# What would you do?



## Incubuss (Dec 19, 2006)

I met a guy in a local pub who is a big herp keeper, and ended up going to see his collection. He doesn't have a dwal, but he has got a few dwa's. He has 2 gaboons and an albino wdb. He also has a nice collection of dwa inverts. They are in top condition, and his protocals and saftey issues are that of a long time dwa keeper. I asked why he doesn't have a dwal, and his reason was that it is too much messing about, and that his landlord won't allow it. He said he's been keeping dwas for over 10 years, and by the look of his animals and how they are kept, I believe him.

Would you report him? Due to his level of safety, and the obviously thriving collection I think I will just stay out of it, but still, there is part of me thats saying 'but what if?' And tbh, I kind of feel cheated that someone in the same area as me is keeping these without all the hassle, and the expense of a dwal. I know that seems like jelousy, but I'm sure you will understand at what I'm gettting at.


----------



## Jb1432 (Apr 19, 2008)

Personally i wouldn't report him, if he's been keeping for 10 years and is very professional in what he does, he obviously knows alot about what he's keeping. Now if he was an irresponsible keeper and a danger to himself and others i wouldn't hesitate in calling the police or reporting him. Sounds like he knows what he's on with though. It's understandable you feel hard done by, it's his choice in not having a license and it's not all hassle free, he's got the risk of getting caught without a license and other possible problems.


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

I wouldnt report him.


----------



## stacy (May 9, 2009)

i would,nt if he is like you said he sounds like a decent bloke who knows his stuff


----------



## Owzy (Jan 19, 2009)

I would keep my nose out.. I wouldn't want to wake up to a Gabby at the end of my bed for letting his secret become public on a forum : victory:


----------



## Crownan (Jan 6, 2007)

Thats a very, very tough call.

As you say he has been doing it to very high professional standards for 10+ years so knows his shit. BUT is it not advocating anyone to just go and keep DWA listed animals without the liscence?

What about public liability insurance etc?


----------



## Owzy (Jan 19, 2009)

Crownan said:


> Thats a very, very tough call.
> 
> As you say he has been doing it to very high professional standards for 10+ years so knows his shit. BUT is it not advocating anyone to just go and keep DWA listed animals without the liscence?
> 
> What about public liability insurance etc?


Thats the other thing, if someone was to get biten it could be bad times for all involved.

I'll add I was faced with kind of a similar situation, however the snake was only a Berus. I just thought to myself... there are no kids in the house... it looks very secure... i'll leave you to it. I didn't want to handle it even though I do when they are in the wild, sure you can see why.


----------



## hysteria_uk (Nov 28, 2007)

you could end up bringing trouble for yourself.


----------



## Incubuss (Dec 19, 2006)

I have decided to keep my mouth shut about this. I met up with the guy this afternoon, and tbh, he sounds more knowlagable, and a hell of a lot safer then some dwal holders I've met. He said that due to his lack of licence and insurance, he is extra careful when dealing with them, and NEVER removes them from thier vivs when anyone besides him and his partner is in the house.

It also turns out that his partner (he's gay) was brought up in Africa, and they often went out snake collecting with his brothers when he was a young lad.

I know that no saying anything may one day come back to bite me in the arse (no pun intended, lol), but I feel safe enough knowing their protocalls are spot on, and in some cases; over the top.


----------



## kettykev (May 15, 2009)

The other item of interest in this thread is that obviously somebody has sold them to him knowing he did not have a DWAL


----------



## Incubuss (Dec 19, 2006)

kettykev said:


> The other item of interest in this thread is that obviously somebody has sold them to him knowing he did not have a DWAL


I asked him about this, and he said you can get almost any dwa herp without even mentioning a dwal. He said that he could go and get himself anything from a black mamba, to a king cobra within a few weeks. He also told me that he got an adult wdb from a reptile shop a year ago, and was planning to breed it with the albino he already has. The snake died just 3 days later while it was in quarentine, and he got one of the gaboons instead after recieving a refund. I have seem people selling them privately, but a shop? Thats just crazy! 

One odd thing considering his lack of licence, is that he said that he has never, and will never sell any dwa to anyone who doesn't show proof of a valid dwal.


----------



## Mujician (Mar 7, 2007)

Incubuss said:


> I asked him about this, and he said you can get almost any dwa herp without even mentioning a dwal. He said that he could go and get himself anything from a black mamba, to a king cobra within a few weeks. He also told me that he got an adult wdb from a reptile shop a year ago, and was planning to breed it with the albino he already has. The snake died just 3 days later while it was in quarentine, and he got one of the gaboons instead after recieving a refund. I have seem people selling them privately, but a shop? Thats just crazy!
> 
> *One odd thing considering his lack of licence, is that he said that he has never, and will never sell any dwa to anyone who doesn't show proof of a valid dwal*.


 
Thats hypocritical. Whats to stop someone else who hasnt got a licence to be keeping them better than he is? If he does get bitten or stung by something then he'll be screwed as it'll come out to the authorities wil it not? As responsible as he may be in keeping them I think it is wholey irresponsible.


----------



## shadowfrog (Nov 16, 2008)

I would just try and edge him into getting one. : victory:


----------



## Mujician (Mar 7, 2007)

shadowfrog said:


> I would just try and edge him into getting one. : victory:


 Problem with that is he would have to clear out all the animals to somewhere whilst he was being inspected! It sounds like he has quite a few. I dont know if the council would be happy about letting him keep some many to start with. I have no experience of DWA, so dont know about that.


