Resident Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by nigeltm

  1. Slight correction. The legislation applies to possessing bladed/sharp articles in a public place. Your home or any other private property to which the public do not normally have access is not considered to be a public place. You can have just about any kind of sword on display on your living room wall. Also, swords and other bladed or pointed objects can be carried in a public place if you have a reasonable excuse/good cause. For example, if you have to collect a sword from the post office/courier depot when it is posted to you if you are a re-enactor going to or from an event/meeting/military fair to take the item to another location/shop for repair taking a machete/bushcraft knife/axe to a camp or meet any folding and non locking knife with a cutting edge of less than 3" and so on As long as you're not waving it around like a fool or posing a threat to others you should be in the clear.
  2. NEWS:April Jones Murder:

    Good, I hope the sentencing is appropriate and he rots in prison in fear of the other inmates for the rest of his life. Her family have to live with his actions. The impact goes beyond her family. A number of friends and I were on the search from Tuesday the 2nd to Sunday the 7th as our mountain rescue team was one of the first deployed. A couple of the guys have had personal issues and have received counselling as they have had issues following the search. Finding and having to open a discarded bin bag that doesn't smell right is not as pleasant experience. I normally avoid condolences threads but in this case: RIP April. Sorry we couldn't bring you home.
  3. GPS tags for dementia patients

    Forget the cost. I look at it from the perspective that if they go missing they can be found quickly and made safe. I've been on a few searches for dementia sufferers. Over the past few years these searches have become formed a larger part of the callouts the more rural/lowland mountain rescue teams are asked to attend. Teams have been on searches which have lasted all night and the misper is found the next day severly hypothermic, or even dead. My mother needs 24hr care at home following a stroke. She has dementia like episodes. If she was mobile and as fit as some dementia patients (in one case the misper was a very healthy 74yr old who didn't come back from her regular hill walk in the Beacons) I would have bought something like this myself.
  4. I don't have a legal background. I'm a project manager specialising in computer mapping systems. In my free time I'm the secretary of a mountain rescue team and I take part in operational callouts. So I don't have the background to judge another posters argument. I rely on the appropriately trained bods on here for that and both sides of the discussion that debate the issue. In this case the poster (or a poster on another thread) MAY be difficult, stubborn or just and argumentative fool (I'm not making the claim in this case). However, RBMs posts do quote legislation and to the untrained seem to be reasonable questions. When the responses are frustrated and descend to name calling it makes RBM look like the victim. perception is reality and in this case (like so many others over the past year or so) my perception is that the forum is degenerating in to a boys club. If you don't accept every statement made by a long term member as gospel then you are hounded and abused until you give up. I've been on this forum for a few years and from my perspective it has gone downhill. I'm happy to discuss my opinions later if anyone wants a reasoned debate :-)
  5. While I don't have anything vested in this thread I do think RBM should be allowed to argue/discuss the issue if they think they have a valid reason to challenge the points raised by other posters. This forum is a fantastic opportunity for MOPs to raise questions and learn. If they misunderstand and think they have a valid point then educate them. If you put forward a reasonable and logical rebuttal then RBM is put right, a lesson is learned and you don't look like a petty, name calling child (as has been the case with some of the posts on here). The laws in this country are complex and often require cross referencing, with a heavy reliance on the interpretation of a phrase or individual word. If someone posts a challenge you can counter it with seasoned argument. If you don't you can give an impression of a pack mentality. This discourages new members and drives away old ones.
  6. Going equipped is a catch all charge that could be applied to just about any item. I was discussing carrying a knife in my mountain rescue kit with a friend who is a serving officer and we got on to multitools. Despite my Leatherman being exempt under Sect 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (nonlocking folding blade of less than 3"), he would still arrest for going equipped. It may be difficult to prove intent and so not be taken forward by the CPS but the arrest alone could cause problems (CRB checks, entry to USA). Using going equipped as an excuse causes a lack of trust in the Police.
  7. Would Police prosecute ?

