Is this too over the top???

[yskippy]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...253/Flame-thrower-scooter-owner-arrested.html :huh::huh::huh:

This was in the UK...they must have caught it on one of their 10,000+ traffic cams.

Read More

 

[gunnails]

I can't say I have a problem with this, infact I think it is way cool.

Reminds me of that Godzila thing that use to come to the Hillsboro Air Show and eat cars then torch them, well at least the torching part.

Great way to stop tailgaters, although that would be wrong and I do not support that.

 

[nwo]

That is VERY cool.

Arrested on a 'firearms" offense. That is so lame. I do NOT support that.

 

[Member 5605]

Well, it doesn't look like a firearm.

It depends though on what the UK's definition of a "firearm" is.

 

[gunnails]

<broken link removed>

What is a Firearm?

"Firearm", within the definition of the Firearms Acts, means a lethal barrelled weapon of any description, from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged. It includes any prohibited weapon, whether it is such a lethal weapon as aforesaid or not, and any component part of such a weapon, and any accessory to such weapon designed or adapted to diminish the noise or flash caused by the firing of the weapon.
Therefore the definition includes firearms such as rifles, as well as shotguns and air guns.

Doesen't sound like a flame throwing scooter meets the definition,,,

 

[spengo]

It's over the top to arrest him. :V

 

[spengo]

So you guys think it's ok for people to go around town with flame throwers on the back of thier vehicles destroying property at the very least and killing people at the very most? Is tailgating in your eyes a justifiable reason for use of lethal force? Or did your mind not take the logical thinking through all it's steps to the end of your conclusion?

I'll give you the "it's not a gun" argument, but it's "something." Destructive device would work.

On the lighter side (no pun intended but I did like it when I saw it) It's not a fire arm. It's a fire tail.

Um... wat? He wasn't destroying property or killing people. It's just for looks...

 

[Mookie]

would this not be a firebutt offense?

So you guys think it's ok for people to go around town with flame throwers on the back of thier vehicles destroying property at the very least and killing people at the very most? Is tailgating in your eyes a justifiable reason for use of lethal force? Or did your mind not take the logical thinking through all it's steps to the end of your conclusion?

I'll give you the "it's not a gun" argument, but it's "something." Destructive device would work.

On the lighter side (no pun intended but I did like it when I saw it) It's not a fire arm. It's a fire tail.

How is this any different than a hot rod that shoots flames? Heck, my old dodge shadow would pop flames when the turbo got to hot.

 

[MarkSBG]

He was held on suspicion of possessing an object converted into a firearm...

 

[4Freedom]

The question I have to ask now is...

How can I set one of those up on my SUV???!!!

 

[MarkSBG]

But that would convert it into a firearm!

 

[BillM]

Love it---"His first attempt failed to ignite, and the second burst into flames"
He would be an idiot to actually USE it. 300 pound scooter vs. a full size
whatever--looks like a good way to get a new nickname. Speedbump.

"But Lincolnshire Police spotted the pictures of Mr Furze allegedly riding his scooter on a public highway – and arrested him on Thursday.

tHe was held on suspicion of possessing an object converted into a firearm, and was released on unconditional police bail without charge until May 6 pending further police investigation"

So they arrested him and released him on bail without charging him? WTF?

 

[cyclesarge]

So you guys think it's ok for people to go around town with flame throwers on the back of thier vehicles destroying property at the very least and killing people at the very most? Is tailgating in your eyes a justifiable reason for use of lethal force? Or did your mind not take the logical thinking through all it's steps to the end of your conclusion?

I'll give you the "it's not a gun" argument, but it's "something." Destructive device would work.

On the lighter side (no pun intended but I did like it when I saw it) It's not a fire arm. It's a fire tail.

So, I take it you've never ridden a scooter that doesn't have the power to get out it's own way, much less out of the way of a speeding mini van driven by a single mom who is too busy putting on her makeup and text chatting to be distracted by her 4 screaming children. Talk about " destroying property at the very least and killing people at the very most". A little fire would be a nice wake up call for some drivers.

 

[Redcap]

So you guys think it's ok for people to go around town with flame throwers on the back of thier vehicles destroying property at the very least and killing people at the very most? Is tailgating in your eyes a justifiable reason for use of lethal force? Or did your mind not take the logical thinking through all it's steps to the end of your conclusion?

I'll give you the "it's not a gun" argument, but it's "something." Destructive device would work.

On the lighter side (no pun intended but I did like it when I saw it) It's not a fire arm. It's a fire tail.

A flamethrower is NOT considered a Destructive Device.

 

[cyclesarge]

You take it wrong. I've put 30,000 street and hwy miles on two wheels. Not a lot but enough to know what I'm talking about here. That said... Have your thread back.

30,000 miles isn't A LOT, but SHOULD be enough to have experienced an inattentive driver crowding you, I guess you are REALLY lucky. I really doubt this was any kind of attempt to damage property or harm people, but more of "over the top" vehicular statement. Some people just have no sense of humor.

 

[The B]

"flame thrower" im sure is a loosely used term here. what's the fuel? the only reason flame throwers are dangerous is because they shoot a liquid thats on fire. i'm sure this is nothing more than a propane or butane torch, not a "flame thrower."

it might singe the dust on somebody's bumper. dangerous from a safety standpoint to be driving around with a torch of unknown QC in its construction, and maybe calls for the driver being cited for using it, if he uses it, but it's a gag, and the risk of people getting hurt are actually pretty damn low, i'd imagine. i used to do "torch-down" roofing- i burned a propane torch for 10-12 hours a day every day. i burned myself a few times, never seriously.. it just singes the hair off your arms, even from a pretty direct blast.

 

[gettersideways]

this is harmless.. they sell these kits as "flame thrower" kits for cars. Anyone can buy one http://autoloc.carshopinc.com/product_info.php/products_id/9204/FLAME