----------



## knighty (Feb 27, 2008)

tough call but id report him. if one of his animals escaped and killed some one how would you feel knowing you could of prevented it? he obviously has no insurance either.

arses like this are what cause problems for honest keepers. give me the address ill do it.


----------



## Lamprophis (Jun 12, 2008)

well if someone were generous enough to let me see their collection... I certainly wouldn't repay them by grassing them up. At the end of the day a license is only a piece of paper, of course all keepers of DWA should have one, but as long as emergency precautions are in place then there is no harm done.


----------



## hysteria_uk (Nov 28, 2007)

knighty said:


> tough call but id report him. if one of his animals escaped and killed some one how would you feel knowing you could of prevented it? he obviously has no insurance either.
> 
> arses like this are what cause problems for honest keepers. give me the address ill do it.


Jobsworth!


----------



## Athravan (Dec 28, 2006)

That's a really tough one.

There are probably hundreds of people in the UK operating in the reptile world without the correct license, be that PSL or DWA. Many traders are pure profit makers and legally should have a PSL, but can get away without the inspection needs or council fees and likewise there are many many keepers of DWA in the UK without a license.

It is just how the system works I suppose - there are always people willing to cut corners, always people who take advantage and will profit from taking risks. But those are his risks he takes, and he could potentially go to jail if someone gets killed by his reptile and he has knowingly not provided all the correct and legal safeguards such as DWA & insurance. 

It is bad for the hobby if people get caught, just like all the dodgy traders make genuine pet shops and genuine breeders look bad, someone cutting corners with a DWA could potentially cause a massive amount of problems for everyone in the hobby. I know several shops who will sell to people without a DWA and again that's the risk they take to make cash, they could lose their license & their business. I'm not going to report them though, I mind my own business and let people make their own decisions.

At the end of the day I'd give them the best advice I could and unless I actually thought the animals or a persons life was directly in danger, I'd keep my nose out of it - especially if you say this person is being responsible anyway. If it was a 17 year old waving a cobra around in a room packed full of drunken teenagers then that would be a whole different story. If it's someone who's been doing it safely for 10 years and is obviously experienced and careful then the risk is minimal.

It is frustrating when someone cuts corners and you have to do things the right way which may take longer/cost more money but that's their choice and they have to live with whatever problems may come of it.


----------



## shortyshazz (Mar 21, 2009)

I would say leave the guy alone at the end of the day its his choice. Sticking your nose in places will cause trouble he was happy to show you his DWAs and you agreed.


----------



## slippery42 (Mar 23, 2008)

Plenty of morality police on this forum I see!


----------



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

Athravan said:


> That's a really tough one.
> 
> There are probably hundreds of people in the UK operating in the reptile world without the correct license, be that PSL or DWA. Many traders are pure profit makers and legally should have a PSL, but can get away without the inspection needs or council fees and likewise there are many many keepers of DWA in the UK without a license.
> 
> ...


Excellent response.


----------



## Chriseybear (Jun 6, 2008)

Tough one.
I dont think I'd Report him though.

Might have already been mentioned - in the event of anything, his Public Liability insurance wont even cover it, In the small print doesnt it declare everything void if a valid license is not held? (assuming he just has it through his house insurance/seperate company - or not at all)


----------



## Meko (Apr 29, 2007)

Incubuss said:


> One odd thing considering his lack of licence, is that he said that he has never, and will never sell any dwa to anyone who doesn't show proof of a valid dwal.


that could be down to the fact that if he sells to an irresponsible owner, the authorities find out and ask where they got it from he'd get royally screwed; no DWAL and selling to somebody without a DWAL


----------



## reptismail (Nov 15, 2008)

i wouldnt report them, if tey are expeirienced etc, i know a guy who has 30 years exp with adders and catches them breeds thema nd releases young withought a license.


----------



## metallica fish (May 5, 2009)

glad you arnt reporting him... but if you werent happy with his keeping id say report straight away!!!


----------



## Incubuss (Dec 19, 2006)

Mujician said:


> Thats hypocritical. Whats to stop someone else who hasnt got a licence to be keeping them better than he is? If he does get bitten or stung by something then he'll be screwed as it'll come out to the authorities wil it not? As responsible as he may be in keeping them I think it is wholey irresponsible.


I see your point, but I don't really agree. Yes, he has no licence, but not selling to people who don't have one isn't being a hypocrite; it's being sensible. I really doubt that his reason is so he doesn't caught, it is most prob for safety reasons. I doubt he thinks he is a better keeper than anyone else without a licence, it's prob due to the fact that he knows what his experience is, but doesn't know theirs. Same for everyone really, we all know our own skills and experience, but we don't know what everyone elses are. In fact, I know a few people with a valid dwal or psl, and would never sell anything to them, let alone someone without a licence.



shadowfrog said:


> I would just try and edge him into getting one. : victory:


I'm on it, but tbh, it seems like I'm wasting my time



Mujician said:


> Problem with that is he would have to clear out all the animals to somewhere whilst he was being inspected! It sounds like he has quite a few. I dont know if the council would be happy about letting him keep some many to start with. I have no experience of DWA, so dont know about that.


I doubt he would need to clear them out for an inspection, he could just tub them up and put them in another room while being inspected. I've never had someone search my wardrobes, the loft, garage ect during an inspection, so I doubt they would do that when visiting him, or anyone else.