    No. That decision is up to the CPS Come on Kenners. You've been on here long enough not to make a rookie mistake!
  8. Your story sounds so familiar. I was married and suffered emotional abuse for years for the sake of our children. I recognise now that for years I did not have the confidence and emotional strength to walk away. Over time the abuse and her behaviour became more anymore extreme. I have scars on my face to prove it. We divorced when the girls were 10 and 8 years old. That was 7 years ago and looking back now I wish we had broken up earlier! Staying together for my daughter's was wrong. As marralass has said, your daughter is being adversely affected living in a dysfunctional household. Today both of my daughters have emotional and anger issues due to the arguments they witnessed and the behaviour they learned in the home. I blame myself for not making the break sooner but I did not have the confidence and strength for much too long. Whatever happens your daughter will suffer. All you can do is minimise the damage. My advice? - See a solicitor NOW!!! - Arrange a court order preventing your daughter being taken out of the country. - Keep a diary of the abuse and (if it becomes violent) photos of any injuries. - Try to record conversations and arguments as evidence. - Plan to leave the family home. - See a solicitor NOW!! (it's worth saying this twice) - Be strong for your daughter's sake. If you do the right thing for your daughter it will be the most difficult and painful thing you are likely to do in your life. I only wish I had had the strength and advice to have done it sooner. Today both my girls live with me. It's hard as on top of the teenage hormones and general bitchyness of teen girls we have the arguments and behavioural issues left over from the relationship. It's difficult as Hell. I doubt myself most days and sometimes cry when I'm alone but it is worth it as my kids deserve the best I can give them (even if I want to wring their necks at times!). Good luck.
  9. What would you do?

    If he's been issued his warrant card then hasn't he completed his training? So this is an off duty copper (regular or special) who is aware of a crime. So, report or arrest?
  10. Sorry for the long post but this is a bit of a big subject! I'm a MOP and I have four daughters. My opinions (for what they are worth!) are based on what I would want them to have and be able to do should they be attacked. Personal alarms - useful to carry but of limited use. They may scare the attacker a bit but if you are in a secluded area (which should be avoided if possible) or the attacker is determined/drunk/high they would probably be ignored. Another function of the alarm is a call for help, for which they are pointless. How many people ignore car alarms? These aren't much different. The danger of this type of alarm is that it could give you false confidence. You could feel safe and end up putting yourself at greater risk. Marker/dye sprays - these are a deterrent and very useful for identifying the attacker after the fact. During the act they are of limited use. If you threaten the attacker they may back off as they know they'd be identifiable. If they've already been sprayed then they have nothing to lose so may as well finish the job. Then you have the attacker who wouldn't give a damn about being identified/caught and will assault you regardless. A marker spray will do nothing to stop the most dangerous attacker. If you are lucky you may spray their eyes and temporarily blind them, giving you a chance to run. This is pretty much the upper limit in the UK but in my opinion it is not enough. As my daughters are growing up I’ll buy them these sprays but I’d like them to have the option to have something more effective. Pepper/CS sprays - The public should be allowed to carry this type of spray. Unlike the marker spray in most cases it can incapacitate the attacker, giving you the opportunity to run. It may also be useful in identifying the attacker if they go to A&E for treatment. Combined pepper/dye sprays - the best of both worlds as they buy you time and identify the attacker. Batons - with proper training these can be very useful. If you have the chance to deploy before the attack they can be a very visible and effective deterrent. The attacker may back off. If deployed during the attack they can be very effective weapons, disabling or restraining the attacker. I would carry some form of baton if I was allowed. Knives - these are a bloody silly choice of defensive weapon. If you haven’t got a lot of training you’re just as likely to hurt yourself as you would the attacker. They could have some intimidation value but as soon as you start swinging one in anger you’re really in trouble. I think the current law on the use of knives is appropriate for the UK. The problem is the wide and varied implementation of the law as has been discussed in numerous other threads on here. Stun guns - again, training is important and these can be effective. This would be my absolute upper limit. Pistols - in the UK with our relatively low level of gun crime I think carrying a handgun for personal defence is excessive. If I was in the USAI would apply for a carry licence as the risk is higher. Slightly off topic, I enjoy shooting and would like to own a pistol for recreational purposes. The knee jerk firearms legislation in the UK has done little to curb gun crime but it did make people feel safe and gather in a lot of votes! Improvised weapons - hairspray/pens/umbrellas and all the other bits and pieces you can press in to service can be useful. That is as long as you can justify instant arming and can avoid the “intent” aspect of an off weapon charge! I have discussed this with my girls and I’ve encouraged them to think about what they have with them and consider how they can be used. I would like my daughters to be able to carry a stun gun and be properly trained in its use as I think this gives them the best chance. In reality it’ll probably never be allowed. Looking at it realistically the best I could hope for is the pepper/dye spray. I agree with Moxnil that the “if the public is allowed then criminals will …” argument is redundant. Criminals already have access to firearms, knives, stun guns and all manner of nasty kit. They already have the advantage. The least we should have is the opportunity to level the playing field.
  11. Maybe it is to understand their side of the case if it isn't clear? Rather than have an issue with their position it may turn out you agree. Or by explaining their position they change your mind and you find yourself agreeing with them. At the end of the day this would be a very uninteresting forum if people made bold statements and didn't engage in conversation! I'm with Moxnil in this. I think it would be useful to hear what people think should be allowed in the UK and why. A bland "it's legal to carry ..." statement without discussing why is pointless in the context of this thread. It stifles the discussion and puts people off contributing their opinions as they don't want to get embroiled in a silly tit for tat. Give me 10 minutes and I'll post up my opinions.
  12. To the Machynlleth searchers

