Question for police re: offensive weapon & using phone
Discussion
Someone recently got chased by some idiots in a black D-reg Sierra, wielding a 9" knife. This happened on A5 near Milton Keynes, FYI.
His 'crime'? Not being able to pull over to left hand lane to allow them to pass (left lane was blocked with traffic)
Anyway, he didn't want to phone 999 from his mobile as it's not legal to dial numbers while at the wheel.
Two questions...
1. Is it acceptable to make a 999 call in these circumstances, using a mobile phone (without a hands free kit) ?
2. I suggested he might make a solution using chilli, cayenne pepper and water and carry it in an old Armor-all pump spray bottle 'just in case' he happens upon these nutters during the future. It might disable them long enough to do a runner. Would carrying the pump spray be considered an offensive weapon?
Thanks, TJ
His 'crime'? Not being able to pull over to left hand lane to allow them to pass (left lane was blocked with traffic)
Anyway, he didn't want to phone 999 from his mobile as it's not legal to dial numbers while at the wheel.
Two questions...
1. Is it acceptable to make a 999 call in these circumstances, using a mobile phone (without a hands free kit) ?
2. I suggested he might make a solution using chilli, cayenne pepper and water and carry it in an old Armor-all pump spray bottle 'just in case' he happens upon these nutters during the future. It might disable them long enough to do a runner. Would carrying the pump spray be considered an offensive weapon?
Thanks, TJ
It's a toss-up really, isn't it?
I'd hope to never attract the attention of the BiB for my driving/riding, but I'd be lying if I said that I never exceed the speed limit in any circumstance.
So, assuming that I do exceed the limit do I want to be caught by you or a camera?
Now if it's you and the only thing wrong with my driving is the number and it's not too big I could end up with an acid lecture ringing in my ears as I'm sent on my way. I'd imagine that would stay with me for a while and would probably influence my driving for a significant period of time. However, the BiB could just say "speed kills" a lot and give me a FP.
On the other hand, a camera-issued NIP would send me scurrying to PePiPoo and would either lead to me getting off entirely
, or getting points and a fine but feeling that there was nothing wrong with my driving at all and I was just unlucky to get caught, along with the hundreds of thousands of other motorists caught by the same cameras while doing the same thing I was doing.
On balance, I choose BiB. If my driving is worthy of attention I should be told what's wrong with it at the time to give me at least the chance of seeing the error of my ways. A NIP a couple of weeks later will never do that.
I'd hope to never attract the attention of the BiB for my driving/riding, but I'd be lying if I said that I never exceed the speed limit in any circumstance.
So, assuming that I do exceed the limit do I want to be caught by you or a camera?
Now if it's you and the only thing wrong with my driving is the number and it's not too big I could end up with an acid lecture ringing in my ears as I'm sent on my way. I'd imagine that would stay with me for a while and would probably influence my driving for a significant period of time. However, the BiB could just say "speed kills" a lot and give me a FP.
On the other hand, a camera-issued NIP would send me scurrying to PePiPoo and would either lead to me getting off entirely
, or getting points and a fine but feeling that there was nothing wrong with my driving at all and I was just unlucky to get caught, along with the hundreds of thousands of other motorists caught by the same cameras while doing the same thing I was doing. On balance, I choose BiB. If my driving is worthy of attention I should be told what's wrong with it at the time to give me at least the chance of seeing the error of my ways. A NIP a couple of weeks later will never do that.
Texas john.
Surely there are other items that can be carried which may make effect weapons, but are less obvious for example a long maglite, large wrench, wheel nut breaker bar, large torque wrench. All of these I'm sure could legitimatley be carried in any car tool box in case of need without raising any need for concern. keeping it in the footwell of the passenger side may be harder to explain.
All though I could be corrected.
Surely there are other items that can be carried which may make effect weapons, but are less obvious for example a long maglite, large wrench, wheel nut breaker bar, large torque wrench. All of these I'm sure could legitimatley be carried in any car tool box in case of need without raising any need for concern. keeping it in the footwell of the passenger side may be harder to explain.
All though I could be corrected.
texasjohn said:
2. I suggested he might make a solution using chilli, cayenne pepper and water
The active ingredient of chillis (capsaicin) is not soluble in water, so you might want to add a drop of detergent or use a different solvent. And cayenne pepper is made from chillis, so there's probably no point in using both.