The council wouldn't really care how many he is keeping. Some people on here have HUGE dwa collections, a few of which I have personally seen.


----------



## AZUK (Jul 9, 2007)

whilst I do not agree with unlicensed people keeping DWA with out the appropriate license, until a more fair and just system is in place I would not report him. I would however recommend that he was a bit more careful who he admits this to in the future as he may well not be as lucky next time.
As far a risk to the general public is concerned then only you can answer this one having witnessed his set ups and protocol.
Plenty of people are killed by unlicensed Drivers, drunks and druggies at the wheel. I think it would be much more effective to keep arse holes like this off the streets than victimized someone who obviously knows and cares about what he is doing.


----------



## knighty (Feb 27, 2008)

hysteria_uk said:


> Jobsworth!


no just trying to keep the hobbys name in tact. its bad enough as it is without all you lot pussying about over illegal keeping of dangerous animals. 

some one get some balls and do the right thing. the guy that is keeping them illegaly does not deserve them. i just hope its him that gets tagged and not someone else.

you all preach on here about propper keeping and lisencing then as soon as something comes up you all bottle it and say well his set ups are good and he has precations. I dont know bout generous i would say stupid, he has illegal animals and is showing them of to someone he has just met in a pub, nob is the word that comes to mind.

A thread is started about what should be done and then its o i cant do that, looks like you already made ya mind up. 

some one needs to report this or pass the thread on to the people that will.


----------



## slippery42 (Mar 23, 2008)

knighty said:


> some one needs to report this or pass the thread on to the people that will.


Are you really that naive that you do not think the authorities do not monitor sites such as this one?

Having spoken to my DWA licensing officer only two weeks ago she confirmed that they regularly use info gained from this site and others!

Same as HM inspector of taxes will be looking as those regularly selling significant numbers of herps and not declaring a second income!

Its not big brother just fact.

If you post it then someone reads it and it might not be who you want to read it!


----------



## knighty (Feb 27, 2008)

slippery42 said:


> Are you really that naive that you do not think the authorities do not monitor sites such as this one?


yes I am aware sites are monitored but i am not willing to wait around waiting for them to come across it whilst some nob has a variety of deadly animals in his control.

report him or this thread will be passed on


----------



## MJ75 (Feb 5, 2009)

Incubuss said:


> I met a guy in a local pub who is a big herp keeper, and ended up going to see his collection. He doesn't have a dwal, but he has got a few dwa's. He has 2 gaboons and an albino wdb. He also has a nice collection of dwa inverts. They are in top condition, and his protocals and saftey issues are that of a long time dwa keeper. I asked why he doesn't have a dwal, and his reason was that it is too much messing about, and that his landlord won't allow it. He said he's been keeping dwas for over 10 years, and by the look of his animals and how they are kept, I believe him.
> 
> Would you report him? Due to his level of safety, and the obviously thriving collection I think I will just stay out of it, but still, there is part of me thats saying 'but what if?' And tbh, I kind of feel cheated that someone in the same area as me is keeping these without all the hassle, and the expense of a dwal. I know that seems like jelousy, but I'm sure you will understand at what I'm gettting at.


Is it absolutely out of the question that he gets a DWA? Your life would be a lot easier if you convinced him to get one after all.


----------



## slippery42 (Mar 23, 2008)

Putting the morality aside I think the main issue here is that as far as I am aware if you rent a property there is little chance of getting a DWAL.

Certainly if you are in Social Housing (formally Council Housing) you have no chance.

I doubt that the person with the DWA species has had his or her true identity compromised so those of you you feel the correct thing to do is to take action are unlikely to cause him real problems.

In addition it is likely to drive him/her deeper underground!


----------



## Meko (Apr 29, 2007)

knighty said:


> report him or this thread will be passed on


to who? i could just imagine it.


Dear Sir / Madam.

I was recently browsing an internet forum and came across the following thread **insert URL**. 
I believe it may be in the interest of safety to inform you that somebody somewhere; possibly around the Hull area, has a selection of venomous reptiles and does not have a DWAL.
I do not know the persons name or exact whereabouts although the thread clearly states that he drinks in pubs. I hope this information will lead to his arrest and prosecution.

If i ever read about people who drink in pubs and have dangerous animals without the correct licensing i will of course, pointlessly, reported the faceless and nameless person to assist you in being able to do absolutely nothing about it.

Regards

Brown Noser.


----------



## shep1979 (Feb 24, 2008)

Meko said:


> to who? i could just imagine it.
> 
> 
> Dear Sir / Madam.
> ...


 
love it :lol2:


----------



## slippery42 (Mar 23, 2008)

Meko said:


> to who? i could just imagine it.
> 
> 
> Dear Sir / Madam.
> ...


That really made me smile!

Thanks for that post.......priceless!


----------



## shep1979 (Feb 24, 2008)

only meko could come up with that :lol2:


----------



## slippery42 (Mar 23, 2008)

shep1979 said:


> only meko could come up with that :lol2:


Cant wait for the reply


----------



## Incubuss (Dec 19, 2006)

knighty said:


> yes I am aware sites are monitored but i am not willing to wait around waiting for them to come across it whilst some nob has a variety of deadly animals in his control.
> 
> *report him or this thread will be passed on*


Who do you think you are giving me orders to report him, 'or else'? Are you so narcissistic that you really believe a threat like that will get this situation sorted out? I am not going to report him, and it seems like most others on here would do the same. You make your calls and pass on this thread to who ever you like. I doubt anything will even go futher than the person reading it having a giggle about someone acting as if they're some kind of animal police superhero. Even thinking that you passing this thread on will do any good is no less than an obsurd perception of superiority. 

