Young man in UK sentenced to 8.5 years for making crude gun, being "danger to society" - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Traditional 'common sense' values and duty to the state.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15273917
I guess those on the Left do not see any problem at all with this; but as a Conservative Libertarian, this totally sickens me.
What that young man did should be seen as normal (or at least within the realm of acceptable behavior, even if potentially concerning/worrying). The judge should be removed from his position, or at least be subject to disciplinary action. The sentence was very excessive, in my opinion. The most he should have been sentenced to is 18 months, maybe less.

This took place in the U.K. (England) which can be quite strict and harsh when it comes to weapons.
It seems this young man's only "real" crime (from my perspective) was making a homemade single-shot gun. But there were several other, what some would consider worrying and aggravating factors.

He built a crude gun out of an aluminium tube in his garden shed.

Police found an encrypted USB drive with digital information about how to build a shotgun and plastic explosives. (The digital publication also contained a guide about how to carry out arson, which was probably just part of the regular "Anarchist Cookbook" publication, popular with many teen males)
Because of this he was convicted the criminal charges of "possession of articles useful for terrorism" and "disseminating terrorist material".

Those laws were probably not clearly meant or intended to be used this way, but the courts have applied that interpretation of those vague laws.

see related thread: "UK court criminalizes information about making weapons", posted in Law & Justice section, May 12, 2023
viewtopic.php?f=51&t=183603

On one occasion he accidentally caused a fireball in his family's kitchen while making gunpowder, evidenced by comments he made on the internet.

Police say the young man was keeping bags of chemicals in a fridge in his bedroom that could be used to make explosives.

He made stupid comments online such as "People will get sick of Black Lives Matter and that is when violence will flare. I am going to make and sell weapons."

The encrypted files were found in electronic folders that were named "Boogaloo", which the prosecution argued was significant because the word refers to "race war" in far-right circles.

He downloaded a video of the Christchurch mosque shootings in New Zealand (where a white perpetrator murdered a large number of Muslims). He had commented "Shame it doesn't have the music."

When arrested in June 2022 at his grandfather's home, the 20-year-old college student told police: "I'm not a terrorist, OK? I have an interest in chemicals and military memorabilia, that's all."

The 20-year-old young man has been ordered to be detained in a young offender institution for eight and a half years.
In addition to that, he was ordered to serve a 12-month "extended licence period" (this is like parole after release from prison, where he will be subject to supervision and restrictions). (The law allows such an "extended licence period" to be added on if the offender is guilty of a "terrorism offence" or if the court believes they are "a significant risk to the public of committing further specified offences")

When passing the sentence, Judge Melbourne Inman the defendant: "The jury heard you were a member of extreme rightwing groups holding extreme racist ideas."
"It's an aggravating factor that you were in contact with a number of extremists and the material was a horrific recording of multiple murders."

Was he punished for his views and political beliefs? That could be wrong and very unfair if it is so.

It seems the U.K. views individual rights very differently than in the U.S.
While it could be very concerning, in the U.S. an individual would be seen as having the right to say what they want, associate and communicate with who they want, and keep a video of a famous violent murder crime.
However, in this case it appears that the judge held all that against him and drastically increased his punishment for it.

The young man's name is Vaughn Dolphin, from Walsall in the West Midlands. He was sentenced in Birmingham crown court.
In my view it's not so clear that he actually committed any real crime, other than what might be considered a gun violation, having a gun without first receiving approval for it.
The other criminal charges appear to be a questionable stretch of the interpretation of the law.

In the U.K. it appears it is widespread to view those who have weapons as a "dangerous threat".

source:
Far-right extremist Vaughn Dolphin is to be sent young offender institution, The Guardian, Daniel Boffey, May 11, 2023
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... nstitution
#15273984
Sorry to burst your bubble, but making a firearm illegally, in the UK, is a criminal endeavor. The police finding evidence of a terrorist manifesto(Anarchist's Cookbook) sure didn't help his case. His affiliations didn't help him, either. The finding explosive materials also made it appear that he was a terrorist. I don't see how this is unfair, as the evidence shows that he was a danger to people around him.

