deactivated weapons

so if for arguments sake an arquebus were loaded with shot and discharged
It now stops being an 'antique'and covered by the exemption
because of the definition, it couldn't possibly be the murder weapon because of the definition.
Incorrect as it is no longer being kept as a 'curiosity or ornament', it's being used as a murder weapon.
A deacc by definition would of course have to be re modified to fire. I'm probably being dense here, but I wouldn't like to make that decision.
Deacs, if they comply with the criteria, are no longer firearms within the terms of Section 57 eg 'lethal barrelled weapons which' etc etc.
 
First off I know nothing about these things so could be wrong, but if you only needed one shot, I can't imagine making/acquiring some black powder to be massively difficult if you're the shooty stabby type, and it's just a ball bearing really, which one of your mates will have an idea about, so presumably it would be possible to do some damage if you cut about with a brace of flintlocks?
 
First off I know nothing about these things so could be wrong, but if you only needed one shot, I can't imagine making/acquiring some black powder to be massively difficult if you're the shooty stabby type, and it's just a ball bearing really, which one of your mates will have an idea about, so presumably it would be possible to do some damage if you cut about with a brace of flintlocks?
Dick Turpin allegedly made a living from it.

Muzzle loading firearms rarely appear in crime. IIRC, the most ‘famous’ incident was the Great Train Robbery when they used a M/L ‘Cap and Ball’ Revolver (without googling it).
 
An interesting excerpt from a London govt report on, inter alia, the source of guns used in crime in the capital:

'Guns enter the capital in a number of different ways: from overseas,
from other parts of the UK, or through the theft from licensed suppliers
and owners.
The Met said that “surprisingly low numbers” of legally owned firearms
are stolen in London: “single figures for rifles, pistols and revolvers and
low double figures for shotguns.” It highlights, however, that weapons
may be stolen in other parts of the country and brought into the capital,
and when this happens it is “very hard for [the Met] to control without
specific intelligence relating to such thefts”.

The available intelligence relating to thefts of legally owned firearms has
changed in recent years. Mike Eveleigh, from the British Association for
Shooting and Conservation, told us that the Home Office used to publish
information from each police force area which “included the type of
gun, where it was stolen and when it was stolen”, but that this has not
been produced since 2005. This, he suggests, has left organisations such as BASC relying on “the media and what our police friends tell us” in
monitoring the theft of legally owned guns and any rise in gun crime.

The supply of guns into the UK from abroad is a growing concern. The
NCA says that the “principal supply route” is through ports, via private
and commercial vehicles. It suggests that small, “but increasing
numbers” of weapons are originating from Eastern Europe, particularly
de-commissioned guns which “are easily converted” into a viable
weapon, but that there is still “a lot of traffic” from America.

The use of technology is changing the way people can access guns. The
NCA said it is “seeing more activity through technology”, in particular
the use of the ‘dark web’. Through this, it suggests, individuals can
“order maybe parts of a weapon or indicative parts of a weapon and […]
with a small amount of effort and sourcing parts within the UK or
elsewhere, they can put together a handgun or a pistol that is viable
that we would regard as a prohibited weapon here.”
The Met works closely with suppliers and owners of legal guns, and law
enforcement agencies across the country to “make it as hard as possible
for individuals to buy weapons”. For example, the Met works in
partnership with the NCA to tackle the supply of firearms moving
internally within the UK. The result, the Met suggests, is that “it is still
hard to gain access to guns in London.”

Source: Gun crime in London January 2018 - Greater London Authority

I have often wondered about the 'assembling a gun from components' method. Many Sten parts can be bought in the UK (you knew I was going to say Sten :)) and you might only need to source individual components from the US, if you find the right (well, wrong) sort of seller.
 
