You only seem to get fined about £80 if caught with one..

Whereas from the link

Stephen Day, 54, of Highfield, Retford. Possessed a weapon, namely a tazer. Community order made with rehabilitation activity requirement and electronic monitoring. Also ordered to pay £85 court costs and a victim surcharge of £85.

So he actually had to pay out £170, was tagged and had a community order. A long way from only being fined about £80…..

Why not spread your BS elsewhere……………..

Why not spread your BS elsewhere……………..

You seem to have keyboard anger issues.. Relax and take deep breaths.

He was fined £85.. court costs are not part of the fine.

Stephen Day, 54, of Highfield, Retford. Possessed a weapon, namely a tazer. Community order made with rehabilitation activity requirement and electronic monitoring. Also ordered to pay £85 court costs and a victim surcharge of £85.

so not actually an £85 fine then 🙄

[edit] there was no fine. The punishment was the tagging, rehabilitation activity.

Additionally, there were court costs and a victim surcharge – neither of which is a fine.

[edit2] so not lying, just misunderstanding the criminal justice system.

The court costs and victim surcharge aren’t the punishment/sentence. The tagging, community order and rehabilitation (a “weapons are bad mkay” course, presumably) are. He didn’t get a fine.

Edit: post above says exactly the same as me.

so not lying, just misunderstanding the criminal justice system.

It appears so.. not much of a punishment though for a firearms offence.. To most people, a tag is a badge of honour. Often see them flashed about with a big grin.

My error it seems was not taking into account the sensitivity of some on this site.

No your error was not writing what you now say you meant.

That was the first error anyway. 🙂

It appears so.. not much of a punishment though for a firearms offence

Does seem low that said it might be considered an honest mistake.
When I was at Uni at a place with high overseas student numbers they had regularly warnings at the beginning of year pointing out various things were a tad illegal in the UK and should be got rid off.

So he actually had to pay out £170, was tagged and had a community order. A long way from only being fined about £80…..

Why not spread your BS elsewhere……………..

POSTED 1 HOUR AGO #

Tbf you are just being pedantic now. The ops point still stands, it is a measly fine and punishment and far less than what was expected.

As for accusations of racism. I guess if you are looking for it at every opportunity then yes it could be construed as racist. If however like me and most normal folks you don’t, then it’s probably not.

maccruiskeen – Member

Whack-a-Pole

Reported for hate crime.

Ok,
Re-reading the firearms legislation / guidance:

Prohibited Weapons Defined by section 5 Firearms Act 1968 as Amended
It is an offence under section 5 to possess, purchase, acquire, manufacture, sell or transfer (without the authority of the Secretary of State) the weapons listed below. The weapons below are subject to the mandatory minimum sentence

Section 5(1)(a) any firearm which is so designed or adapted so that two or more missiles can be successively discharged without repeated pressure on the trigger, e.g. machine guns, burst fire weapons;
…. Loads of other weapons listed
….
Section 5(1A)(a) any firearm which is disguised as another object, e.g. pen guns, key fob guns and phone guns.

Note the disguised as another object.

In addition the following are also prohibited but are not subject to mandatory minimum sentences:

Section 5(1)(b) any weapon of whatever description designed or adapted for the discharge of any noxious liquid gas or other thing. Generally stun guns or electric shock devices, CS gas not usually cattle prods but depends on type.

So a plain old stun gun, that looks like a stun gun may not be subject to a minimum sentence, unless:

Note: Parliament has provided that disguised weapons fall within the provisions for a minimum sentence and so, an offence contrary to section 5(1A) should be charged rather than an offence contrary to section 5(1)(b) where a stun gun is disguised as another object and also meets the requirements of section 5(A1), (R v Brereton [2012]EWCA Crim 85) ;

I.e. a stun gun made to look like a mobile phone.

And the mandatory minimum sentence part:

Mandatory Minimum Sentence:
The mandatory minimum sentence is 5 years’ imprisonment for an offender aged 21 or over and 5 years’ detention in a young offender institute for those aged 18, 19 and 20 at the date of conviction. Offences that attract the minimum sentence are triable only on indictment (Section 288 Criminal Justice Act 2003, which also amends Schedule 6 to the Firearms Act 1968).

There is also guidance of exemptions from the minimum sentences on exceptional circumstances.

So, it looks like in the case of the OP, it may be the case that the stun gun device possessed was clearly marked as such … hence the less than minimum punishment.