Few people in UK ever serve out their full sentence, anyways. He'll probably only serve 4 years.
#15273991
@Puffer Fish

He was a foolish young man with a death wish.

If you google 'pressure testing a water pipe', you will find that most are rated at less than 1,000 psi.

A shotgun shell produces around 8,000 psi of pressure.

He should think himself lucky they locked him up before he could fire the thing.


:lol:
#15273993
ingliz wrote:@Puffer Fish

He was a foolish young man with a death wish.

If you google 'pressure testing a water pipe', you will find that most are rated at less than 1,000 psi.

A shotgun shell produces around 8,000 psi of pressure.

He should think himself lucky they locked him up before he could fire the thing.


:lol:

And the Anarchist's Cookbook is notorious for giving people faulty 'recipes'. He would have got a bad case of indigestion for sure. He's lucky they caught him when they did.
#15273994
@Godstud

"typically operating at pressures of 14,000 psi, or less, for 12 gauge shells"

High and low-pressure 12-gauge 2¾" loads...

The maximum average pressure (MAP) permitted by SAAMI for 12-gauge 2¾" service loads is currently 11,500 psi. CIP permits slightly less at 10,730 psi.

Target loads usually come in around 8-9,000 psi.

High pressure is anything within about 2,000 psi. less than the upper limit of the MAP standards.

There are specialist factory 12 gauge shells as low as 4300 psi., but you would have to know what you were looking for to find them.
Last edited by ingliz on 13 May 2023 18:25, edited 1 time in total.
#15274013
A "crude gun" AKA a piece of shit gun. He should leave the gun making to the professionals who actually know about design and weapon creation. A lot of young men are clueless about creating anything, that goes for liberals or libertarians or conservatives.

It is punishable to be a "danger to society". If he shot that gun and killed anybody or hurt them, he would be held responsible for that. Not everyone is aware that their actions affect other people.
#15274017
Godstud wrote:Right @ingliz

I've edited the reply you are referring to for clarity. @Puffer Fish might have thought your 'or less' meant the weapon was safe to shoot with a low-pressure load. I thought it best to show him that it was not, that low pressure is a relative term when you are talking about guns.
#15274102
MistyTiger wrote:It is punishable to be a "danger to society". If he shot that gun and killed anybody or hurt them, he would be held responsible for that. Not everyone is aware that their actions affect other people.

What type of logic is that?

You say "If he did it", but he did not.

Perhaps in your mind you imagine that the only purpose of a gun is to murder innocent people or commit crimes?
#15274151
Puffer Fish wrote:in his garden shed

Men and their sheds...

A blow-forward Fosbury Nagant automatic shotgun which is also a land mine.




Trivia:

After years of beavering away in his shed with balsa and clay models, the American tinkerer made only 3 examples of his auto-shotgun from more suitable materials.

That didn't stop him from starting his own company, registering them as machine guns, and offering 2 to be tested by the Army.

In the trials, it is said the US Army fired 50,000 rounds without incident.

That didn't stop them from rejecting it.
#15274180
Puffer Fish wrote:What type of logic is that?

You say "If he did it", but he did not.

Perhaps in your mind you imagine that the only purpose of a gun is to murder innocent people or commit crimes?


Logic is based on conditional statements. If you took a formal logic course, you would know this. Yes, I took a Logic course like that before. The entire course was dependent on our ability to recognize conditional statements. Programming also relies on conditional statements.

It looks suspicious when anyone creates a "crude gun" and they're not a weapon's creator. Maybe you wouldn't mind hanging out with a person like that, but people have been hurt by "freak accidents" and such. And actually, some kids play around with guns and if the gun goes off...well should we pretend it didn't happen? If we see something weird, should be ignore it and think that nothing will happen? Accidents happen. What is so wrong with wanting to prevent accidents? Life is priceless. Accidents are expensive and messy.

Guns are not toys. A responsible parent would not want their child to handle a gun and get hurt or hurt anyone. That young man is someone's child and family member. I'm sure his family would not want him to be hurt or hurt anyone.
#15274247
MistyTiger wrote:... but people have been hurt by "freak accidents" and such.