I reported a guy down the street for driving his car while drunk every single weekend, and usually at the same time. Nothing has been done about that, even though he has been reported loads of times, and has even filmed getting in his car by another neighbour. So, do you really think that the police or the council will go knocking on every single door looking for dwa reps, when they won't even pop down the street at 8pm one weekend?


----------



## slippery42 (Mar 23, 2008)

Incubuss said:


> Who do you think you are giving me orders to report him, 'or else'? Are you so narcissistic that you really believe a threat like that will get this situation sorted out? I am not going to report him, and it seems like most others on here would do the same. You make your calls and pass on this thread to who ever you like. I doubt anything will even go futher than the person reading it having a giggle about someone acting as if they're some kind of animal police superhero. Even thinking that you passing this thread on will do any good is no less than an obsurd perception of superiority.
> 
> I reported a guy down the street for driving his car while drunk every single weekend, and usually at the same time. Nothing has been done about that, even though he has been reported loads of times, and has even filmed getting in his car by another neighbour. So, do you really think that the police or the council will go knocking on every single door looking for dwa reps, when they won't even pop down the street at 8pm one weekend?


Well said and I see that Knighty has failed to reply!


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

knighty said:


> report him or this thread will be passed on


:lol2::lol2:


----------



## Owzy (Jan 19, 2009)

knighty said:


> yes I am aware sites are monitored but i am not willing to wait around waiting for them to come across it whilst some nob has a variety of deadly animals in his control.
> 
> report him or this thread will be passed on


Sad man


----------



## Incubuss (Dec 19, 2006)

Owzy said:


> Sad man


I know this has nothing to do with me, and i know nothing about the goings on, but I find that offensive. 

Either delete it, or this thread will be passed on.



:whip::whistling2::whip::whistling2:


----------



## knighty (Feb 27, 2008)

Knighty has not failed to reply, he just has a life out side the realms of the forum.

you can call me sad or what ever you like i realy do not care and have no time to sit here swapping insults with people i do not even know.

The thread being passed would not be a waste of time as if an investigation was to go under way the thread starter would be contacted and he would be obliged to pass on the information. As for the Report him or this will be passed on, it was not a threat, i am simply pointing out what is going to happen if the "concerned" thread starter did not do what deep down we all know the right thing to do is, or do you all really condone illegal keeping of deadly snakes? 

Meko just to make you happy i will even use your letter as a base, but of course i will have to edit it to show concern rather than just childish hummour.

I just have one question, if you had no thoughts of reporting him why start this thread?


----------



## Incubuss (Dec 19, 2006)

knighty said:


> Knighty has not failed to reply, he just has a life out side the realms of the forum.
> 
> you can call me sad or what ever you like i realy do not care and have no time to sit here swapping insults with people i do not even know.
> 
> ...


 
You obviously have very little knowledge of English law. I am the thread starter, and in no way would I be legally obligated to suply *any* information to the police or the council. Everyone has the right to remain silent, the right to refuse to give evidence, and the right to stay out of other peoples business. The only evidence of this guy even existing is this thread, and even then, I never stated the guys name, the pub I met him in, the town he lives in, what he looks like or any other vital information. Tracking someone down with few to no details is impossible. Imagine how this guy will be discribed when looking for him. 

POLICE STATEMENT: we are looking for a man between the ages of 16 and 100, he is between 3 and 7 foot tall with either bright red hair or totally bald. He has either a beard and a tash, just a tash, or no facial hair. he will be dressed in anything from just a pair of high heels, stockings and fake chest hair, all the way to a 10,000 quid suit. He is known to like aniamls. we believe that he has been seen in a pub at least once in his life time, and may have even had some form of beverage in his hand. This man is considered to be highly dangerous, and when confronting him, the officer must be armed with a snake hook and a dangerous wild animals licence.

Also, who is to say that I never left my laptop in the garden while popping in house for a sanwhich, and forgot about it. While I was making myself something to eat, a strange guy sneeked into my garden and started this thread. He then decided to take my laptop home and carry on posting. The odd part of this is that he then got bored and decided to return my laptop a few days later. it's odd, because I never even noticed it was gone.


----------



## cornsnakejay (Jan 17, 2009)

knighty said:


> I just have one question, if you had no thoughts of reporting him why start this thread?


it's hard to tell what someone is really saying or how they are saying it on a forum, but the thread is titled 'what would you do?' not 'what should i do?'


----------



## knighty (Feb 27, 2008)

Incubuss said:


> You obviously have very little knowledge of English law. I am the thread starter, and in no way would I be legally obligated to suply *any* information to the police or the council. Everyone has the right to remain silent, the right to refuse to give evidence, and the right to stay out of other peoples business.


well my knowledge of the law is obviously better than yours. What you are saying there would be called perverting the course of justice, "Knowingly holding information that WOULD lead to a prosicution"


----------



## Incubuss (Dec 19, 2006)

knighty said:


> well my knowledge of the law is obviously better than yours. What you are saying there would be called perverting the course of justice, "Knowingly holding information that WOULD lead to a prosicution"


Nope, it's not classed that way. If it was, then all the people picked up on drug possesion would HAVE to tell them who their dealer was, and the dealer would HAVE to tell them who their importer was. thus making the country drug free (to an extent) in very little time.

