some tea.


Here's the odd thing, when you compare those stories to the ones we are neverendingly regaled with from the USofA.

Nobody's dead!

I don't know how that could be.

I wonder whether it could possibly have something to do with the fact that nobody in either story was packing heat?

A victim gets a scratched hand, a victim gives a courteous nod. No guns are aimed at them, and they do not kill anyone out of an excess of, ah, presumption. Amazing.

[pipoman]

51. Much to your surprise, there are many, many stories

from the UK of murder and mayhem..only the sentences exceeded the 2 years..

BTW, I too had a smile as I pictured this playwright greeting the burglar with a nod and tip of the hat..

[iverglas]

20. lord jeezus it's the Daily Mail

Is the News of the World next?

a wee bit more even from there:

Liverpool Crown Court heard that Blennerhassett, who works for his father's tarmacking business, had previously held a firearms certificate. However, it was revoked in 2008 after he was convicted and fined for failing to comply with its conditions.

... 'Each of these three rifles are deemed specially dangerous under the legislation,' said Judge Mark Brown. 'Each was of high specification in that each had been fitted with a sound moderator and telescopic sight. Each had been modified and modified in a very professional way.'

The judge accepted that Blennerhassett had not modified the weapons himself but he did not accept that he had not known they were modified.

The judge's finding was that he was deliberately flouting the law, by having the air rifles modified to look legal when they were not.

Nobody clicked ... or nobody wanted to admit they had clicked ... ?

[PavePusher]

56. Obviously intended to poach the King's deer.... tut, tut..... n/t

[iverglas]

21. so are you a regular reader of the Mail?

A google search for the accused's rather distinctive name finds loads of pages where essentially a couple of versions of the report appear ...

But other than numerous Mail sites and a lot of local radio stations and things like that, I see only two that would be known to your average denizen of the dungeon.

One has initials FR, and the other involves barking moonbats.

Just how did you happen on the happless Mr. Blennerhassett, I wonder?

no, wait, I'll bet I know ... keepandarmbears dot com

[Abin Sur]

23. Why in the world would you care?

I read *lots* of websites...left, right, and in-between.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

26. There appear to be some here...

...who believe you should not be reading any non-approved websites or source material.

[iverglas]

28. and then there are the obvious ones

who are devoid of the least clue.

Some people, you know, actually do know what they're talking about.

When it comes to the Daily Mail and quite a lot of other things, I R 1.

[iverglas]

27. uh ... because I know what the Daily Mail is

Apparently you don't. So I'm thinking that is not where you picked up this delicate tidbit.

The Daily Mail is, shall we say, not known for giving a good account of the facts.

The present article seems to be one of its more sedate efforts, possibly because trying to rile up its halfwitted readership (the main thrust of most of its "news" items) to demand guns would just be a dud.

[Abin Sur]

37. If any of the information presented in this article was incorrect, please let me know.

I will promptly post a revised article.

Unless and until you do so, I can only assume the article to be correct. Since you've been quoting from the article itself and commenting on the case, I can only take it that you assume the same.

[iverglas]

42. if I had said it was, you would have read that in my post

I believe I expressly said it wasn't.

I believe I am asking the question that has been dodged once already on this board in about 24 hours.

How does somebody like you stumble upon an obscure little bit of foreign news, in a bizarre big trashy tabloid foreign newspaper, just all by chance?

And if you didn't, where were you dipping your toes that you ran across it as somebody else's idea of really neat shit?

Yup, I've been quoting from the article. I got sidetracked while I was looking for other sources. Because there is always, always, a serious possibility that the story is less than complete in the Daily Hate.



A banker, a Daily Mail reader and an immigrant sit at a table with twelve biscuits. The banker takes eleven. He then leans forward, points at the immigrant and whispers to the Mail-reader "I'd keep your eye on him; he's after your biscuit."

[Abin Sur]

46. Who asserted that I came across this story by chance?

I already told you that I read a wide range of websites, both left and right wing. As it happens, I do frequently read www.keepandbeararms.com, where the original story is currently linked.

So what?

[iverglas]

48. not me

:shrug:

My your head plays funny tricks.

If what you're saying is that you found the story at keepandbeararms dot com, then you've answered the question, other than the fact that you don't seem to have said that.

How could someone possibly not know where they clicked on a link to get to a story that they turned around and copied and pasted here??

:shrug:

[Abin Sur]

54. You were certainly implying that I was saying that was the case.

If what you're saying is that you found the story at keepandbeararms dot com, then you've answered the question, other than the fact that you don't seem to have said that.


