Police Dismay after Sheriff Grants Hunter Magnum Licence (Scotland)


PDA






cuchulainn
August 3, 2005, 08:59 PM
from The Scotsman

http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=1687002005

Police Dismay after Sheriff Grants Hunter Magnum Licence

FRANK URQUHART


A HUNTER yesterday won the right to use a .44 Magnum revolver - "the most powerful handgun in the world" :rolleyes: - to kill deer on estates throughout the Scottish Highlands.

Trevor Jeans, a professional deerstalker who culls at least 300 deer a year, went to court after Northern Constabulary refused his application to carry the weapon, made famous in Dirty Harry, the cult thriller film starring Clint Eastwood.

In the wake of the Dunblane shootings in 1996, the government outlawed handguns, with the exception of cases where professions such as vets or slaughtermen need the weapons as part of their job.

In the latest case, Mr Jeans challenged Ian Latimer, the Chief Constable of the Highland force, by arguing that he needed the large-calibre pistol to humanely finish off deer not killed by the first shot from his rifle.

He said he was uncomfortable using a knife to kill a wounded animal and that there was a risk of people being injured by a ricocheting bullet from a rifle fired at close range.

In a judgment issued yesterday at Inverness Sheriff Court, Sheriff Alexander Pollock ruled that Mr Jeans, 45, of Dunlichity House, Tordarroch, Inverness, should be able to own the pistol for his work.

The Deer Commission for Scotland, said Sheriff Pollock, did not recommend the use of handguns, but preferred hunters to take a second shot with a rifle or for a stalker to kill the wounded deer with a knife.

Granting Mr Jeans the right to own a .44 Magnum, Sheriff Pollock stated: "What matters in this case is whether this particular pursuer has satisfied the court that he has 'a good reason' - nothing more and nothing less - for having the handgun in respect of which his application is made. Given that I am so satisfied, I have therefore reversed the decision of the chief constable."

Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish National Party's justice spokesman, told The Scotsman that the judgment highlighted the need for an urgent review of Britain's gun laws. He said: "The gentleman in question is clearly entitled to have a firearm to carry out his work, but there are guns and there are guns. And he is a gamekeeper, not Clint Eastwood.

"There are other legitimate weapons that are capable of killing off the animal without possessing a gun that really belongs in a Dirty Harry movie and not in the hills and glens of Scotland."

A spokeswoman for Northern Constabulary said: "The force notes the outcome and is examining the details of the sheriff's decision."

A spokeswoman for the Home Office confirmed that an exemption had been made under the Firearms Amendment Act, 1997, to allow the use of handguns "as slaughtering instruments for the humane killing of animals".

A senior Scottish police source explained: "This exemption covers veterinary surgeons, who were allowed to keep their handguns. You would have the odd slaughterman and stalker who will use them as well.

"Guns as powerful as the .44 Magnum were not completely outlawed. They are a prohibited firearm, but with these few exceptions. If a vet, for example, chooses to use a Magnum there is nothing illegal in that.

"It may seem incredible to a layman that that is the case, but it does to us as well. Very few stalkers use handguns unless they are in very dense undergrowth, where it is difficult to use a rifle, and most would use .38 calibre weapons."

Mr Jeans, who has held firearm and shotgun certificates for 27 years, declined to comment on the outcome of his appeal when contacted last night.

If you enjoyed reading about "Police Dismay after Sheriff Grants Hunter Magnum Licence (Scotland)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Jake
August 3, 2005, 09:05 PM
Anybody want to start a collection to get this guy a S&W 500. I figure just the thought of that would make peoples heads explode.

Cesiumsponge
August 3, 2005, 09:15 PM
Uhh, why does a vet get the special rights to use a .44mag? I thought they used lethal injection to put down pets, not a .44mag slug through the skull. :confused:

Granted I can see justification if an animal hops up and attempts to bite someone. However, the vet always has a few helpers around. He is in more risk hitting an innocent bystander (due to vicinity and inexperience) than a professional hunter.

Kurush
August 3, 2005, 09:29 PM
Uhh, why does a vet get the special rights to use a .44mag?To deal with rabies most likely.

Marshall
August 3, 2005, 09:31 PM
What an Idiot............Very few stalkers use handguns unless they are in very dense undergrowth, where it is difficult to use a rifle, and most would use .38 calibre weapons."