    Just want to say good luck and stay safe to anyone out there who is taking part in the April Jones search. As of last night our MR team was stood down. It doesn't feel right leaving the job unfinished and many of us are already booking seats in the vehicles if we're called back up. The terrain is varied. In may of the woodland areas there are hidden drops and slopes, ankle traps, deep water and bogs. Simply put,it's bloody horrible and all too easy to pick up an injury or worse. Take care.
  13. I hope you're right as that's almost exactly what they did with lock knives. Until the Harris vs DPP case law in 1993 a lock knife was considered to be exempt under Sect. 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. Then the case set the precedent that even though a lock knife may fold and have a cutting edge of less than 3" the fact that it could not be immediately closed made it more effective weapon when stabbing. Therefore the appeal judges agreed that; I can see the same thing happening with spring assisted knives if it ever went to court.
  14. Fair comment :-) Not an easy situation and Tony2010 has my sympathy. Whoever came up with the quote about a woman scorned hit the nail on the head.
  15. It could be considered to be DV under this definition if you look at it as abuse by the ex against Tony2010. They have a child so have been "intimate partners". Even though they are no longer together they were intimate. By denying access to the child you can argue that the ex is denying access to humiliate, intimidate and punish Tony2010. Any harm to the child may not count as DV but it can be argued that the harm to Tony2010 is. If I was in his position I would see my solicitor to get their opinion and then arrange a meeting with the NPT or possibly a more senior officer before the next scheduled visit to the child. The idea being to establish the details of the situation, agree any action that can be taken by the Police and be ready for the next time the ex plays power games. As for the court order, see your solicitor. Disclaimer: I'm not a Police officer or in the legal profession so could have this all wrong (never rely on an Internet barrack room lawyer!). Although I was married to a total nightmare of a woman and had to see my solicitor on a number of occasions (luckily she didn't deny access but she caused issues in other areas).
  16. The long term future of policing in the UK