"As it happens, I do frequently read www.keepandbeararms.com, where the original story is currently linked."

Gee, you couldn't figure out from the context of the sentence that I found the story there?

Ok class, we're going to have to slow down so everybody can follow along.

I read the story about the bad, bad, man at www.keepandbeararms.com. After I read the story, I though I would share it with all my friends at DU. To do this I had to "copy and paste" a link. Can you say "copy and paste"? I knew you could!

(Well, that will have to be it for now...that housework won't get done by itself)

[iverglas]

49. oh, no, Paco!

keepandbeararms dot com wants your opinion.


Keep and Bear Arms - Vote In Our Polls
Do you support or oppose the Obama Administration's plan for a U.N. Arms Trade Treaty?
Support
Oppose
Undecided


Now how could anyone possibly "vote" in that poll?

Not a single person who does -- and yes, I will say that absolutely categorically -- will have clue one about the alleged subject matter. Not a one will have a one.

Kind of like people who tell pollsters they think better gun control would help prevent mass murders. Not a single one of them knows anything about gun control, I have learned here.


"Who will you vote for in the 2008 Presidential Election?"

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/polls/pollmentorres.asp?id=111

You can make a bet with yourself as to how that one comes out. Then calculate how much of that voting block Democrats would have to win over in order to foresee a comfortable margin ... and the likelihood of that happening ...

[rl6214]

64. Doncha know the MO is to attack the source and in doing so

attack you at the same time?

[iverglas]

80. I'll tell you what I know

Your post betrays either a total inability to understand what you have read or a bizarre desire to misrepresent what you read, for reasons I could guess but of course can't know.

I can't think of any other explanation for it.

[rl6214]

63. It's easier to ridicule the source and you for finding the story there

Doncha know that's how it's done, eh?

[iverglas]

82. it's easier to say things that are not true

than to engage in sincere, candid discussion.

Apparently.

[iverglas]

25. this is how rare firearms homicide is in the UK

The sentencing judge in the Blennerhassett case referred to Rhys Jones, a boy who was killed by gunshot four years earlier in the same area.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Rhys_Jones#Tributes_and_public_reaction

Songs played and tributes at home team and rival games, and his own wiki page.


In 2006-2007 there were 59 firearms homicides in England/Wales, which I believe is the highest number before or since.

For whatever year, it's generally safe to say the US had 10,000+ firearms homicides.

The US has a population just over 5 times the population of England/Wales.

I wonder whether there's a reason.

[gejohnston]

67. Given that

homicides were equally rare, if not more so, before the law I seriously doubt that to be the case. While there are certainly many reasons, your example of post hoc ergo propter hoc is not one of them.

[rl6214]

61. As a collector he should know the laws and abide by them but

TWO CHARGES OF POSSESSING A BULLET? A BULLET? OMG!!!

[Oneka]

65. And that is the future

that gun prohibitionists, here in the US of America, and some of our neighbors, would like to see us have.

I wish them "good luck" i think they will need it.

[iverglas]

88. keep on pretending

If you do it enough times in enough places, somebody may think you are speaking the truth.

http://www.wishfm.net/news?id=35256

with emphasis so non-wilful blindness really just won't be an available excuse:

Up Holland Gun Collector Jailed
Saturday 5 November 2011

A firearms enthusiast who concealed illegal guns and ammunition among his collection of antiques has been sentenced.

Before Liverpool Crown Court, Karl Blennerhassett (born 18/8/82) of Cinnamon Brow, Upholland, Lancashire, was found guilty after a trial, of possessing two section 1 firearms without having a firearms certificate.

He pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to possession of two 'live' 500 calibre rounds of ammunition and two further section 1 firearms without a certificate.

OMG, eh? Why, you must just not have known this before.

[DissedByBush]

66. "the need for legislation for antique firearms"

A reasonable person would think "Jail, over a few air rifles and a couple bullets? We need new legislation to stop this kind of injustice."

But the authoritarian statists think "We couldn't jail him on these guns, so we need legislation so that we can."

Note the two scariest things about this:

1) The prosecution said there was "no suggestion of any nefarious use of any of these items."

2) It's the JUDGE who is calling for legislation

There is no way this guy got a fair trial with this judge's attitude. He should be at the very least reprimanded, and a new trial held.