Yea boy, I hunt deer with a .38 caliber handgun. :rolleyes:

Joejojoba111
August 3, 2005, 09:37 PM
I thought if you had the word 'National' in your party name it meant you were right wing? I read what the party spokesman said at first thinking, "Ahha, he's arguing that the firearms laws are crazy because this man is getting the fifth degree for his absolutely legitimate need of said firearm." Then I read the next sentence the guy spoke, and it's not what I expected!

"Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish National Party's justice spokesman, told The Scotsman that the judgment highlighted the need for an urgent review of Britain's gun laws. He said: "The gentleman in question is clearly entitled to have a firearm to carry out his work,..."

So far so good, I'm about to start clapping, my hands are poised and on an intercept course, then:

"...but there are guns and there are guns. And he is a gamekeeper, not Clint Eastwood."

Abort, abort clapping! My hands hit at an obtuse angle, one deflecting up and out and the other into the desktop. I have to look this up whether the 'nationals' are in fact on the right. Perhaps it is bizarro world, where right wing is anti and the left wing is pro. Or maybe there's anti and super anti.

And how the hell can he slaughter animals with a knife when they are banning pointy knives? Hell ask for a pointy knife permit and some jackass will say "Whoa there, this isn't some Japanese Samurai movie, just use a hammer like ordinary people do."

MechAg94
August 3, 2005, 11:34 PM
I am surprised they didn't make him carry a spear.

Standing Wolf
August 3, 2005, 11:41 PM
I think the English probably would have been happier under Nazi rule. To think that sorry excuse for a nation once ruled the largest empire the world has ever seen!

Joejojoba111
August 4, 2005, 12:20 AM
It used to be that no English Gentleman was completely dressed without a pistol in his pocket. I'll say things have certainly changed.

hifi
August 4, 2005, 12:34 AM
Boy these articles are cracking me up tonight!! :D

c_yeager
August 4, 2005, 01:56 AM
Uhh, why does a vet get the special rights to use a .44mag? I thought they used lethal injection to put down pets, not a .44mag slug through the skull.

I think that they still use the old-method for livestock etc. Family pets still get the injection, but if a farm animal needs to be put down by a subsistance farmer i doubt they would select a method that would make the meat inedible.

There are a selection of captive-bolt firearms (propells a steel rod/bolt into the head of the animal via a blank charge) that are marketed for this purpose (James Harriot makes mention of using one in one of the "all craetures great and small" books). Its possible that those tools arent substantial enough for larger animals, or that even those require a permit.

Fletchette
August 4, 2005, 02:06 AM
Soooo, you can own and carry a gun if it is required for my job, eh?

My job requires me to stay alive... :cool:

stevelyn
August 4, 2005, 02:19 AM
This makes me embarrassed to be of Scotish decent.

LiquidTension
August 4, 2005, 02:22 AM
I am so glad we don't have to go through this sort of BS in the States....yet.

JohnBT
August 4, 2005, 08:21 AM
"cult thriller film" :scrutiny:

You don't suppose he's confusing Eastwood with the guy in Texas Chainsaw Massacre?

John

Mixlesplick
August 4, 2005, 08:28 AM
I guess I can see why a vet would need a firearm to put down a farm animal but if I took my dog to the vet and he said there is nothing he could do but put my dog down and then he pulled out a pistol my piece would be out about a half second later. :what:

I finished off a deer with a rifle bullet to the head and I was worried about a ricochet at the time. I was a little disgusted at the result, too. After the .30-06 to the head there were about two ounces of brain left in the skull. :barf:

Mongo the Mutterer
August 4, 2005, 08:57 AM
for a stalker to kill the wounded deer with a knife

Yeah ... I'll get right on that

scubie02
August 4, 2005, 10:47 AM
Uhh, why does a vet get the special rights to use a .44mag?

most likely because they are the "right kind of people". Traditionally a vet would be from the upper class--a dr as it were. Most gun control laws there or here were aimed at keeping guns away from the "wrong sort"--ie "poor people" and other "undesirables". I'm sure if you're Prince Charles, or virtually any noble type for that matter, or a member of parliament, or some other privileged type, its no problem owning firearms still. Its just the "common" types that can't have them. A long standing tradition in Great Britain--arm the peasants so they can do most of the dying in the wars, then take the guns away quick afterwards so the retches can't be turning them against their lawful rulers!

GunGoBoom
August 4, 2005, 12:20 PM
Stupid politicians aside, what does he do with all that meat?! Surely hope that it is not wasted...

Pawcatch
August 4, 2005, 01:28 PM
And how the hell can he slaughter animals with a knife when they are banning pointy knives?

