"A.Lee" wrote in message
...
dennis@home wrote:

"A.Lee" wrote in message
...
The firearm was only 'illegal' as he didnt have a certificate for it,
it
wasnt illegal in itself, anyone else with the relevant cert. could keep
it lawfully.

Not true.
He could not get a license for it, it was an unlicensable weapon.
He was a criminal from the moment he had it, no better than other
criminals.

No one is denying he is/was a criminal.
It was not 'an unlicensable weapon'.
Tony Martin did not have the relevant certificate, so could not keep a
gun.
The relevant gun could be held by anyone else with either a shotgun
cert. or firearms cert. depending on what model the shotgun is.

So lets get the right.. you don't know what model of shotgun he had but you
state it was licensable.