Apparently a Profile being referred to as Quarrelsome Paranoia is being looked into by police firearms licencing departments as an indication of suitability for firearm certificate holders.

I heard this through a contact in one of the northern constabularies who is using data collected from internet sites to vet FAC/SGC holders. Not sure how they get through the tag name/identity issues , but it ominious.

I only found the below posted link as an indication of what they are looking for. Sounds like a cross between the internet and road rage


Quarrelsome Paranoia

We've known for some time that the sites are monitored but this is the first time I've heard that logs are being kept.

FB

Why do you need privacy if you have nothing to hide?

Lol!

quote:

Apparently a Profile being referred to as Quarrelsome Paranoia is being looked into by police firearms licencing departments as an indication of suitability for firearm certificate holders.

I heard this through a contact in one of the northern constabularies who is using data collected from internet sites to vet FAC/SGC holders. Not sure how they get through the tag name/identity issues , but it ominious.

You're a bit late for April Fools day but I'm sure some one will buy it.



This must be the 3rd or 4th time I've seen this posted under various guises on some forum.

It still makes me laugh that people actually think people are gullible enough to buy into it.

Its like that one that supposedly tells you how many points you've clocked up from the speed cameras.

FB,
you seem reliably informed,I had never heard of it until my daughter came home from Aberdeen Uni last week,she is a 3 year phycology student.
She informs me that it is not a new diagnosis but just a new term for for an old illness.
I did a google search and the term quarellsome paranoia certainly exists, I would however have to question wether the FLO's would have the need or access to such a programme.

Was your source reliable?

regards
griff

quote:

Was your source reliable?

Getting paid to read AR?? Sounds like a decent job!

Griff,

the conversation I had was based around the lack of firearms knowledge by many of the assesing officers in the Met as opposed to sme more rural areas. Bottom line is that there is an unofficial line that says that officers that shoot should not be FLO's as there is a feeling it may result in "easier" issuance of certs and I think it is fair to say that increasing firearms in circulation is not a priority for the police forces on the whole.

Then this came up as an area that is being looked into by one of the constabularies as a pilot.

I thought he was having me on too but a quick google turned up the link I've attached. Just thought it was relavent.

Considering that history of depression and other psychological disorders are already declarable on applications I don't see why something like this is any different.

I have no idea how they go about collecting info. It's a small world and most people know one another by reputation if nothing else, however, I can't see how they can use it as a reason if there is no medical diagnosis, so that means work records and the like.

Just posting what I was told.

FB

The problem with a lot of mental illness is that there is usually some "expert" willing to diagnose if you pay them enough. I've just recently witnessed this myself and watched with interest as a perfectly healthy person became "disabled" after paying someone £250 to diagnose. Perhaps the police are analyzing postings and reaching conclusions about the person from what is written? If that is the case then I'm willing to bet there will be some beardy bloke with sandals and a Geenpeace sticker on his bike working on the "research project" and justifying his conclusions with some dodgy statistics. He probably makes up stuff about man made global warming as part of his other research. Of course the fact that I believe this will immediately indicate to him that I'm suffering from the disease. I would also imagine that if I didn't believe it they I would be suffering from a "lack of concern for authority" and this would also make me unsuitable to hold a firearm.

The police would be utterly mad to base any decision upon a posting on the internet and, presumably, the statistical analysis of the language used in the post by some beardy nutter. Apart from anything else establishing who actually made the post is impossible unless you witness them doing it or they admit to doing it. While the police seem, currently, to believe that the internet offers a dependable chain of evidence those with some little knowledge of computer security can be absolutly sure that MAC addresses, IP addresses, email addresses and names on forums are all easily "forged" by the average teenage geek.

It is not healthy to snoop on other people in part because most of the discussion is idle chat and gossip with a very low information value for the crime fighter and also because once they know you are listening they will start making stuff up and your days will be filled chasing up misinformation. I would also ask - if you have to read other people's communications is it them, or you, who is paranoid? The beardy types may not be studying the people the police beileve they are studying.

If you have some time I will relate an amusing story which I know to be true: Some time ago in a university a systems administrator became somewhat irate over the behaviour of some students who had become extremely knowledgable about the operating system in use. They didn't do any harm, but in expanding their knowledge they did things he didn't approve of and he could never actually pin anyone down in relation to the minor things that took place, nor did he have the ability to stop them. The students involved concluded that it appeared that the systems admin person was reading their emails, they had pretty good evidence. When he was approached he denied that he was reading their emails and so they could only assume that he was telling the truth. Given that their emails were not being read there was absolutely no harm at all in begining the discussion of a fictitious (though based on a real and known problem) security bug and the intention to expliot it, this discussion took place via the email system. No harm could possibly come of such an amusing diversion. The town where our tale takes place had two universities and in the run up to a bank holiday weekend an email was sent stating that the teddy bear's picnic was going to the other university for the weekend. For reasons which were impossible to explain the computer admin staff at the other university went into a panic, based on info coming from the first university, closed down all their computer systems for the weekend and brought their staff in over the bank holiday to attempt to patch the security hole. There was no security hole and the people who had been exchanging the little made up story in email were all at home enjoying the holiday. Several people at the first university were summoned, upon their return, to see the systems admin person and were given a significant ear bashing as a result of telling lies in email, he even went so far as to suggest that it was policy that you should not tell lies in email and that you could be thrown out for it. He was, however, defenceless when it was pointed out that he wasn't, on his own word, reading the emails and everyone who was reading them knew it was just a made up story. What could the harm be in that?

I would suggest therefore that reading other people's communications and trying to make value judgements on that basis is the road to ruin and no good ever comes of it.

Behaviour that sits badly with firearms ownership doesn't have to be a recognised diagnosis.

Violent domestic disputes, drunk driving, involvement in heated disputes or being plain weird are enough to bar one from fire arms ownership (and rightly so)

The apparent anomonymity of the internet seems to have opened a window into the souls of people who might previously have been considered normal.

People regularly exhibit some very strange behaviours on internet hunting forums.

quote:

being plain weird are enough to bar one from fire arms ownership (and rightly so).

Have to disagree here, wierdness is a very common trait in some sections of the shooting community.

See discussions about 'anal tunneling' to get you started.

FB

I followed your link and read the psychiatric 'definitions'.

The description is so all encompassing of what anyone may feel at different times, or situations, as to be worthless for the intended purposes.

As an example, try this:

You are a lone female

You are waiting for a late evening or night bus

There are rowdy, drunken people milling around

You have varying levels of apprehension

The bus arrives

It is full of inner city night life weirdoes: drunks, druggies, the vagrant 'nutter' and a group of leering young men.

You are worried about your safety

Are you irrational, paranoid even?

or are your self preservation instincts going into turbo charged overdrive - "fight or flight"?

Try "depression"

A loved one dies and you feel an irreconciable sadness

Are you some manic depressive, someone who cannot cope with life?

or is this how most people feel when they loose a child or their parents die?

quote:

People regularly exhibit some very strange behaviours on internet hunting forums.

Care to explain how someone can exhibit strange behaviour via the written word on an internet forum?