The end of English shooting YouTube channel

[Dark Skies]

For me its the fact he is highlighting and using sub clause rules to allow him to handle firearms (the entertainment / film clauses). If you have had your FAC removed and can't get it back then why in gods name would you keep trying to circumvent this ruling?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYz7h_nl2wg

Seriously just accept the ban and and move on ffs!

Oh, I dunno, because he enjoys shooting and the legislation in place permits him to do so?
And apparently he can reapply for his FAC some time hence - so not a ban.

Some people just accept a situation and give up. Others find a way around a problem and carry on.
I admire that attribute in people - even if I don't always agree with everything they do or say.

[Tithras]

If we assume he is using:

http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/etis20.pdf

As his basis for doing his shooting then it is clearly designed around the film and TV production industry and not a youtube channel with 18000 subscribers!

While legally he may be able to get away with it at the moment it doesn't mean that as a responsible member of the shooting community he should be using what amounts to, in my opinion, a loop hole in the law to continue to shoot!

[kennyc]

If we assume he is using:

http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/etis20.pdf

As his basis for doing his shooting then it is clearly designed around the film and TV production industry and not a youtube channel with 18000 subscribers!

While legally he may be able to get away with it at the moment it doesn't mean that as a responsible member of the shooting community he should be what amounts to, in my opinion, a loop hole in the law to continue to shoot!

I'm no fan of his, but a youtube channel gets many times more hits than subscribers, and even an audience of 18000 would justify him being considered a film maker IMHO, I'll bet theres a lot of "professional" films that have less exposure to the public!

[Dark Skies]

[quote="kennyc[/quote]I'm no fan of his, but a youtube channel gets many times more hits than subscribers, and even an audience of 18000 would justify him being considered a film maker IMHO, I'll bet theres a lot of "professional" films that have less exposure to the public![/quote]

Agreed. I was surprised at just how much money some of these YouTubers can generate.
Some of these people have become millionaires with some canny content and the right commercial backing.

[kennyc]

[quote="kennyc

I'm no fan of his, but a youtube channel gets many times more hits than subscribers, and even an audience of 18000 would justify him being considered a film maker IMHO, I'll bet theres a lot of "professional" films that have less exposure to the public![/quote]

Agreed. I was surprised at just how much money some of these YouTubers can generate.
Some of these people have become millionaires with some canny content and the right commercial backing.[/quote] although not if it involves shooting apparently as a lot of the youtube content providers in the shooting world have been de-monetised by youtube in the last year or so

[Gh0st]

[quote="kennyc

I'm no fan of his, but a youtube channel gets many times more hits than subscribers, and even an audience of 18000 would justify him being considered a film maker IMHO, I'll bet theres a lot of "professional" films that have less exposure to the public!

Agreed. I was surprised at just how much money some of these YouTubers can generate.
Some of these people have become millionaires with some canny content and the right commercial backing.[/quote] although not if it involves shooting apparently as a lot of the youtube content providers in the shooting world have been de-monetised by youtube in the last year or so[/quote]

I think I’m right in saying his channel isn’t monetised for Ads?

[Pete]

If he's flagged up a legal loophole, someone will close it..............eventually.

Pete

[J4mes]

Perhaps because hes lawfully entitled to?

It's not like he wasnt involved in shooting entertainment before he lost his FAC, so hes just carrying on using another part of the law that allows him to.

Are we against using the law to our advantage? Or is it you dont want him using it to his advantage, because you dont like what he says or does?

[Dark Skies]

Perhaps because hes lawfully entitled to?

It's not like he wasn't involved in shooting entertainment before he lost his FAC, so he's just carrying on using another part of the law that allows him to.

Are we against using the law to our advantage? Or is it you don't want him using it to his advantage, because you don't like what he says or does?

Agreed. It really grinds my gears when fellow shooters refer to such legislation put in place for a specific exemption as a 'loophole'.
It's akin to saying 'we support ever more restrictive intrusion on our sport, please do so.'
It's no different from saying we BP revolver / pistol shooters are exploiting a 'loophole' when we really aren't. We're shooting perfectly legally within the law.

A legal loophole is an ambiguity or inadequacy in a system by which unscrupulous people can circumvent or avoid the spirit of the law. Usually arising from poorly drafted or a knee-jerk rapid piece of ill-considered legislation. Or because of new technology unavailable at the time of assent.
That's not the case here. The legislation was specifically intended for the purpose of films, documentaries, and such.

[Sim G]

He can’t be using the exemption under s12 to shoot as that exemption does not cover ammunition. Other exemptions do, however.

The bit that really grinds me about Callum is he is unbelievably amateurish and just “wrong” with technical aspects. Couple this with his smug, almost slimey presentation, his whole “act” is unpalatable. He really does seem that he believes is is the “Gun Rights Messiah”. Yeah, Yardley did as well....

And having seen how this schiester operates, using specialist exemptions to give him a platform whilst throwing other exemptions, such as s11, under the bus.... well honestly is this the bloke who you want to appear on “This Morning” couch or in front of a Home Affairs Committee to literally represent you? That’s exactly what will happen if this baffoon is given legs....