The laws on holding info back is very complicated, and has many loopholes and gray areas.


----------



## slippery42 (Mar 23, 2008)

knighty said:


> Knighty has not failed to reply, he just has a life out side the realms of the forum.


It would seem you have no life to many others, ever thought about just getting on with yours and leaving others to their own?


----------



## knighty (Feb 27, 2008)

slippery42 said:


> It would seem you have no life to many others, ever thought about just getting on with yours and leaving others to their own?



well if thats how i come accross to you thats your opinion. I do have a very good life, its just my care fo the hobby to carry on and not wanting DWAs unlicensed keeps bringing me back.

Ever thought about taking your own advice?


----------



## knighty (Feb 27, 2008)

Incubuss said:


> Nope, it's not classed that way. If it was, then all the people picked up on drug possesion would HAVE to tell them who their dealer was, and the dealer would HAVE to tell them who their importer was. thus making the country drug free (to an extent) in very little time.
> 
> The laws on holding info back is very complicated, and has many loopholes and gray areas.


When people are picked up on Drug possesion they are prosicuted and fined for the crime they have commited. Your crime would be holding back information.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Incubuss said:


> I met a guy in a local pub who is a big herp keeper, and ended up going to see his collection. He doesn't have a dwal, but he has got a few dwa's. He has 2 gaboons and an albino wdb. He also has a nice collection of dwa inverts. They are in top condition, and his protocals and saftey issues are that of a long time dwa keeper. I asked why he doesn't have a dwal, and his reason was that it is too much messing about, and that his landlord won't allow it. He said he's been keeping dwas for over 10 years, and by the look of his animals and how they are kept, I believe him.
> 
> Would you report him? Due to his level of safety, and the obviously thriving collection I think I will just stay out of it, but still, there is part of me thats saying 'but what if?' And tbh, I kind of feel cheated that someone in the same area as me is keeping these without all the hassle, and the expense of a dwal. I know that seems like jelousy, but I'm sure you will understand at what I'm gettting at.


 

no... leave him be...


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

knighty said:


> well my knowledge of the law is obviously better than yours. What you are saying there would be called perverting the course of justice, "Knowingly holding information that WOULD lead to a prosicution"


No it wouldn't, and thats not how you spell prosecution.

Maybe in an ideal world then the police pull someone over catch them wil some drugs, these people tell them who they got it from (because they "have" to by law), the people they got it from tell who the bigger dealer was then the importer then the person that made it and bingo the world is a drug free better place, ahh the police can sit back and relax because they have solved a massive problem, the world is a safer place. Umm this isnt a frigging comic book, we are not is Gotham city now, it doesnt work like that.

I have been arrested many years back with a fair amount of cannibis on me, did they ask who I got it from? Yes, did I tell them? No, did I get prosecuted for withholding information? of course not. 

This guy isnt the only person in the UK keeping without a license, I dont condone it at all, and if it was me I wouldn't be letting random people I met in a pub come and look at them, in fact I wouldn't be mentioning it to anyone, there are people that do though, but in my opinion its very stupid, a guy has been charged recently with it, alot of people know of him in the venomous community and hes been banned from keeping DWA animals for 10 years, thats not something I along with the other keepers I know would ever want to happen.


----------



## knighty (Feb 27, 2008)

not really worried about spellings.

Its quiet boring how many times you want to use the same drugs example.

Im board of this now and wont return.

what needs to be done will be done.


----------



## Meko (Apr 29, 2007)

knighty said:


> well my knowledge of the law is obviously better than yours. What you are saying there would be called perverting the course of justice, "Knowingly holding information that WOULD lead to a prosicution"


but yours obviously isn't that great.
The police or whoever wouldn't log on, sign up and PM Incubus for the information. For them to do anything they'd have to sign up, contact T-Bo, ask for his IP address, obtain a warrant, contact the ISP, ask for the details of address where the IP address was issued and then pay Incubus a visit and then hope he can remember what this bloke looked like that he met once and remember where he lived... all in the hope of catching somebody without a license to keep dangerous animals..
Can't see them bothering to be honest.


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

knighty said:


> not really worried about spellings.
> 
> Its quiet boring how many times you want to use the same drugs example.
> 
> ...


Im not saying its good that hes keeping without a license, in fact its bad, but so is your grasp of things, the drugs offence gets brought up because its an obvious one that people understand, but the same thing goes for if a car is stolen and one of the people in the car gets caught, if they dont say who the other is and they cant be linked to it forensically, then thats the end of that, thats just how it works.

Im afraid you have a very naive grasp of how things work with regards to the law, you seem to think you dont for some reason, but you really do.

You could report Incubus and I can garantee you that nothing will happen about it, for one they could go to him, and ask and for all we know he could of made it up to see what reaction he got, and theres absolutely nothing that anyone police included could do to prove otherwise, its impossible.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

calling the cops for a snake?...

laughable.....!!


... but then... we must respect the LICENSE!...

... a permit for common animals... ridiculous!...

next you'll be telling me that possums are dangerous wildlife and you need a permit....!!! 

*HA!!!!:lol2:*


----------



## Incubuss (Dec 19, 2006)

knighty said:


> not really worried about spellings.
> 
> Its quiet boring how many times you want to use the same drugs example.
> 
> ...


