Printable View
At a tangent (but interesting - to me anyway) how do you determine what an item "is", is evey parcel subject to x-ray, do you rely on the customs declaration ie "metal cup", how do you decide what is a 'suspect item' ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert303
I don't think Robert will answer that Q. AdeE on the basis that a lot of their knowledge is intelligence based. Additionally, we used to regularly deal with HMC&E and you'd be suprised at the depth of knowledge that certain members had or had access to............
The sad part about this thread is the fact that we are actually discussing whether this sort of innoxious stuff REALLY is a cause for concern. Reading back I notice mention of 'stabilised in flight' in relation to items that are 'projected' A No36 grenade in flight certainly isn't stabilised in flight. IN fact it's about as aerodynamic as a piano whereas an energa certainly is stabiliased. The rule of thumb will be whether the object is capable of being accurately sighted and placed. Just a thought........
As Peter says I will not discuss 'Operational Matters'. Peter thanks for the praise re certain Customs Officers. I was lucky enough to know a few of them and they and the staff at Shrivenham taught me a LOT. I learnt more from them than I did from the 'Shooting Community'' especially the various Club 'Experts' I've come across in 30 years of shooting.
Hi
So is there or isn't there a definitive answer to the legal status of the cup launcher or does it come down to being a matter for the courts to decide?
Thanks Terry
Well - I have got my SMLE "Cup" for the type 23 grenade - beats me that anyone could make a firearm component out of it.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...x0aojzsv-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...zz5hkran-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...f2f6ymjl-1.jpg
Now to work out if the No1 Mk1 2 1/2" Cup is allowed
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...qwlhpoth-1.jpg
Alan illustrates JUST what I said earlier - and more....... All a cup discharger REALLY is, put simply, is no more that a 'striker lever holder in thinggy'. Which is exactly what the pressed steel thinggy in thread 15 is. And here's the thing. If you were to be questioned about possessing a cup discharger you just remain silent and commeth the day, your solicitor and expert witness illustrate the stupidity of the case by producing the totally innoxious pressed steel 'thinggy' and explain that they do exactly the same thing.
A bit like driving to Carlisle. You can do it in a Triumph TR6 or a clcpped out Mini. They'll both get you there but one looks better than the other. As my sister occasionally tells me. The judiciary don't like you making a laughing stock out of the law. But if you do it while making a laughing stock of the 'other side' - to your benefit, then that's OK!
Hi
This thread was originally first posted in January 2015 since then an updated Guide on Firearms Licensing Law was published in March 2015, I have just been looking through it, and I don’t know if clause xii) was included in the 2014 guide? But it would seem to me that this clause would now make the 2.5in discharger cup a section 5 item?
vi) any rocket launcher, or any mortar, for projecting a stabilised missile, other than a launcher or mortar designed for line-throwing or pyrotechnic purposes or as signaling apparatus (section 5(1)(ae));
ix) any cartridge with a bullet designed to explode on or immediately before impact, any ammunition containing or designed or adapted to contain any such noxious thing as is mentioned in (viii) above and, if capable of being used with a firearm of any description, any grenade, bomb or other like missile, or rocket or shell designed to explode as aforesaid (section 5(1)(c));
xi) any rocket or ammunition not falling within (ix) above which consists of, or incorporates, a missile designed to explode on or immediately before impact and is for military use (section 5(1A)(b));
xii) any launcher or other projecting apparatus not falling within (vi) above which is designed to be used with any rocket or ammunition falling within (xi) above or with ammunition which would fall within that paragraph but for it being ammunition falling within (ix) above (section 5(1A)(c));
If this is the case, they have finally gone the the whole way and gone completely nuts ... you can make a prohibited Sec5 component part with a bit of sheet metal, bent to fit a No36 grenade and gaffer taped to an SMLE!:madsmile:
Seriously though, if they make a WW1 era discharger cup a prohibited weapon the world really has gone bloody mad!
Fortunately a hand grenade, projected by the cup discharger doesn't explode ON or immediately BEFORE impact. It explodes AFTER impact.
Annanuvverfing. Please don't confuse a PROOFED part with a pressure bearing part. They are not the same thing. If it were, you would have to proof your butt!
The question boristhepig has raised at No 17 is valid. Is the item in question a Sec 5 prohibited item? This and a few other matters are going to have to be referred to the Law Commission review of Firearms Law. We are either going to have to push for a list of items that can be held without an FAC (Rather like the obsolete Calibre List) or get a really tightly defined list of what is controlled WITHOUT the ability of the Police or Home Office to add to that list as they see fit.