During a routine discussion recently I lodged an official request for a Police response to the above question
With so many modular moderators on the market there is a potential for breach of the Firearms Act and Licensing due to vague interpretation by various authorities
Consider DPT moderators for example
- Threaded rear section of an open chamber
- Baffle stack
http://legislation.data.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/27/section/57/data.htm?wrap=true
"1)In this Act, the expression “firearm” means a lethal barrelled weapon of any description from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged and includes—
(a)any prohibited weapon, whether it is such a lethal weapon as aforesaid or not; and
(b)any component part of such a lethal or prohibited weapon; and
(c)any accessory to any such weapon designed or adapted to diminish the noise or flash caused by firing the weapon;
and so much of section 1 of this Act as excludes any description of firearm from the category of firearms to which that section applies shall be construed as also excluding component parts of, and accessories to, firearms of that description."
The component with the design feature to reduce noise in this scenario is clearly the baffle stack
The rear threaded chamber or in some cases just a threaded adaptor does nothing to reduce the noise or flash.
When I asked a direct question to the Police about a scenario where someone has two rear sections in different threads and one baffle stack
Is this considered ownership of two moderators or one
The answer was ...."TWO"
requiring two slots on the FAC for authority
The issue here is that baffles spares are generally being regarded by both RFDs and buyer as unrestricted.
Additional baffles, stainless baffles, replacement baffles to gas cut ones
Yet the attachment point is being viewed as restricted in spite of it being totally ineffective and not specifically designed to reduce noise and therefore not defined in law as a firearm.
Take it one step further.
if an attachment device (threaded rear section) is to be restricted
where do we stand with :
So cat, meet pigeons...
Will update when we have an official response
With so many modular moderators on the market there is a potential for breach of the Firearms Act and Licensing due to vague interpretation by various authorities
Consider DPT moderators for example
- Threaded rear section of an open chamber
- Baffle stack
http://legislation.data.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/27/section/57/data.htm?wrap=true
"1)In this Act, the expression “firearm” means a lethal barrelled weapon of any description from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged and includes—
(a)any prohibited weapon, whether it is such a lethal weapon as aforesaid or not; and
(b)any component part of such a lethal or prohibited weapon; and
(c)any accessory to any such weapon designed or adapted to diminish the noise or flash caused by firing the weapon;
and so much of section 1 of this Act as excludes any description of firearm from the category of firearms to which that section applies shall be construed as also excluding component parts of, and accessories to, firearms of that description."
The component with the design feature to reduce noise in this scenario is clearly the baffle stack
The rear threaded chamber or in some cases just a threaded adaptor does nothing to reduce the noise or flash.
When I asked a direct question to the Police about a scenario where someone has two rear sections in different threads and one baffle stack
Is this considered ownership of two moderators or one
The answer was ...."TWO"
requiring two slots on the FAC for authority
The issue here is that baffles spares are generally being regarded by both RFDs and buyer as unrestricted.
Additional baffles, stainless baffles, replacement baffles to gas cut ones
Yet the attachment point is being viewed as restricted in spite of it being totally ineffective and not specifically designed to reduce noise and therefore not defined in law as a firearm.
Take it one step further.
if an attachment device (threaded rear section) is to be restricted
where do we stand with :
- Thread specific adapters (MP5 Adapter for SL6)
- Integral Muzzle brakes that are the attachment point for a moderator (TET)
So cat, meet pigeons...
Will update when we have an official response