You're only bored because you know very well that you are wrong about the police thing, and have been proven to lack any knowledge regarding the subject. This subject was mainly aimed at lDWAL holders, as it's the licence holders are the ones that are effected most by this. However, I have been happy to read any replies, and what others would do. Sending out threats, or what ever else you would like to call it when someone says "do this, or else" just pakes the pee. I really have no idea how you think a none licence holder will effect you. that only adds more evidence of you believing the world revolves around you.



HABU said:


> calling the cops for a snake?...
> 
> laughable.....!!
> 
> ...


Ha? Don't americans need a licence for a dog? 

:lol2: HA!!!!! :lol2:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Incubuss said:


> You're only bored because you know very well that you are wrong about the police thing, and have been proven to lack any knowledge regarding the subject. This subject was mainly aimed at lDWAL holders, as it's the licence holders are the ones that are effected most by this. However, I have been happy to read any replies, and what others would do. Sending out threats, or what ever else you would like to call it when someone says "do this, or else" just pakes the pee. I really have no idea how you think a none licence holder will effect you. that only adds more evidence of you believing the world revolves around you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
yes... you prove it has it's rabies shot and shell out a few bucks that's it... no test... just a way to make sure that dogs get their rabies shot...

... if your dog bites someone here they can quickly check it for it's shots... that's all...

... how many rabies cases are there in the U.K. each year?... you all must not need a license for dogs... just let them run amuck and spreading the rabies... eh?: victory::lol2:


a dog licence is merely a verification of a dog's innoculations... parvo... crap like that....


we got rabies here big time... ***** and opposums will carry it... and that's why englishmen get the rabies here..." here, kitty, kitty"... then they get bit...


... but i could be wrong...: victory:


----------



## Incubuss (Dec 19, 2006)

HABU said:


> yes... you prove it has it's rabies shot and shell out a few bucks that's it... no test... just a way to make sure that dogs get their rabies shot...
> 
> ... if your dog bites someone here they can quickly check it for it's shots... that's all...
> 
> ...


Ah, thats a pretty good idea then really. I may move to america, it sounds far better than here. You don't need a dwal, you can legally own a gun, and you can even use it if someone attacks you. Now how cool is that? I can see myself sat on a chair in my animal roon, looking at the rattlers and cobras while cleaning my gun. I turn to stroke my rabies free dog, and see a burgler. BANG! No burgler, and I get to go to the gun shop for more bullets. Now that is a place thatI want to live.

I, for some reason can't get the image out of my head of a copper writing a dog a ticket for jay walking, and not having his shots. and the dog is looking at the copper hoping he drops his dougnut. Now that would be funny to see:lol2:


----------



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

For the benefit of Knighty, the police do not enforce the DWA, it is enforced entirely by the Local Authority. Secondly, the offence of perverting the course of justice needs a) consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions to proceed, and b) is to do with lying under oath, or reporting offences which did not take place. Only the most seriouis cases are treated as perverting. And I don't think that in this case failing to report someone with unlicenced DWA falls in that category.
You may also like to know that prosecution for unlicenced DWAs is rare, most authorities prefer to get the owner to surrender the animal as it is cheaper and instantly resolves the problem, or get them to apply for a licence. 
Sorry for the long and slightly off topic reply, but there has been a fair amount of misinformation on this.


----------



## MJ75 (Feb 5, 2009)

Incubuss said:


> you can legally own a gun, and you can even use it if someone attacks you. Now how cool is that?


You can in the UK!!!!!


----------



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

MJ75 said:


> You can in the UK!!!!!


No, you can't. I think you will find there is a farmer from Norfolk who would also disagree!
In the UK, the test for whether or not you legally acted in self defence is whether or not the force was reasonable. This basically means that the Court (and yes you would have been arrested) must look at the force used compared to the threat offered and if a reasonable person would feel that blasting away at an intruder is reasonable. Unless they were armed and pointing a gun at you, this would be unlawful.
Added to which, you can only legally use a weapon in defense if it is immediately to hand.
Firearms licences require weapons to be securely locked, with ammunition separate, so not exactly to hand.


----------



## MJ75 (Feb 5, 2009)

ian14 said:


> No, you can't. I think you will find there is a farmer from Norfolk who would also disagree!
> In the UK, the test for whether or not you legally acted in self defence is whether or not the force was reasonable. This basically means that the Court (and yes you would have been arrested) must look at the force used compared to the threat offered and if a reasonable person would feel that blasting away at an intruder is reasonable. Unless they were armed and pointing a gun at you, this would be unlawful.
> Added to which, you can only legally use a weapon in defense if it is immediately to hand.
> Firearms licences require weapons to be securely locked, with ammunition separate, so not exactly to hand.


You can own a firearm in the UK. And I'm well aware of all the legal requirements for storing them thanks.

The farmer you refer to shot a man in the back as he was running away from him! This is not classed as self defence! And thus irrelevant to the discussion. He was jailed and rightly so. 

If a person was attempting to break into your house claiming they're going to kill you and you had to time to unlock your cabinet and ammunition drawer or cab, load up and shoot him after he'd gained entry in the belief that your life was in danger. This would not be illegal. There is no law stating you can only shoot to kill if having a firearm pointed at you as you suggest.