[iverglas]

91. "A reasonable person would think"

... "jail, for somebody whose firearms certificate had been revoked because he was convicted of violating the terms, who then went on to acquire four legal firearms that were professionally modified to make them illegal, and try to conceal that fact?

... Gosh, I wish I lived someplace where people who deliberately break gun laws were treated like the criminals they are."


Note the two scariest things about this:
1) The prosecution said there was "no suggestion of any nefarious use of any of these items."

Note that the prosecution was simply stating what the evidence was. The prosecution knew no more about the intentions of the individual involved than anyone else other than the individual did. Maybe he just really enjoyed breaking laws.

If a person is found in illegal possession of a firearm in a US state, does "nefarious use" need to be proved in order to convict them?

2) It's the JUDGE who is calling for legislation

You don't think judges in the US comment on legislation? :rofl:

Near the top of my first google results:

http://www.cannabisnews.org/united-states-cannabis-news/judge-calls-for-clarity-in-michigans-medical-marijuana-law/

Judge Calls for Clarity in Michigan’s Medical Marijuana Law

A Michigan Court of Appeals judge urged lawmakers Wednesday to clarify the state’s medical marijuana law, saying the “inartfully drafted” measure has resulted in confusion and arrests.

Judge Peter O’Connell issued his call Wednesday in a 30-page opinion on an Oakland County case in which the court upheld marijuana possession charges against two Madison Heights residents. The judge said the law is so confusing that users “who proceed without due caution” could “lose both their property and their liberty.”

http://jjie.org/york-judge-calls-for-major-reforms-states-juvenile-justice-system/39027

New York Judge Calls for Major Reforms in State’s Juvenile Justice System

The New York Times reports that Lippman will call on the state’s sentencing commission to prepare a bill that would be introduced in the Legislature at the beginning of the session in 2012. Lippman, the Times reports, will also establish pilot programs in the meantime that will deal with defendants aged 16 and 17.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/03/26/153196/california-hanging-judge-death-penalty/

California ‘Hanging Judge’ Calls For Abolishing Death Penalty To Help Balance State Budget

Former California Superior Court Judge Donald McCartin, a self-described “right-wing Republican” who earned the nickname “the hanging judge” for the numerous death penalty sentences he handed out, penned an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times yesterday calling on California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) and the state legislature to abolish the death penalty. Doing so, McCartin writes, would save the state “hundreds of millions of dollars” that could go toward filling the state’s $25 billion budget gap: ...

Note that the British judge said what he said in open court from the bench, where it could be challenged if necessary, not in letters to the editor or interviews with the press, and that he did not communicate with the government, he asked that the prosecution convey his concerns to the government, which the prosecution is free to do or not do as it chooses.

Strikes me as a little more acceptable than a judge writing a letter to the editor taking a political position by advising the government on how to balance its budget.

[DissedByBush]

94. Firearms?

"If a person is found in illegal possession of a firearm in a US state"

It's about AIR RIFLES!

This just doesn't pass the laugh test. Fucking absurd.

They did not like the fact he perfectly legally owned many real firearms. They had to get him on something, and this is what they could dredge up.

"Strikes me as a little more acceptable than a judge writing a letter to the editor taking a political position by advising the government on how to balance its budget."

No, the judge showed his personal bias against firearm ownership in this specific case.

Disbarred, forced to retire in disgrace. That is what is in order for conspiring to ruin this man's life.

[Euromutt]

95. It's very hard to escape the cops were fishing for something to nail him on

I sincerely doubt anyone tipped off the cops, "hey, this Blennerhassett guy has an air rifle with a muzzle velocity that's a smidgen over the legal limit." It seems way more plausible they came looking for something, anything to nail him on, and they kept looking until they found it.

Evidently, you can own antique firearms as long as you don't have ammunition for them, and they aren't chambered for a current commercially available cartridge. Strictly speaking, .32 Short Colt (which will also fit in a revolver chambered for .32 Long Colt, which is no longer made commercially) is still made (by Winchester) but there's no way in hell you're picking up a box at your local gun store or Wal-Mart; it's online or nothing. How you'd get hold of some in the UK--even illegally--is beyond me. So the charges against Blennerhassett on possessing three Colt revolvers which could fire "modern" ammunition is pushing the definition. Then he had two rounds for his .500 Tranter revolver, but since that round has been out of production in the UK since 1920, it's questionable whether those rounds will even fire (especially since we don't know whether they were stored properly). So we're not talking quite as severe a threat to pubic safety as the fuzz are making it out to be, to put it mildly.

[Name removed]

96. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.