Ruger243, charming to see that eloquence is not dead in Essex. Regrettably your ability to finish reading a sentence leaves something to be desired! Would you not infer that in commenting upon a statement made by “a shooting colleague” that I may in fact shoot?

You are, of course, incorrect in the statement that the Police cannot, “Demand” that we call them prior to shooting. (Please note, to avoid further riposte the term we.) The Police can, “Demand” whatever they choose to demand, just as you or I may.

The point you are striving to reach is that there is no enforceable legislation that requires us to contact the Police prior to striding forth whilst armed! A demand is (noun) a clear and firm request.

EXCEPT, if the chief constable of your local constabulary were to enter this as a condition upon your firearms certificate, whereby failure to do so would result in a firearms offence (of the relevant section) being committed.

A wonderful illustration of this point would be for you to find the legislation that requires you to secure your firearms in a cabinet! I will save you the effort old chum, for there is no such legislation! The requirement is simply that firearms be “Stored securely to prevent unauthorised people using or taking them”

Hurrah, shall we hold a small gathering and commit our trusty steel bastions to a lonely grave? Probably not, because even if you were clinically stupid enough to attempt this approach your application would, with one exception (prizes for guessing) undoubtedly be rejected by the enquiry officer!

Stand fast though stout fellow, a man with your prodigious grasp of the Queens English would certainly appeal a decision that cannot be founded upon current legislation would he not? Almost certainly I hear you cry, and I should win!

You shall, as such a rejection would be unlawful! Be warned however that the good chief constable of Essex would simply issue you with your certificate (hence avoiding any nastiness in court) and impose an individual condition upon your certificate that you may only store the relevant weapons in a Police approved cabinet!

Peelers : 1
Ruger243 : 0

Enough hilarity though and on to the crux of my post. Like it or not we ALL answer to the Police. I agree with you completely that we have suffered at the hands of the legislature AND that we should be heard with one clear, concise voice as we defend our sport.

However, for a simple courtesy to the local plod how much hassle can you save yourself? I am not aware of the current procedures in England, but I suspect that in your 5 decades (some of us research before condemning) of wildfowling you will have been reported to the Bobbies at some point. In my locale this report, when coupled with a concern of wrongdoing, will trigger the dispatch of an armed response unit.

Personally, the prospect of a pre dawn encounter with a part time firearms cop carries enough reason to lift the phone prior to departure.

If we are to promote a better understanding of our sport/hobby/livelihood in the public domain we need plod to be on side. Better relationships will bring about a better public profile with a reduction in the number of calls to ban anything that may or may not be a firearm. This in turn reduces the column inches dedicated to bashing the law abiding majority and may help drive out the bad sorts amongst us.

To which end, Yes, we could all refuse to inform plod, but what does it achieve? On a purely selfish note, were I ever to be involved in an accident whilst in the field, I should be quite glad of their company!

And so dear Ruger243, to put this epic to bed, I shall clear up the outstanding points from your post.

1. I do own a gun, several in fact.
2. I am anti many things. Labour governments, cold breezes up your kilt, warm lager and cheap whisky to name a few!
3. Your reference to the diminutive Austrian is interesting. Was he not guilty of brazenly charging over the greater numbered good of the world with little regard for others opinion? That sounds like, “absolute crap” to me!