Who said parliament was banning pointy knives?The only I've thing heard was that same team of doctors in Middlesex suggesting a ban a long,pointed kitchen knives.Which is far from being made into law.

Mk VII
August 4, 2005, 03:06 PM
second case with a similar result http://www.basc.org.uk/content/0621_deer_despatch1
Scottish National Party is very anti-gun. Make the present lot look like moderates. Their policy after Dunblane massacre was 'cancel all gun licences imediately and impound the guns, then the owner can make out a case, if he can, for having them back'

c_yeager
August 5, 2005, 03:11 AM
I just thought i would mention that the vets are using either .22s or the captive-bolt pistols that mimick the wound of a .22 Noone is putting down animals with a .44 simply due to the mess that would be involved. The standard practice is to fire into the head as many times as necessary to ensure "permanent unconsciousness" (usually once) and then to cut the throat and allow the animal to bleed out.

Mk VII
August 5, 2005, 07:42 AM
the vet's slaughtering gun which I saw was a Taurus revolver in .32 S&W Long. It had a single chamber cylinder which did not revolve, no sights, and the barrel was counterbored for much of its length.

Pawcatch
August 5, 2005, 02:02 PM
www.entwistleguns.com sells captive-bolt pistols.

dasmi
August 5, 2005, 02:25 PM
What a bunch of ninnies.

Joejojoba111
August 5, 2005, 06:12 PM
He doesn't need a .44, a .22 would do.

And freaking royalty and politicians don't need Bentleys and Cadillacs, free accomodation in mansions and lifetime pensions larger than lottery winnings... But they have them.

So what 'would do' means nothing, as an absolute absolute base line, if it's not illegal immoral or injurious to others then there it is not wrong!

Shear_stress
August 5, 2005, 07:39 PM
Not a rousing victory for Scottish gunowners, but a good start. I get the feeling that, with time, they will be seeing more and more of these "exceptions". A couple of years back, the English Parliament exempted Olympic target shooters from the handgun ban--up to then, they had to practice in Switzerland!

One question, though. How does the exempted "stalker" actually buy his handgun?

cracked butt
August 6, 2005, 02:49 AM
Uh, I thought that in GB, the .44 magnum was a terrorist weapon that is so powerful that it could like shoot down airliners or damage nuclear reactors and such :eek:

Randy in Arizona
August 6, 2005, 12:22 PM
IIRC there have been several cases of hunters and other individuals killed by deer. If I were in the position of having to approach a wounded deer in the course of culling "at least 300 deer a year" I would want a 41 or 44 magnum.

The deer is going to be frightened and in pain, and I have to get close to it to finish it off. Yup 41 or 44!

Brett Bellmore
August 6, 2005, 12:34 PM
IRC there have been several cases of hunters and other individuals killed by deer. If I were in the position of having to approach a wounded deer in the course of culling "at least 300 deer a year" I would want a 41 or 44 magnum.

The deer is going to be frightened and in pain, and I have to get close to it to finish it off. Yup 41 or 44!

I don't know; Personally, I'd want to send in somebody with the Scottish Deer Commission, ideally armed with butter knife.

LAR-15
August 6, 2005, 02:48 PM
Heck even Chuck Schumer here in the US admits handguns are used for hunting deer a lot.

And he HATES handguns.


Scottish red deer are what we North Americans call 'elk' or 'wapiti'. Just the European subspecies.

There are roe and fallow deer in Scotland too but they are small- 150 pounds or less.

Red deer/elk can reach 900 pounds.

Mk VII
August 6, 2005, 03:20 PM
handgun hunting always was illegal here. The Deer Act 1991 lays down a minimum muzzle energy of 1700 ft-lbs and the Deer (Scotland) Act lays down 1750 ft-lbs and 2450 fps. It's been like that for a lot longer, since at least the Deer Act 1963. You can only use the handgun to administer the coup-de-grace

grimjaw
August 6, 2005, 03:45 PM
The fools! Don't they know that the .44 Magnum is the most powerful handgun in the world? The discharge of a single cartridge will cause miscarriages, tidal waves, rupturing of underground gas lines, and squinting of the eyes!

Ridiculous.

jmm

Randy in Arizona
August 7, 2005, 09:57 AM
grimjaw,

You forgot earthquakes, solar flares and dislocation of the planets from their orbits. (Let's not scare people by discussing the tragic consequences of firing the S&S 500.) :what: :what: :what:

If you enjoyed reading about "Police Dismay after Sheriff Grants Hunter Magnum Licence (Scotland)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!