This seems like a weak argument. Usually the person making it, or the person using it is the one who gets hurt.

I'm not seeing a reason why we should turn the person into a criminal when they are the same person who risks getting hurt.

Are you arguing it "should be made illegal for the individual's own good"? Because if so, I think it also would follow that the prison sentence should be lower.
(Or at least this specific logical reason does not justify lengthy prison sentence or permanently taking that person's rights away)

This seems to me to be more like an excuse you are using, to help justify the rest of your argument.


MistyTiger wrote:And actually, some kids play around with guns and if the gun goes off...well should we pretend it didn't happen?

Now you seem to be trying to mix together small kids with younger adults.

I presume you're trying to argue we can't trust a 20 year old with a gun, they're not old enough, they might accidentally shoot someone??


I knew this forum was pretty Left-leaning, but never did I imagine I would see an opinion like that.
In my humble opinion this totally epitomises the "nanny-state" mentality, which I must suppose is so prevalent in Britain & Europe.
#15274264
Puffer Fish wrote:England ... a 20-year-old with a [shot]gun

Applying for a shotgun certificate in England isn't as complicated as you might think. There is only one form to be completed. If you fill it out correctly and no red flags pop up, a police officer will visit your home to check if your gun safe is bolted to the wall. When he asks why you wish to own a shotgun, all you need say is you wish to take part in shooting sports.

If the police officer is satisfied that your gun safe has been installed correctly and you don't say anything stupid, the certificate will be granted.

are made illegal

Guns have not been made illegal in the UK. You just have to prove that you are a proper person to possess a firearm - not mad or bad - and have a reason to own one.

It is not unlawful to manufacture or deal in firearms either as long as you register and are licensed.

Guns are not banned in the UK.


:)
#15274347
Puffer Fish wrote:This seems like a weak argument. Usually the person making it, or the person using it is the one who gets hurt.

I'm not seeing a reason why we should turn the person into a criminal when they are the same person who risks getting hurt.

Are you arguing it "should be made illegal for the individual's own good"? Because if so, I think it also would follow that the prison sentence should be lower.


The sentence is relatively light. A serious criminal would get 20 years or more. It could be argued that 8.5 years is excessive but that is what the judge and jury decided based on all the evidence they were provided. I was not present at the trial so I cannot possibly understand how they came up with that number. I do not fully understand how many strikes were against him at the trial so that is also a factor for the number of years he got in his sentence.



Now you seem to be trying to mix together small kids with younger adults.

I presume you're trying to argue we can't trust a 20 year old with a gun, they're not old enough, they might accidentally shoot someone??


Accidents can happen. And did he even have a safety installed on this gun? Some guns do not come equipped with a safety. How do we know that this young man is expert in weaponry and would never accidentally fire the gun or point it at any random person "on accident"? I have a friend who teaches gun safety classes. He has seen some dumb stuff on the range. My friend understands guns and owns a small collection of his own, and would never show off a "crude gun" in public.

I knew this forum was pretty Left-leaning, but never did I imagine I would see an opinion like that.
In my humble opinion this totally epitomises the "nanny-state" mentality, which I must suppose is so prevalent in Britain & Europe.


So you think a "crude gun" could never be dangerous? Any crude gun could cause problems to the person who fires it actually. How do we know if the crude gun was actually inspected and classified as safe for public use? We do not know that.
#15274376
We have 2nd Amendment rights, even if our government flouts them. It is important to note that the US 2nd Amendment doesn't grant the right to bear arms, it just calls to attention the preexisting right to bear to arms that all Protestant English men possessed.
#15274426
Puffer Fish wrote:Of course it's a lot less suspicious when everyone around you already has guns and guns are legal.

Would you not agree?

It only becomes "suspicious" AFTER they are made illegal.


By calling the gun crude, the article paints the man as suspicious. Most people prefer professionally made guns which have been tested and pass inspection. A homemade gun might not pass inspection.
Israel-Palestinian War 2023

@Rancid anyone who applauds and approves genocid[…]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't this be als[…]

@FiveofSwords " chimpanzee " Havin[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQ4bO6xWJ4k Ther[…]