    Thanks, makes sense. This has got me thinking. I don't know if SWP or DPP are looking at UAV but there's a company in mid Wales that uses UAV for ground surveys. I may have a chat to see if there is any potential for trialing one in our MRT.
  17. OK, not ignore. Hand off a better description? All I'm after is an explanation why the dog warden does this and not the Police? OK, the dog warden can issue a "Dog Control Order". Is this specified in the Act? Or is it an agreement on responsibility between the Police and local authority/council? I understand that you have been given guidelines or instruction to do this in your force's policy. I'm just trying o understand why.
  18. In post 53 you say: In the OP's post she said; The Act says; She wasn't attacked but she was injured. Whether or not it is an intentional act by the dog is irrelevant. The Act doesn't say that the dog has to attack a person, just that they are injured. So your reason for ignoring the incident is wrong.
  19. With all respect you have not answered the question. I have looked through your posts and I cannot find any explination why this is not a Police matter and why it should be reported to the local authority dog warden. Your responses seem to be "I'm a Police Officer, I know better, do as I say". It looks like an offence under the DD Act and you would refuse to deal with it. Why? Is there a reasonable explination? I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just after a clear answer. If you have already explained in a previous post please quote it here in your reply so there is no confusion. Edit for spelling
  20. Sorry if I haven't been clear. I'm not arguing on the behalf of the OP. I'm a dog owner and I'm asking to improve my understanding of the legislation and how the Police approach this type of situation. From what I can see: We have the OP in her home ( a private place) when the dog entered through the front door without permission and cause her a number of injuries when it knocked her down. We have a quote from the Dangerous Dogs Act that states that there is an offence under the Act if the dog is in a private place without permission and it causes an injury. We have the response from her local force that they can't help. We have your responses that amount to "nothing in it for the Police." and "contact the Dog Warden" My question is; if the events taken at face value appear to be an offence under the Act what reason would the Police have for not looking in to it? In today's media driven society I'm sure the same questions would be raised if the dog was to seriously injure or even kill someone and Venus went to the press and told them about her situation. I'm happy to continue the discussion by PM if that would be better?
  21. Luckily I'm not the OP and I'm not arguing the toss :-) I'm trying to understand how the incident appears to be covered by the quoted legislation but there is no action taken? There may very well be a valid reason (prioritisation, resources, other legislation better suited, etc.) and I would like to find out more. No agenda or indignant outrage :-)
  22. Hi Sub-seven. Daily basis? And the advice in this case is that there is nothing the Police can do despite the (admitedly short) extract from the legislation suggesting that the dog was dangerously out of control? I appreciate that sometimes resource issues and priorities mean that action isn't taken but is it right to make a blanket statement that there is "nothing in it for the Police."? The poster has suffered an injury due caused by the dog's owner not taking responsibility for their pet. Surely it is worth reporting and some action being taken? What if the cat had run in to the house and jumped up in to the arms of it's owner? What if the owner was a young child? In this case there are injuries but nothing life threatening. If the owner goes unchallenged this could happen again with more dramatic consequences. Just to be clear, I'm not one of those people who are rabidly (pun intended) anti "devil dog". I have bred Staffordshire Bull Terriers and have one at home. I also keep cats and have been known to feed my kids on occasion :-) So I can see this situation from all sides. Even so, as a responsible dog owner I would hope some action could be taken against someone who gives the rest of us a bad name! Nigel.
  23. The long term future of policing in the UK

    Not always. I've been on shouts where we are actively looking out for a big yellow RAF Sea King heli. Unless they are high in the sky and quite near by they can be difficult to spot. Especially against the backdrop of high ground, where they blend in to the background colours. Looking for a much smaller and quieter blue/yellow Squirrel heli is much more difficult. Even when someone points it out to you it can take a little while to make it out from the background. If you're not specifically looking for it it's unlikely you'll just happen to notice it.
  24. The long term future of policing in the UK

    Not quite. In a couple of biographies there are reports of helicopter surveiliance in Northern Ireland by the military. In these cases the heli couldn't be seen by the target but the camera system could get a clear picture. Today the technology is even better. For example, a company called SELEX Galileo produce a turret system which includes a x26 optical zoom on a camera system. So the heli could be 1300m away from a target and pick up an image from an effective distance of 50m. At 2600m away the picture would be at 100m. That's over 1.5 miles. I don't think most people would notice, let alone hear, a heli at 1.5 miles. Not trying to add to your concerns mate but the technology certainly is there for unobtrusive heli surveilance. And having worked with some Police heli crews they certainly don't close their eyes between jobs!
  25. The quote doesn't say the dog has to attack and intentionally injure. Just that the dog injures a person. Also the fact the door was left open is not relevant. The same conditions apply if the dog were to jump over a fence into a property's garden or if the dog is being walked in a farmer's field without permission. There's also the issue of the damage caused to the cats. IIRC cats are considered to be the possession of the owner. I guess that the cost of treating injuries to the cat could be considered for a civil claim. I stand to be corrected on this as I'm not a Police officer or in the legal profession. I just thought I'd try to offer a bit more support and helpful advice than Sub-Seven. Sub-Seven - Are you an Officer? If you are your unhelpful and dismissive comments don't reflect well on the service and give an MoP like me a poor impression of your capabilities in the role.