Man arrested for turning in a found firearm

[ink face]

about 4 months old, wasn't too sure where to put this so fuck it, crossfire it is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Man Arrested, Faces 5 Years In Jail For Reporting Firearm To Police

Posted in: Worthy Local/World News

By

Nov 17, 2009 - 10:32:44 AMPrinter friendly page

RSS News Feed

Share |

A former soldier has become the latest victim of the predatory UK police state after he was arrested and convicted by a jury for handing in a shotgun to his local police station after discovering it in his garden. The man faces 5 years in jail due to draconian gun control laws that dictate members of the public cannot even touch a gun without being charged with "possession of a firearm".

"Paul Clarke, 27, was found guilty of possessing a firearm at Guildford Crown Court on Tuesday – after finding the gun and handing it personally to police officers on March 20 this year. The jury took 20 minutes to make its conviction, and Mr Clarke now faces a minimum of five year's imprisonment for handing in the weapon," reports Surrey Today.

In a statement read out in court, Mr Clarke said: "I didn't think for one moment I would be arrested."

"I thought it was my duty to hand it in and get it off the streets."

Clarke discovered that the gun had been discarded in a bin liner at the bottom of his garden, which backs on to public fields, and called Chief Superintendent Adrian Harper to let him know he would be visiting the police station.

When Clarke removed the gun from the bin liner and placed it on the table facing towards the wall, he was instantly arrested for possession of a firearm.

Despite the fact that Surrey Police issued a leaflet encouraging people to "report found firearms," Clarke was told by the prosecuting attorney that his honest intentions were irrelevant and that possession of a firearm was a "strict liability" charge.

"Just by having the gun in his possession he was guilty of the charge, and has no defence in law against it, he added."

Clarke now faces 5 years in jail for attempting to perform a law-abiding action by turning in the gun to police.

This is just the latest example of how the UK police state has been malevolently manufactured to oppress the innocent in a predatory fashion. The British justice system is deliberately structured in such a way that it vampirically feeds on law-abiding members of the middle class while the real criminals are coddled and pardoned.

Like most cities in the UK, in my town the more affluent areas are full of cops running speed cameras attempting to suck off the fat hog that is the British taxpayer. However, in the worst slum areas which routinely top crime league tables, police are nowhere to be seen, and will refuse to even visit some areas at all.

 

http://funreviews.net/publish/WorthyWorldNews/Man_Arrested_Faces_5_Years_In_Jail_For_Reporting_Firearm_To_Police.php

 

 

 

i see several things wrong with this, i'm most concerned about the u.s. trying to pass laws that would

one day be similar to the uk's.

[twonpoo]

disgusting.

 

should be publicized broader to embarrass the government into making the change. I mean christ he's a ex soldier for chirst sake, you think he doesn't know how to handle a weapon?

[ink face]

yeah that was a big reason i thought this was so heinous, i hate when laws get so extreme that they

become a witch hunt more than being there for the actual needs of the general public. this borders on a human rights violation imo.

 

 

edit* i think what i'm trying to say is, is there no point at which the nature of the law can take precedent to the letter of the law?

[freakeenyc]

fucking outrageous....this really makes me mad...

[twonpoo]

what's ironic is that if he was in the military and put the gun down and went awol, he'd get locked up too!

[Prime Chaos]

JESUS.. I thought cops in my town were bad.. Fuck the UK, London smells bad anyway and all the people there are ugly as fuck.

[viperface]

I bet the real reason why he wasn't excused like he should have, was the need to statistically improve the merits of that particular department.

[ink face]

yeah but 5 fucking years? thats crazy, that bitch that falsely accused dude of rape is only going to

maybe do 3. 5 years for "doing the right thing" what the fuck? i guess it just goes to show, that's why

you never go to the police for ANYTHING.

 

also, where's angelofdeath been? i figured he'd have an opinion on this, and i have some questions about a

mossberg purchase i'm about to make. where you at son?

[ink face]

it would seem that there is not.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

I brought this up in a thread where gun control was brought up, around the time that it happened.

 

Pretty stupid all around.

[GucciCondom]

Psh, remind me to never go to the UK. Fucking christ...

