Police: Powers of entry?

Sunny Suffolk said:

It sounds like both the question and answer were within the original post. Someone reported shooting at night (possibly a disturbance or a serious crime until they can investigate further, two of the reasons for entry without a warrant that you list) so they came into your land to do so.

There's been plenty of occasions over the years when armed robbers have entered farms and killed the occupants. If the police are unsure, why wouldn't they check it out.

I can't imagine that saying 'my taxes pay your wages" would have endeared him to you. Plenty of members of the public could argue that their taxes pay for subsidies.

Click to expand...

Is Sunny Suffolk claiming that tax payer's money doesn't pay the subsidies? Maybe they come out of those "other sources" the police sergeant claimed the government pays his wages out of? I do not pay taxes to endear the police to me, I pay them so the police will do their job "without fear or favour".

I do not expect firearms legislation to be used by the police to punish gun owners. If someone has committed an offence, charge them, produce the evidence, and take them to court. "Justice should not only be done but be seen to be done".

I mentioned the case to the police sergeant where a self employed gamekeeper had had his certificates revoked because he was suspected of wrong doing. I was told there is more to the case he couldn't tell me about "because of privacy legislation". I replied that it seems we not only have a police state now and a secret police state.

The officer had to pass my house to drive into my yard where I have open fronted sheds containing tools and machinery. He didn't stop at the house and ring the doorbell which should surely have been his first action. I do not trust a police force that attempts to get me to sign away my guns for destruction by deception. Our discussion was quite amicable but I refused to shake his hand while he was in uniform and made it quite clear why I no longer have respect for the police. I also reminded him that his wife still owes me £30 for grazing for her horse! What's the betting I don't get that?

Sunny Suffolk said:

Nope, I'm quite clearing stating the opposite, that tax payers DO pay for subsidies. The point I was making is that it's never productive to jab the finger of "I pay your wages mate"

Gun ownership in this country isn't a 'right' like it is in America (thank-god!). I'm not for a second suggesting that you fall into this category but irresponsible gun owners damage the reputation of all gun owners and so it is only right and understandable that gun owners are subjected to scrutiny.

In this scenario someone reported gun shots, the police offer perhaps thought "Probably just a farmer shooting pests so probably best that I just take a look rather than sending in 20 armed police and looking like a plum" In any event, the police can't just ignore that kind of report can they?

Click to expand...

I can see you are going to be a valuable member on this forum. Only on 14 days and we are already getting the benefit of wisdom.

You wouldn't be a member of the police force, by any chance?

sawdust said:

I would have thought farmers would welcome with open arms random visits from police late at night, unless they've as much to hide!

Click to expand...

So, there are shots on farmland at night, the sounds of a vehicle, and someone using a powerful spotlight. What does that mean to you? To anyone around here, that means someone is controlling the rabbit and fox population -- a perfectly normal and legitimate farming activity in the countryside.

Sorry to break it to you, but Dixon of Dock Green is dead. These days policing is all about statistics and young plod is looking to increase his conviction score so he will get promoted.

I do not want dishonest people on my land under any pretext. And when the police demand I hand over my guns, shove a piece of paper in front of me and ask me to sign it, stating (and I quote verbatim), "This is just a receipt to say we have the guns. We will be taking it away with us", they are either scammers or think I am stupid. My next action was to read the "receipt". For your enlightenment, I attach a copy below with personal information removed. I didn't sign it! I inherited one of those guns from my grandfather, a superintendent with Liverpool Police.

After that there followed a whole series of malpractices. In response to my remonstrations, I was given another "receipt" which stated "Received from the Chief Constable..." The poor stupid police officer could not understand that this was not a proper receipt either (and I did try to explain!) as I had received nothing from the police, so I left it there! When I did get my guns back over a year later, it took four trips to the police station because they'd lost the bolts and ammunition!

Then I waited ten months before I was told what I was meant to have done wrong, I am not allowed to know who complained because that would infringe his human rights, etc., etc. I took my complaints to the Police Investigations and Reviews Commissioner and three out of four were upheld. (The national average is 1%). And so it goes on.

You think I would willingly welcome these people onto my land? "Cheat me once, shame on you. Cheat me twice, shame on ME!"

Philip Watkins said:

In much of the country that could also mean hare coursing or poachers about.

Click to expand...

True, but I've been here for 33 years. There is no poaching and there are no hares.

I find it strange that the police are so quick to investigate what should be obvious to them but won't investigate planning fraud.

It was my reporting the latter that led to my guns being seized. And I've a pretty good idea who complained!

Little brown envelopes and funny handshakes?