By adapting an article to cause injury, the person doing so changes it from its inanimate description/object into an offensive weapon.
Anything that squirts a noxious substance or liquid falls within the definition under the fireams act! ( Cue for the wags amongst you to turn this into something lavatorial
)
Firearms offences attract serious penalties. That would include squirting liquid from a bottle into someones face or using purpose built equipment for delivering pepper or CS spray!
Be careful about lumping someone with your wheel brace, maglite or anything else hard and long! At the point you adapt it by picking it up to defend yourself or to cause someone to feel they will be assaulted or make contact with the object and the third party, the offence of offensive weapon is complete! If you strike and injure them, then there may be other offences to consider as well.
Of course, there is always the defence under Section 3 Criminal Law Act 1967 that you can rely on to help defend your actions if you felt that you were in immediate danger of assault but they would have to be proportionate to the circumstances!
Adapting a washing up bottle by filling it with ammonia is the offence complete whether you use it or not. Having it with you will do nicely for that offence.
A wheel brace is a wheel brace until you pick it up intending to hit someone with it. At that point you adapt it into an offensive weapon!
>> Edited by mg6b on Wednesday 26th April 12:14
Anything that squirts a noxious substance or liquid falls within the definition under the fireams act! ( Cue for the wags amongst you to turn this into something lavatorial
) Firearms offences attract serious penalties. That would include squirting liquid from a bottle into someones face or using purpose built equipment for delivering pepper or CS spray!
Be careful about lumping someone with your wheel brace, maglite or anything else hard and long! At the point you adapt it by picking it up to defend yourself or to cause someone to feel they will be assaulted or make contact with the object and the third party, the offence of offensive weapon is complete! If you strike and injure them, then there may be other offences to consider as well.
Of course, there is always the defence under Section 3 Criminal Law Act 1967 that you can rely on to help defend your actions if you felt that you were in immediate danger of assault but they would have to be proportionate to the circumstances!
Adapting a washing up bottle by filling it with ammonia is the offence complete whether you use it or not. Having it with you will do nicely for that offence.
A wheel brace is a wheel brace until you pick it up intending to hit someone with it. At that point you adapt it into an offensive weapon!
>> Edited by mg6b on Wednesday 26th April 12:14
In regard to the call to 999. A call to the emergency service is a defence to using the mobile phone, however before you all think i will use that excuse the next time I am stopped it would have to be proved. I am sure that if there was a police vehicle nearby that saw you using the phone he would also see the idiot threatning you as well. I am also sure the idiots would have not reacted in the way they did if a police vehicle had been nearby.
mg6b said:
By adapting an article to cause injury, the person doing so changes it from its inanimate description/object into an offensive weapon.
Anything that squirts a noxious substance or liquid falls within the definition under the fireams act! ( Cue for the wags amongst you to turn this into something lavatorial
Firearms offences attract serious penalties. That would include squirting liquid from a bottle into someones face or using purpose built equipment for delivering pepper or CS spray!
Be careful about lumping someone with your wheel brace, maglite or anything else hard and long! At the point you adapt it by picking it up to defend yourself or to cause someone to feel they will be assaulted or make contact with the object and the third party, the offence of offensive weapon is complete! If you strike and injure them, then there may be other offences to consider as well.
Of course, there is always the defence under Section 3 Criminal Law Act 1967 that you can rely on to help defend your actions if you felt that you were in immediate danger of assault but they would have to be proportionate to the circumstances!
Adapting a washing up bottle by filling it with ammonia is the offence complete whether you use it or not. Having it with you will do nicely for that offence.
A wheel brace is a wheel brace until you pick it up intending to hit someone with it. At that point you adapt it into an offensive weapon!
>> Edited by mg6b on Wednesday 26th April 12:14
MG6B.
We are taught in our Ju-jitsu self defence that in defending ourselves we can use equal force depending on other circumstances (such as the age and or size of the attacker). We have been told that if a person physically attacks you with a knife then you can justifiably use an equal and potentially lethal force in defence from that attack.
If for example I were to use a maglite as a defence against a knife attack surely this a no brainer. The knife is usefull for only one thing (cutting stuff be it a person a bag a rope whatever) where, as as you state the maglite is torch. Could it not be argued therefore that the level of force you used in defence of yourself by using the torch a non leathal weapon was lower than that with which the law would allow anyway?
In the eye for an eye stakes a maglite does not to me equal a knife?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff