The end of Semi Auto Humane Dispatch Pistols

[NorthDorset]

I’m obviously behind the times. Having recently obtained a slot for a .357 Magnum Humane Dispatch Pistol I have been shopping and can’t find anything sensible.

Came across a good looking 9mm CZ which floated my boat. Asked My FLO if could do a 1 for 1 to buy it and got a pretty quick “No”

Turns out the latest guidance says Revolvers only. Asked BASC what was going on and apparently there has been an incident. One force are doing a review and if you have one of these you can expect it to be revoked next renewal. So confirmed my FLO.

Not a big market, not sure how many will be affected (2 in my county)

 

[novice]

From memory I think gmp were happy at one point to authorise unrestricted semiautomatic pistols for humane dispatch, however that was revised to restricted mag. Obviously even if you have a restricted mag, it's not too much of a stretch to obtain an additional larger capacity mag from overseas if you really wanted to do so. Perhaps they're now looking to box off that avenue also.

Novice

 

[NorthDorset]

Yes this is the driver.

Of course if they thought I would commit an offence with a firearm we should be having a conversation about me holding a licence not the action of a firearm.

 

[roryh]

"Not with a bang but a fizzle"

All these little chips and soon there will be no iceberg.

Wonder what the incident was?

Perhaps the Scouse gangster recently jailed for rolling grenades down peoples hallways should be made aware of what is allowed...or those kids on the recent BBC documentary....*insert terrorist organisation here* for that matter.

 

[Whitebeard]

Dont forget guys that we have to be the most squeeky clean law abiding citizens in the country to get a FAC but once we have one we are regarded as a future mass killers not be trusted, thats why we are on the same database as the most high profile jihadis

Ian

 

[.Skinner.]

Very well said! Something that really bothers me about the whole thing...

Yes this is the driver.

Of course if they thought I would commit an offence with a firearm we should be having a conversation about me holding a licence not the action of a firearm.

 

[mereside]

each case must be taken at its own merit, so having an incident shouldn't come into it, certain forces have a real issue of granting 9mm even though .357 is just over lol will take heavier bullets and so on, pistol or revolver makes no odds, just stay within the conditions its simple, they cannot enforce one over the other even though they try to if you show good reason for one over the other then go for it, atb wayne

 

[User00014]

Years ago applied fire a HD pistol, got a .32 granted, but couldn’t find one so found a 38/357mag, did a 1-4-1 and got it.

I had a proven good reason and it was granted.

My point is, i can’t see how they can refuse you a 9mm if you have good sound reason.

 

[Druid]

I must admit I am suprised that they do allow semi auto pistols over restricted revolvers as the fact that you can just change the restricted magazine to a higher capacity one makes a mockery of any 2 shot condition on your certificate.

 

[Cranhill]

I've had 32acp pistol over 30yrs and just had my FAC renewed.

 

[NorthDorset]

I’m not making it up Cranhill.

Here is what I was sent

As you know we work in line with the Home Office Guidance on firearms licensing law and this gives the following advice for the humane killing of animals;

13.38 For revolvers and slaughtering instruments under section 3 of the 1997 Act, it is suggested a .32 single (or two) shot revolver is suitable for most circumstances, though larger calibres such as the .38 may be considered if the applicant has to deal regularly with large or dangerous animals (for example, horses, water buffalo, bison, Highland cattle or larger deer species).

 

[mereside]

I must admit I am suprised that they do allow semi auto pistols over restricted revolvers as the fact that you can just change the restricted magazine to a higher capacity one makes a mockery of any 2 shot condition on your certificate.

absolutely not, why would you go against your condition that’s on your ticket.
were does it say anywhere the revolver must be welded or permanent

 

[nun_hunter]

I must admit I am suprised that they do allow semi auto pistols over restricted revolvers as the fact that you can just change the restricted magazine to a higher capacity one makes a mockery of any 2 shot condition on your certificate.

In the same way they can limit your ammo allowance, where you can shoot etc. Those are the conditions and you'd be a fool to breach them.

 

[Druid]

absolutely not, why would you go against your condition that’s on your ticket.
were does it say anywhere the revolver must be welded or permanent

I was under the impression that if you had a restricted to 2 shots revolver then the other 4 chambers were blocked by some means.

 

[Druid]

In the same way they can limit your ammo allowance, where you can shoot etc. Those are the conditions and you'd be a fool to breach them.

I understand the consequences and trust that possession of firearms requires and the facts that the breaking of those conditions that are placed on your certificate is not a good thing to do but what I actually said was that I am suprised that semi pistols are allowed for the humane despatch purpose when the powers that be would only grudgingly allow possession of a pistol of any type.

 

[scrumbag]

In the same way they can limit your ammo allowance, where you can shoot etc. Those are the conditions and you'd be a fool to breach them.

Well, it does seem that the ability of the police to impose conditions they see fit was a bad part of the legislation, one they can't use, has lead to confusion, a massive waste of resources and they should be stripped of it...

 

[lister]

I’m not making it up Cranhill.

Here is what I was sent

As you know we work in line with the Home Office Guidance on firearms licensing law and this gives the following advice for the humane killing of animals;

13.38 For revolvers and slaughtering instruments under section 3 of the 1997 Act, it is suggested a .32 single (or two) shot revolver is suitable for most circumstances, though larger calibres such as the .38 may be considered if the applicant has to deal regularly with large or dangerous animals (for example, horses, water buffalo, bison, Highland cattle or larger deer species).

section 3 does not mention revolver it says firearm
13.38 does not say you cannot use a semiauto they are trying it on
just read 13.39
sound moderators for "pistols" only for vets at racecourses
adapted conventional handguns are not generally considered suitable." anyone know what one of them is"

 

[NorthDorset]

section 3 does not mention revolver it says firearm
13.38 does not say you cannot use a semiauto they are trying it on
is"

No. It doesn’t say anything about semi auto pistols, it specifies a revolver.

Going back to my first post, I queried this with BASC.

 

[Old-YOP]

Please excuse this ramble, but ...

I Just sold a rather lovely S&W 686 4" .357 mag / .38 spl revolver and replaced it with one of these:

https://bondarms.com/bond-arms-handguns/snake-slayer/

It's only got two barrels, so the thought was that it might be more acceptable to officialdom. We shall see.

The S&W revolver was restricted to 2 shot, but it was the work of minutes (and 99 bucks) for me to obtain and fit a new & unrestricted 6-shot cylinder.

But why would I? If my ticket says 2 shot, then that's what I have to accept. Same with a semi-auto. Sure you can slot in a full mag but then you're breaking the law. So why would you?

All of that seems entirely logical to me, and should be to any FEO and FLD dealing with some of the most responsible, law abiding and uber-background-checked people in the land.

And the statistics are on our side. We're squeaky, we keep our weapons secure, and that should be respected. Any choice of pistol, 2 shot restricted as conditioned, should be acceptable given good reason.

OK, so then we hear the 'safer if stolen' argument, as if every thieving scrote is too thick to restore the thing to full capacity or at least knows someone who could. So that one doesn't really hold up.

So what is the reasoning behind this increasing encroachment? Maybe political? "Being seen to be taking action" - as with the current 50 cal debacle? You can't really odds that.

I'm baffled. Answers on a postcard please

 

[Whitebeard]

Please excuse this ramble, but ...

I Just sold a rather lovely S&W 686 4" .357 mag / .38 spl revolver and replaced it with one of these:

https://bondarms.com/bond-arms-handguns/snake-slayer/

It's only got two barrels, so the thought was that it might be more acceptable to officialdom. We shall see.

The S&W revolver was restricted to 2 shot, but it was the work of minutes (and 99 bucks) for me to obtain and fit a new & unrestricted 6-shot cylinder.

But why would I? If my ticket says 2 shot, then that's what I have to accept. Same with a semi-auto. Sure you can slot in a full mag but then you're breaking the law. So why would you?

All of that seems entirely logical to me, and should be to any FEO and FLD dealing with some of the most responsible, law abiding and uber-background-checked people in the land.

And the statistics are on our side. We're squeaky, we keep our weapons secure, and that should be respected. Any choice of pistol, 2 shot restricted as conditioned, should be acceptable given good reason.

OK, so then we hear the 'safer if stolen' argument, as if every thieving scrote is too thick to restore the thing to full capacity or at least knows someone who could. So that one doesn't really hold up.

So what is the reasoning behind this increasing encroachment? Maybe political? "Being seen to be taking action" - as with the current 50 cal debacle? You can't really odds that.

I'm baffled. Answers on a postcard please

Old Yop, see my post No.5

Ian.