[KD1]

see what we've got to put up with, you across the pond folk got it easy haha

[Mercer]

I don't know whats worse, the retarded law itself, or the eagerness by the Cops to misuse it to send a civilian to prison for 5 years.

Any cop thats actually there to protect the community would be like "I didn't see shit"

When dude gets out I hope he gets a movie like vendetta against the cops involved in this.

[tom_peters]

wow...fail :(

[El Mamerro]

Follow up:

 

 

Soldier given suspended sentence for handing shotgun to police 'should have been given award instead'

 

By Daily Mail Reporter

Last updated at 4:29 PM on 18th December 2009

 

 

 

A former soldier arrested after handing in a sawn-off shotgun was given a suspended sentence today - but said he should have received an award instead.

 

Paul Clarke, 27, spotted a black binliner in his back garden earlier this year and discovered it contained a 20 gauge double-barrelled gun.

 

When he took it to a police station four days later, he was shocked to be arrested for possessing the firearm.

 

He was found guilty of that offence by a jury last month, but claims his arrest was a 'stitch-up' by police.

 

Clarke said today that he failed to call 999 when he found the gun because he had suffered 'harassment' from Surrey Police over a relationship he was having with a female detective.

 

He told Reading Crown Court: 'I was sleeping with a detective from Reigate and I think another officer got a bit jealous and I'd had a bit of harassment since then.'

 

Clarke admitted he had been in trouble with police before, and added: 'I didn't want to call 999 and get trigger-happy police turning up on my doorstep.'

 

Instead, he contacted a police officer he knew personally and set up a meeting with him, in which he produced the bin liner containing the gun from his trouser pocket. He was arrested and taken to police cells where he was questioned.

 

Lionel Blackman, defending, said it was an 'exceptional case' and quoted Home Office guidance which says: 'No obstacle should be placed in the way of a person who wants to surrender firearms or ammunition to the police.'

 

However, because possession of a firearm is a strict liability offence, Clarke's intent in handing it in was deemed to be irrelevant.

 

Judge Christopher Critchlow told Clarke the minimum sentence for possessing a firearm is normally five years, but admitted it was a 'highly unusual' case.

 

Instead, he gave Clarke a 12-month sentence, suspended for one year, and put him under a one-night curfew from 8pm tonight until 7am tomorrow.

 

He told Clarke: 'I understand you were once a soldier, and you in particular ought to have appreciated the danger posed by such a weapon and should have asked the police to come and collect it right away.'

 

Speaking after the sentencing, Clarke said: 'It's pathetic how Surrey Police have ignored Home Office policy.

 

'The Crown Prosecution Service has betrayed the public interest, all over a personal grudge.

 

'I think I should get a good citizen's award. I'm the only victim here.'

 

The judge said he believed the case was unique.

 

He told the court: 'This is the only case, as far as I know, where a person has been charged with such an offence, having surrendered such a weapon at the police station.'

 

But he said that, despite the circumstances, sawn-off shotguns are used by 'serious violent criminals to commit very serious crimes'.

 

The judge added: 'It must be appreciated that it is vital that these weapons are taken out of circulation immediately they are found.

 

'Otherwise, there is a risk a serious offence might be committed using such a weapon.'

 

Clarke had stored the gun in a wooden chest at his home in Merstham, Redhill, Surrey, for safety after finding it in his garden, which backs on to a playing field, on March 16.

 

He said he thought the gun might be a replica, but also feared it could have been a murder weapon.

 

Clarke said he wanted to meet his contact, Chief Superintendent Adrian Harper, Divisional Commander for East Surrey, sooner, but the policeman was not available.

 

He said he did not want to contact any other officers, and admitted: 'I've had a few run-ins with the police before. I know how the armed unit acts.'

 

Clarke said he did not want to throw away the weapon, so handing it in was his only course of action.

 

He added: 'I was more concerned that I would be done for wasting police time than anything else. It never even crossed my mind that I would be arrested.'

 

When he was indeed arrested, Clarke said he was told the worst he could expect was a caution, which he protested he did not want as he had done 'the right thing'.

 

The judge said there was no evidence suggesting that Clarke came to have the gun in his possession by any other means, but told him: 'Your account seems somewhat implausible but I am not prepared to find, bearing the burden and standard of proof and that I must be sure upon such matters, that it was other than as you have maintained.'