I think you'd have to be pretty confident pulling the trigger on a 100-year old pistol with your mate's home-made ammunition in it, I definitely wouldn't fancy it
Well by definition of normal things 100 would qualify it as an antique anyway and I’m not aware that a change of use is specified to qualify which makes the FA rather unusual. Cars can now be antiques etc. But I wouldn’t fancy competing in one of them in comparison to modern cars
It now stops being an 'antique'and covered by the exemption

Incorrect as it is no longer being kept as a 'curiosity or ornament', it's being used as a murder weapon.
.
But that’s my point
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
First off I know nothing about these things so could be wrong, but if you only needed one shot, I can't imagine making/acquiring some black powder to be massively difficult if you're the shooty stabby type, and it's just a ball bearing really, which one of your mates will have an idea about, so presumably it would be possible to do some damage if you cut about with a brace of flintlocks?
Allegedly (or not) one of the reasons .38 revolver blank firers were banned is because some idiot had been opening the blanks up and pressing in a ball bearing. The fact that bystanders were killed and injured at strange angles to the action has more to do with the pressure of the blank now causing the die cast starter pistol to disintegrate, grenade like!
 
But that’s my point
Was it? I thought first of all you were talking about ‘remanufacturing ammunition’ and it was mentioned what the definition of an antique under 58(2) is ie it’s not covered, until you put the two together.

You then mentioned using an ‘arquebus’ (presumably a muzzle loading matchlock type firearm) not being a firearm (due to the definition and being used in crime) and advised it would no longer be covered by the ‘kept as a curiosity or ornament’?

Bottom line is if it’s an antique firearm and held as a ‘curiosity or ornament’ it’s not covered by the FA’68 (other than Schedule 3, public place, trespass and prohibited). If it’s no longer held as a ‘curiosity or ornament’ eg ‘in use’ it is covered by the FA’68.
 
Allegedly (or not) one of the reasons .38 revolver blank firers were banned is because some idiot had been opening the blanks up and pressing in a ball bearing. The fact that bystanders were killed and injured at strange angles to the action has more to do with the pressure of the blank now causing the die cast starter pistol to disintegrate, grenade like!
A few more than ‘some idiot’:
Starting pistol, Olympic .38BB used in gang warfare to be banned
In the last three years police have seized 179 converted Olympics and recorded a growing number of crimes — including three attempted murders — in which the guns have been used.

The handgun is behind a surge in “reputational shootings” in London where it has been used by gangs to injure and frighten rivals.

All but 22 of the converted guns recovered have been found in the capital but there have also been seizures across the country, including Bristol, Manchester and North Yorkshire.
https://basc.org.uk/wp-content/plugins/download-monitor/download.php?id=103
 
Was it? I thought first of all you were talking about ‘remanufacturing ammunition’ and it was mentioned what the definition of an antique under 58(2) is ie it’s not covered, until you put the two together.

You then mentioned using an ‘arquebus’ (presumably a muzzle loading matchlock type firearm) not being a firearm (due to the definition and being used in crime) and advised it would no longer be covered by the ‘kept as a curiosity or ornament’?

Bottom line is if it’s an antique firearm and held as a ‘curiosity or ornament’ it’s not covered by the FA’68 (other than Schedule 3, public place, trespass and prohibited). If it’s no longer held as a ‘curiosity or ornament’ eg ‘in use’ it is covered by the FA’68.
How long before the government bans fork rests? If we can get those out of circulation, we'll nip the impending arquebus crime wave in the bud.
 
How long before the government bans fork rests? If we can get those out of circulation, we'll nip the impending arquebus crime wave in the bud.
I’ve said for many moons on here and elsewhere there needs to be a ‘root and branch’ review of firearms licensing. What do you want to achieve and how it can be achieved. There is absolutely zero interest in Parliament about having that discussion, so the (predominantly imx) law abiding are subject to more restrictions which may (or may not) achieve some result in some crimes being committed.