----------



## slippery42 (Mar 23, 2008)

If my family were under threat do you think I'd hesitate no I'd get my unlicensed venomous snakes to bite the F*cker!

:Na_Na_Na_Na::Na_Na_Na_Na:

Then deny it was mine!


----------



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

MJ75 said:


> You can own a firearm in the UK. And I'm well aware of all the legal requirements for storing them thanks.
> 
> The farmer you refer to shot a man in the back as he was running away from him! This is not classed as self defence! And thus irrelevant to the discussion. He was jailed and rightly so.
> 
> If a person was attempting to break into your house claiming they're going to kill you and you had to time to unlock your cabinet and ammunition drawer or cab, load up and shoot him after he'd gained entry in the belief that your life was in danger. This would not be illegal. There is no law stating you can only shoot to kill if having a firearm pointed at you as you suggest.


Sorry, wrong again. The law states that you may only use REASONABLE force to protect yourself or others. I think I have given a fairly clear and concise explanation of "reasonable". I am afraid that in the world of law and Courtrooms, reality and real life don't exist. If you had time to move from the threat, unlock the firearm cabinet, then unlock the ammunition box, load the weapon (and unless a shotgun then the firing mechanism ie bolt would also have to be retrieved and fitted), before going back to shoot then no Court in the UK will accept that this was an immediate threat to which you responded by grabbing the first thing to hand. A firearm is not readily to hand. I agree with the view that self defence laws are rubbish but they are what they are.


----------



## MJ75 (Feb 5, 2009)

ian14 said:


> Sorry, wrong again. The law states that you may only use REASONABLE force to protect yourself or others. I think I have given a fairly clear and concise explanation of "reasonable". I am afraid that in the world of law and Courtrooms, reality and real life don't exist. If you had time to move from the threat, unlock the firearm cabinet, then unlock the ammunition box, load the weapon (and unless a shotgun then the firing mechanism ie bolt would also have to be retrieved and fitted), before going back to shoot then no Court in the UK will accept that this was an immediate threat to which you responded by grabbing the first thing to hand. A firearm is not readily to hand. I agree with the view that self defence laws are rubbish but they are what they are.


I'm afraid it's you who are mistaken. I tend to belive (Amongst others that I can't be bothered to mention) the actions of the CPS and views of a judge rather than a random bloke of the forum, sorry....

Farmer who shot burglar backed by judge - Telegraph

I could have a shotgun or one of my rifles loaded and ready for use within a minute and they are obviously stored legally. I'd also attempt to call the police and advise of my "predicament" but thats not really relevant.


----------



## MJ75 (Feb 5, 2009)

Incidentally under UK law there is no legal requirement to have the bolt stored seperately. Although it's advisable (And common sense) you wouldn't neccesarily have to fit it.

Nor do you have to have shotgun cartridges stored securely. However, you're an idiot if you don't! 

As I don't have a sord and shield, baseball bat or even eye lash viper to hand in my home I could argue that the firearm was the first thing I could aquire to defend myself with as I believed my life was in danger.


----------



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

MJ75 said:


> Incidentally under UK law there is no legal requirement to have the bolt stored seperately. Although it's advisable (And common sense) you wouldn't neccesarily have to fit it.
> 
> Nor do you have to have shotgun cartridges stored securely. However, you're an idiot if you don't!
> 
> As I don't have a sord and shield, baseball bat or even eye lash viper to hand in my home I could argue that the firearm was the first thing I could aquire to defend myself with as I believed my life was in danger.


Again, you are wrong. In my job I am often asked to conduct firearms licence checks, and guess what?? One of the checks I am always asked to conduct, aside from comparing serial numbers on the stock to those on the licence, is that the weapons are secured with bolts separate and ammunition separate.
As for the judge having sympathy for the farmer, this did not change his conviction.
I have no idea what your background is, but I get the feeling that you don't have quite as much experience or knowledge as you try to claim. I hope you never find yourself in the unthinkeable situation of shooting a burglar, as I can assure you that at the very least you would have a guilty verdict for manslaughter.
Anyway, this has gone WAY of topic.


----------



## MJ75 (Feb 5, 2009)

ian14 said:


> Again, you are wrong. In my job I am often asked to conduct firearms licence checks, and guess what?? One of the checks I am always asked to conduct, aside from comparing serial numbers on the stock to those on the licence, is that the weapons are secured with bolts separate and ammunition separate.
> As for the judge having sympathy for the farmer, this did not change his conviction.
> I have no idea what your background is, but I get the feeling that you don't have quite as much experience or knowledge as you try to claim. I hope you never find yourself in the unthinkeable situation of shooting a burglar, as I can assure you that at the very least you would have a guilty verdict for manslaughter.
> Anyway, this has gone WAY of topic.


Ian it's you who are wrong. Find me information that states shotgun cartridges have to be locked seperately away from the shotgun as I stated. You need a shotgun certificate to purchase them, but if you're over 18 you can posses them quite legally locked up or otherwise without a shotgun certificate. It's only ammunition possessed under a fire arms certificate that must be stored securely away from the weapon they are to be used with. You are aware that firearms licensed ammunition and shotgun ammunition are treated differently in law are'nt you? There is no legal requirement for the bolt of a firearm to be stored seperately from the weapon, though it's common sense to ensure that it is!

I suggest you read this before you post more innacurate information on the forum. My points will be found to be true and your incorrect unless of course you believe the home office have got things wrong?

