The Pargeter rifle

[grahameb]

the qustion is why did he remove it why dident he want to leave it around.

was he worried about being falsely acused if so why.

It was probably something as simple as that. He had no connection with the killings and he wanted it to stay that way?

[nugnug]

but why would he think that anybody would think that he had.

[grahameb]

but why would he think that anybody would think that he had.

I don't know nugnug. But he did sue someone once who suggested that he had. Perhaps he has the forsight to see that coming?

[nugnug]

but surely nobody would of thought it was him at the time.

[scipio_usmc]

A firearms certificate doesn't require you to store the weapon on particular property.  It governs the right to purchase and own a weapon and specifies where and for what purpose any wepaons that are purchased under said certificate can be USED.

A weapon can be used for target shooting or for use killing animals on specific lands.  The certificate will specify either use or both but must specify at least 1.   

The claim Anthony would be in violation of the law by taking his own weapon home is nonsense.  He would be in violation of the law if he tried to use a weapon for a purpose not authorized according to the terms of the certificate or on property where he was not authorized to do so.

It has to do with use not storage of the weapon.



 

[nugnug]

that all depends on the terms of your licence not all licences are the same.

under normal circumstances your right but it would depend on the terms you were granted the licence.

[nugnug]

and your still not supposed to take items of intrest from a crime scene without permission even if they do belong to you.

[Caroline]

Back in 1985 the rules weren't anywhere near as tight as they are now, but I would have thought that the location of the firearm would have been a consideration. I suspect our laws are very different from yours.

( Info on current practices - https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/262215/Guidance_on_Firearms_Licensing_Law_v6_Nov_2013.pdf)

[Jan]

I agree with both nugnug and Caroline

As far as I remember the shotgun should always be returned to the premises and the locked gun cupboard of the address the licence was granted - that was definitely the case in the 70s in the UK

I agree that the individuals were sometimes a bit lapse about putting them back in the cupboard especially on farms - but considering that NB was supposed to be nervous for his safety "allegedly" and had children in the house I would have been surprised if all guns had not been locked away at the end of the day. Remember that you also were in big trouble if you used them against an intruder . Dis-proprtionate  defence and all that.

[nugnug]

you were also in big trouble if you manged to lose one that could cost you your licence.

[grahameb]

A firearms certificate doesn't require you to store the weapon on particular property.  It governs the right to purchase and own a weapon and specifies where and for what purpose any wepaons that are purchased under said certificate can be USED.

A weapon can be used for target shooting or for use killing animals on specific lands.  The certificate will specify either use or both but must specify at least 1.   

The claim Anthony would be in violation of the law by taking his own weapon home is nonsense.  He would be in violation of the law if he tried to use a weapon for a purpose not authorized according to the terms of the certificate or on property where he was not authorized to do so.

It has to do with use not storage of the weapon.

I'm afraid it does and his certificate specified exactly that and that was the very reason he left it at WHF. The licensing laws are very strict on that.

[Jan]

Yes Grahame is correct. And the guns should have been locked away as well. You were not allowed to use guns to defend yourself against burglars either. Dis-proportionste defence and all that. Considering my was supposed to be in fear of his life :Pypu had children in the house you would he would have locked all the guns away securely.

[nugnug]

but here lies a problem if the guns were locked away securely how would ethere sheila or jeremy have got hold of one.

[grahameb]

I'm afraid it does and his certificate specified exactly that and that was the very reason he left it at WHF. The licensing laws are very strict on that.

Not only that but his certificate ruled also that not even the bolt action component was allowed to be taken off the farm. Probablt because it was capable of being transferred to another gun of similar calibre and make?

[scipio_usmc]

Back in 1985 the rules weren't anywhere near as tight as they are now, but I would have thought that the location of the firearm would have been a consideration. I suspect our laws are very different from yours.

( Info on current practices - https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/262215/Guidance_on_Firearms_Licensing_Law_v6_Nov_2013.pdf)

I was referring to UK rules.

US laws vary by state but the US is different in that our license is a license to own and use a gun for any lawful purpose.  We don't specify it can only be used for hunting or target practice.  It can be used for self-defense, (which is not allowed in the UK), hunting or target practice once owned.  Each state has its own rules about transport (some require guns to be unloaded locked in a trunk for instance).

You can thus go to any range you want you don't have to go to a specific shooting club only and can hunt anywhere hunting is legal.  Uusally you need to pay a fee for a hunting license but it is separate from gun licensing.

The UK is much more strict in what it can be used for and where- such is actually included in the conditions section.