Oooooooooooh Lester, post 50, you are stating things that are incorrect. When one quotes the law, you can be nearly right, but still hopelessly and in this case, dangerously wrong.

Put simply, as detailed to me by my sister, if a 'non firearm' has been certified so via the proof house, then the onus of proof that it IS a firearm rests with the prosecuting authorities.
If an alleged non firearm has not been marked AND/OR certified by the proof house, then the onus of proof regarding its status rests with the POSSESSOR and NOT the owner

The subsequent absence of a certificate or mark has no bearing whatsoever on its status in much the same way that if you've lost the log book or MoT for your car............ It's STILL MoT'd!
Information
Warning: This is a relatively older thread
This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.