Get that Parliamentary time and there actually may be a decent result. I doubt it though as generally restrictions are applied rather than lifted, hence the need to establish what it is you’re trying to do and how do you intend to achieve it.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
I’ve said for many moons on here and elsewhere there needs to be a ‘root and branch’ review of firearms licensing. What do you want to achieve and how it can be achieved. There is absolutely zero interest in Parliament about having that discussion, so the (predominantly imx) law abiding are subject to more restrictions which may (or may not) achieve some result in some crimes being committed.

Get that Parliamentary time and there actually may be a decent result. I doubt it though as generally restrictions are applied rather than lifted, hence the need to establish what it is you’re trying to do and how do you intend to achieve it.
Since David Cameron became PM we have seen fewer restrictions and less knee jerk reactions, unfortunately the current bunch are less than interested!
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
I think you'd have to be pretty confident pulling the trigger on a 100-year old pistol with your mate's home-made ammunition in it, I definitely wouldn't fancy it
Done it a few times, the old nitro proofed revolvers were quite strong and resilient! 100 years is fairly subjective, my newest revolver was a 1915 built beasty that took a lot of hammer!
 
Since David Cameron became PM we have seen fewer restrictions and less knee jerk reactions, unfortunately the current bunch are less than interested!
I agree, and I know there was a reason for that. Also undoubtedly helped by the ACC who did the BIRD review being a shooter, knowing what he was talking about and making it plain that further restrictions, especially on the type of firearms used, would be a cultural change for the U.K.
 
I’ve said for many moons on here and elsewhere there needs to be a ‘root and branch’ review of firearms licensing. What do you want to achieve and how it can be achieved. There is absolutely zero interest in Parliament about having that discussion, so the (predominantly imx) law abiding are subject to more restrictions which may (or may not) achieve some result in some crimes being committed.

Get that Parliamentary time and there actually may be a decent result. I doubt it though as generally restrictions are applied rather than lifted, hence the need to establish what it is you’re trying to do and how do you intend to achieve it.
To apply Maudling's quote to this situation, is the level of gun violence 'acceptable'? I think it might be, as far as the government is concerned, as the steps that would help prevent criminals from accessing weapons are not being taken. Therefore, not much may happen until(if) gun violence becomes more widespread and the victims are no longer young men from certain parts of cities.
Edit: as you say, new regulations will be less permissive. I think gun crime will be the driver when it happens, not a sensible review of the wider issue.
 
Last edited:
To apply Maudling's quote to this situation, is the level of gun violence 'acceptable'?
That would depend entirely on who you speak to. I doubt any Politician or Snr Copper (same thing) would openly say any level was 'acceptable'.
I think it might be, as far as the government is concerned, as the steps that would help prevent criminals from accessing weapons are not being taken.
RBCs. A 'risk. balance case'
Therefore, not much may happen until(if) gun violence becomes more widespread and the victims are no longer young men from certain parts of cities.
Pretty much, being a cynic as well.

Criminals will always try and get round the law anyway, be it converting air pistols (SCGC ban), to converting blank firers (Olympic BBM ban) to converting ammo to use in 'antique' firearms. Hence, 'what do you want to achieve and how do you intend to achieve it'?
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
Hence, 'what do you want to achieve and how do you intend to achieve it'?
I'd like a return to pre 1988 rules, that wont happen sadly.
 
I'd like a return to pre 1988 rules, that wont happen sadly.
Me too. I'd like to put a folding stock on my Mossburg pump and to have my P226 and HP35 back :cool:. Never happen sadly.

Some things during and after '88 are probably worth keeping imo like the original club legislation (S15 '88 Act as was), and some of the 'character tests' brought in by '97, but as we all say it's the individual not the firearm. The law Commission which was a good opportunity to actually have a review became an opportunity to add more offences, rather than think 'what is it you're trying to achieve and how can you implement it'?
 
Is anyone following the discussion on the HBSA group about SKN (skeleton) actions?

The utter clustfnuck over those a very good example of the shockingly bad drafting of firearms law, and the unacceptable level of legal risk thrown onto the public.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top