Enfield bolt bodies for sale on e-bay UK FAC holders BEWARE.

[Peter Laidler]

In short Ridolpho, we have a policy of not pursuing and punishing the wrongdoer even if they can find them, but just, well......, banning everything slowly but surely. So said, the Country is awash with weapons. But if you don't know where the unlawful ones are you just clamp down harded and harder on the lawful ones until you end up with a pure hotchpotch of bits of legislation that.............

[Maxwell Smart]

It is my future plan....

North, South or West island?

West island rules are not quite as good as other two.

[PrinzEugen]

until you end up with a pure hotchpotch of bits of legislation that.............

...... (to helpfully finish off)...... means people competing for their country in events like .22 pistol shooting have to train abroad.

As I said earlier with regards to police targeting illegal guns - community relations and potential disorder backlash means they generally don't do it. Meanwhile the law abiding and easy targets get more and more squeezed. As this debate shows this community is packed with good intentions - the whole point of this thread is an intention to uphold the law. This part of the law makes it harder for law abiding gun enthusiasts to maintain their guns. But it goes to show the level of lawbreaking or even stretching within this community is almost nil - and still they keep introducing more legislation - more lately the extra stuff on deacts.

[Peter Laidler]

What's the latest stuff/clampdown on deacts Prinz? That surely must just illustrate the whole point in question.......

[PrinzEugen]

It's all to do with the 'firearms amnesty' in the wake of new legislation, so the police say. Not sure I can accurately relay the exact law with regard antique firearms as the police are being less than clear. I think probably so they get deacts etc handed in. The blog post I linked to above (from July) contains:

This month the law has been made tighter still with the maximum penalty for illegal gun possession having leapt from ten years to life in prison.

Another change is that anyone given a prison sentence, including suspended sentences, of three months or more is now banned from possessing antique firearms which could previously be held as a “curiosity or ornament” with a relevant certificate.

All this has led to hand ins like this.

I can't really say how the law has changed - the home office guidelines to the alterations are here. Section 8 is relevant. (Warning the: last link downloads a Home Office pdf of the law).

[Brit plumber]

Can I just say I've had my fair share of problems with Police FireArms licensing however I've never had a problem with Cumbria. They were very knowledgeable and actually pro active rather than reactive and I never felt like I was an inconvenience to them.

[Beerhunter]

An amendment was recently slipped in to the 1968 Firearms Act via an Act that was NOTHING to do with firearms legislation. Essentially, persons who have been sentenced to three years or more in the nick (the old felony definition) can no longer benefit from Section 58 which covers antiques. Henceforth if they are caught with a Section 58, they will be charged with possession of a firearm.

People in high places say that this is because one of Lee Rigby's killers was carrying a Section 58 at the time of the office. However this does not hold water because neither of them had any previous and so the new law would not have applied. Second, because the scrote in question was clearly not possessing the gun in question "as a curiosity or ornament", Section 58 did not apply anyway. Even if it did would he have worried about committing two firearms of fences rather than just one - as he carried out a cold-blooded murder.

In my opinion, the new offence was a sop to ACPO because they could not get the Home Office to remove .44 Russian from the "obsolete calibres" list.

BTW, if you look carefully at the haul of "deadly weapons you will see a "Gat". For it to be included in the photo shoot shows the level of what they actually "seized". It really annoys me that the police hype up these "weapons seizures" because they are not actually removing any guns "off the street" to quote a famous war criminal.

[Aussie48]

In short Ridolpho, we have a policy of not pursuing and punishing the wrongdoer even if they can find them, but just, well......, banning everything slowly but surely. So said, the Country is awash with weapons. But if you don't know where the unlawful ones are you just clamp down harded and harder on the lawful ones until you end up with a pure hotchpotch of bits of legislation that.............

And silly me thought it was only in Australia that this happened

[Robert303]

Be very cautious of any seizure figures. Replicas seized by what was H.M. Customs now UK Border Force are included in Firearms seizures. Any police or UK Borders force seizures are just as likely to include air guns, replicas, DAs, as it's all about numbers and publicity. On a slightly different tack 5 or 10 years ago police would never have tipped off press about a search warrant let alone allowed live TV coverage as they have just done with a well known personality who was abroad at the time the warrant was used.

[Peter Laidler]

Beery, The Prinz and ZGB illustrate another most absurd situation that you would never associate with a Nation with democratic law process - not in a thousand years. And perhaps anyone can tell me where it arises in another democracy. They say that it saves Parliamentary time......... as if they don't have enough time on their hands! It's this:

What other nation would incorporate into a forthcoming law or primary legislation, a section that states, in effect that '....... the government of the day or ANY government thereafter don't forget, can at the whim of a protest group, pressure groups, lobby group, change of heart (or an idea) or anyone with enough clout* really, can simply lay an order before parliament and without so much as a discussion or by-your-leave, a change can be encorporated and enacted'! Then, they say, as if it'll all make things OK, that it isn't retrospective so it'll all be OK!

As a reasonably educated layman, it's simply mind boggling complacency by our legislators. Or am I missing something

* It MUST be by these groups by definition, as how would the legislators learn about the events that they're shouting about?