 

Clarke, whose supporters in court included UK Independence Party MEP Nigel Farage, said: 'I hadn't done anything wrong. I wish I had thrown it in the lake, but unfortunately I didn't.'

 

Mr Blackman said his client's actions were 'laudable' and that he should be receiving a reward, not punishment.

 

He said: 'If there is any culpability on his part, it is his failure to act immediately and getting it into the safe custody of police.

 

'The reality is that many citizens of this country have reasons not to trust all policemen all the time, and this defendant has explained that he has reasons not to trust all policemen all the time.'

 

Clarke was previously convicted of handling stolen goods in 2001, of possessing a stun-gun in 2002 and of affray in 2008.

 

Speaking outside court, Mr Blackman said: 'As a matter of urgency, the Home Office should issue clear public guidelines on what to do when firearms are found.

 

'The public money spent on this trial could have been better spent publicising an amnesty for those who surrender firearms.

 

'Parliament should rethink the strict liability for possession of a firearm and the mandatory minimum sentence of five years.'

 

Mr Farage hailed the sentencing as an 'outbreak of common sense' and said he was delighted by the outcome.

 

He added: 'However, I still intend to write to every MP in this Parliament, and the next if necessary, to talk about the concept of strict liability.

 

'There is still a big question mark in people's minds over what they should do if they find a shotgun in their gardens.

 

'If you've been in trouble with the police, you're going to think twice.'

 

 

 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1236976/Soldier-given-suspended-sentence-handing-shotgun-police-given-award-instead.html

[ink face]

really though the stupidity of this is mind blowing.

[CACashRefund]

In the UK since firearms are mostly outlawed, criminals just turned to stabbing people instead.

 

Their knife crime statistics are crazy.

[.hopeless.]

Re: england sucks dick america fuck yeah

 

fuck england.all motherfucking day.sorry decy and all the other uk cats but your country is fucking ridiculous.

[abcs]

it would be hard to drop laws like this on Americans.

Not only is the right to bear arms protected by the constitution

many tens of millions of Americans own firearms. Plenty of

them possess small arsenals. The most i could see the government

doing with any measure of success would be placing imposing

taxes on ammunition. The gun lobbyists are pretty well funded and

in the pockets of some highly positioned and tremendously influential

Beltway politicians. Every time some legislation pops up the NRA gets

on the phone and starts fundraising. Money collected lands in the

coffers of the congressmen, senators, and representatives who ultimately

pass bills into law. While Obama fully endorses gun control and is

fully entitled to veto some shit i suspect that he is savy enough to know

better.

[liquorsick.]

thats fucking horrible..

the system is all fucked up.

[angelofdeath]

disgusting.

 

should be publicized broader to embarrass the government into making the change. I mean christ he's a ex soldier for chirst sake, you think he doesn't know how to handle a weapon?

 

this would make sense... but......

in the US for example the govt is very scared of ex military. hell they are scared of current military. they dont even allow them to be armed on military bases.

they even have issued reports about vets being possible anti government threats.

[angelofdeath]

it would be hard to drop laws like this on Americans.

Not only is the right to bear arms protected by the constitution

many tens of millions of Americans own firearms. Plenty of

them possess small arsenals. The most i could see the government

doing with any measure of success would be placing imposing

taxes on ammunition. The gun lobbyists are pretty well funded and

in the pockets of some highly positioned and tremendously influential

Beltway politicians. Every time some legislation pops up the NRA gets

on the phone and starts fundraising. Money collected lands in the

coffers of the congressmen, senators, and representatives who ultimately

pass bills into law. While Obama fully endorses gun control and is

fully entitled to veto some shit i suspect that he is savy enough to know

better.

 

i dont think full fledged gun confiscation would be successful in the US, although i dont doubt it will be tried at some point. its to the point now, a lot of the population is straight up forbidden the right to own a gun. all it will take is a 'national emergency' of some kind or a response to a mass killing to really clamp down on guns. this is usually the pretext every where.

 

i wouldnt trust the NRA though... they supported the brady bill and reportedly authored various parts of it according to larry pratt of GOA. the NRA also supported the gun control act of 1968 and supports various other gun CONTROL initiatives.