Firearms Law Guidance to the Police 2002 | Home Office

If you're a police officer, then this will not be the first time I've had to correct a copper on the legalities of firearms ownership. The other was a FLO believe it or not! Regular plod rarely have a clue.

The farmer you first reffered to I assume was Tony Martin. I assume this as you mention Norfolk the area he came from.

My link points to an entirely different case. Another farmer called Kenneth Faulkner who shot a man in self defence in the UK. The CPS did not bring a case against him. And the judge stated he was unhappy that they even considered prosecuting him in the first place! Therefore my original post which reads "You can in the UK" is correct. Your information has been innacurate throughout. 

If you're a FLO (Firearms liasion officer for those that don't know) I'll gladly point you to other instances of FLO's being misinformed and handing out poor advice about firearms law. So whatever your job, whatever your background you don't know the law. And you're completely misunderstanding or not even bothering to read my posts thoroughly!

And no I'm not certain to face a guilty verdict of manslaughter. He'd have to die first! After all Kenneth Faulkener shot a burglar and was not was he? Not that I will ever be in this position of course! I'll just scare them away with my milk snake hatchlings...... :2thumb:

Best
MJ

Apologies to the OP. This is the worst derailing of a thread I've ever seen. I just hate to see self styled gurus posting inacurate info!


----------



## Mynki (Mar 24, 2010)

ian14 said:


> Again, you are wrong. In my job I am often asked to conduct firearms licence checks, and guess what?? One of the checks I am always asked to conduct, aside from *comparing serial numbers on the stock* to those on the licence, is that the weapons are secured with bolts separate and ammunition separate.
> As for the judge having sympathy for the farmer, this did not change his conviction.
> I have no idea what your background is, but I get the feeling that you don't have quite as much experience or knowledge as you try to claim. I hope you never find yourself in the unthinkeable situation of shooting a burglar, as I can assure you that at the very least you would have a guilty verdict for manslaughter.
> Anyway, this has gone WAY of topic.


Since when has any gun manufactuer ever engraved a serial number onto a stock? Afterall you can easily remove and fit a new stock! Yep, you don't have a clue thats for sure!


----------



## Guy (Aug 31, 2009)

Mynki said:


> Since when has any gun manufactuer ever engraved a serial number onto a stock? Afterall you can easily remove and fit a new stock! Yep, you don't have a clue thats for sure!


Your wrong, I might be 22, I own a firearm licence since I was 16. But I am not irrepsonsible toward the firearm. Serial number is engraved on the metal and fitting a different stock is not quite easy. I have two same gun but they manufactured in bit different way so one gun look fit like glove then try change the stock and its look out of place. Its happened to me because I was cleaning both gun and disassembled them and assembled them turn out i got wrong stock fitted and change back and both fit like glove. Plus its engraved on the steel so its will be noticed if its been tampered with.


----------



## paulds (Mar 17, 2009)

Nothing like digging up the past


----------



## STReptiles (Feb 6, 2009)

You should report him he may be a "good" keeper" but it only takes one mistake and that guys one mistake could destroy the hobby for all those keepers that have worked very hard in some cases to obtain a DWAL. If he or his partner or even a member of public was to get bitten by a snake like the bitis or crotalus, the hobby would be under serious threat I think. Either that or the DWAL rules and guidlines would be hardened making it a nightmare for the legit keepers to obtain one.: victory:

My 2p.


----------



## Mynki (Mar 24, 2010)

Guy said:


> Your wrong, I might be 22, I own a firearm licence since I was 16. But I am not irrepsonsible toward the firearm. Serial number is engraved on the metal and fitting a different stock is not quite easy. I have two same gun but they manufactured in bit different way so one gun look fit like glove then try change the stock and its look out of place. Its happened to me because I was cleaning both gun and disassembled them and assembled them turn out i got wrong stock fitted and change back and both fit like glove. Plus its engraved on the steel so its will be noticed if its been tampered with.


You have a metal stock??? Post a picture...

Removing and refitting a stock is something many people do at some point. So why would anyone engrave the all important serial number on a component that can and sometimes is replaced? Are you sure you're not reffering to the barrel or receiver?


----------



## Guy (Aug 31, 2009)

Mynki said:


> You have a metal stock??? Post a picture...
> 
> Removing and refitting a stock is something many people do at some point. So why would anyone engrave the all important serial number on a component that can and sometimes is replaced? Are you sure you're not reffering to the barrel or receiver?


Oh shit I meant the serial number is engraved on the reciever not stock. My brain wasnt function properly this morning! also some serial number also will be written on the barrell but rare occassion. stock never engraved as its can be easily removed whilst not on the reciever or barrel. Now about the stock its cutted exactly what receiver shape is so its will be fit perfectly as other stock wont able to fit other reciever.

Sorry about confusion.


----------



## Webleybulldog455 (May 11, 2010)

paulds said:


> Nothing like digging up the past
> 
> image


*Legend* :2thumb:


----------



## Agkistrodon (Dec 12, 2008)

I like the idea that some people seem to have of the police tracking this guy down through FORENSICS POWERS OF THE INTERNET and kicking his door in in the middle of the night. "Armed police, get on the ground! Get on the ****ing ground! Where are the snakes!?" All I got when I got shopped was a bewildered council officer (who was a really nice guy actually) pop round at 2 in the afternoon and have a chat about what I was keeping what I should do with it. I wasn't even interviewed under caution.


----------

