The Cafe

Gail Cochrane I
Gordon Richmond

Kenneth Roy's article (SR 276) on the woman imprisoned for five years for illegal possession of a firearm was very interesting. As someone who has been shooting for many years – both in military and civilian competitions – I'm dismayed by the shrieking histrionics which we act out at the mere mention of firearms. It doesn't help when the criminal justice system becomes target-driven on particular issues.
     I have no wish to stick my oar in – I'm no expert – but one teeny observation. The weapon may have been 'functional' but could have been 'de facto' non-functional if the ammo it fires is now obsolete. Eastern European manufacturers routinely copied western designs (e.g. Browning), which were then chambered for obscure callibres of cartridge.
     Not sure if that would change anything but she has my sympathies.

Gail Cochrane II
John MacDonald

From my distant perspective in Dubai, the case of Gail Cochrane (SR 276) struck me as odd right from the start. Why was the woman charged in the first place for possessing what was clearly an antique weapon – likely to do more damage to the shooter than the target, even if she had ammunition and it ever fired at all? Media coverage was peremptory, during and after the trial, and I expected more response and comment when she was sentenced to five years in jail.
     But maybe there was more to it than met the eye, and what do I know of contemporary Scotland from my distant sandland outpost. Still, the penalty struck me as excessive – and well done Scottish Review for highlighting the inconsistencies with English sentencing under the same legislation. As you say, Mrs Cochrane may be no angel, but five years is totally disproportionate. Had she fired it at the officers executing the warrant, how much longer would she have to stay in Corton Vale?

Send your contributions to islay@scottishreview.net