 

surprisingly ammo has gotten EASIER to obtain than previously. in the 80's you had to provide a copy of your ID to be kept on file with an ammo order. now a clerk needs to just verify your age... no records to be kept. but i do not doubt an ammo tax will at least be attempted in the future.

 

This UK story is absolutely nuts. ex military dudes finds an 'illegal' gun, turns it in, gets arrested. probably thousands of $$$$$ later... gets a light sentence. even if you do get off on a charge like this, you are still bankrupted paying for your defense.

[Zig]

but i found this interesting from the other day

 

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/mar/03/nation/la-na-court-guns3-2010mar03

[DirtyWhiteBoyX]

i agree with angelofdeath, i dont see a 1OO% firearm confiscation as ever being successful in the US. There are way to many people who are to attached to their guns. The NRA, though it has some "odd" moves in its past has to many supporters who believe that guns are proof of freedom.

[.hopeless.]

This UK story is absolutely nuts. ex military dudes finds an 'illegal' gun, turns it in, gets arrested. probably thousands of $$$$$ later... gets a light sentence. even if you do get off on a charge like this, you are still bankrupted paying for your defense.

 

 

this is a major flaw in our justice system,the money you end up shelling out in the end is ridiculous.especially if your poor.if your broke there is no way you can afford a lawyer so most of us are stuck with court appointed attorneys,and if you ever had to deal with these guys you know that 9 out of 10 of them don't give a fuck about you or your case.most are either burnouts or straight up new to the game...plus they have huge case loads so something like 80% of their cases get pleaded out so that sucks.especially when you have a case and know your innocent but there is no real reason to go forward with it because your lawyer just doesn't give a fuck about you enough to really,REALLY give you a good defense.its sad really.sometimes i wonder if this is a way to get at the minorities in this country seeing as most of them are poor anyways.im probably just paranoid but idk when you go to court the amount of black kids there is retarded.most arent bad kids either,got caught fighting or smoking weed or some dumb shit..whatever tho.

 

 

i know this has nothing to do with what we are discussing but having been in this situation at least 5 times i can tell you its ridiculous.there is no way most of us can get a fair trial unless we got money to burn,and in the state of the world now that number of people is becoming less and less.these lawyers get paid way too fucking much imo.

 

 

fuck...endrant

[redeyedanimal]

JESUS.. I thought cops in my town were bad.. Fuck the UK, London smells bad anyway and all the people there are ugly as fuck.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[angelofdeath]

hopeless:

no. that is a serious topic in my opinion.

 

this showcases the exact reason why i continually get into arguments with people who defend cops/LE that arrest first, ask questions later. the 'let the courts sort it out' types.

 

the way it is now police are more likely to just arrest you on either a bogus charge or a charge that is open ended or allows for super loose interpretation, than to actually do their job and arrest people that they have probable cause on to do so legally. then when they shoot some body for no reason they yell "I WANT MY GARRITY!!!' and are essentially immune from criminal prosecution themselves.

 

if you defend this you are just defending making it easier for unionized law enforcement to break the law, concoct suspicion (RAS) or PC, and put people in jail for no good reason just to 'make the LE's job easier'

 

im not against lawyers making money and the market determining how much they are worth. obviously if you want a good lawyer that might save your life, you would be willing to pay. but what really gets me is the people who are arrested on some nonsense like this guy in the UK, or the guy in the US that was sent to prison because his legal semi auto malfunctioned that he loaned to a friend and he was charged with possession of a machine gun. (google around for the olofson case if anyone is interested) and then are bankrupted on defense against this absurdity

[sneak]

Re: england sucks dick america fuck yeah

 

fuck england.all motherfucking day.sorry decy and all the other uk cats but your country is fucking ridiculous.

 

 

admittedly, this is a very fucked up story but im sure the actual details are a little different to those reported in the papers.

 

im personally pretty happy we have quite major anti-gun laws, i think its common sense to limit the number of people who can get their hands on a gun...

[.hopeless.]

hahahaha.i have no problem with the english people themselves.i just think your government is kinda crazy.but i see what your getting at haha.

[LUGR]

this would make sense... but......

in the US for example the govt is very scared of ex military. hell they are scared of current military. they dont even allow them to be armed on military bases.

they even have issued reports about vets being possible anti government threats.