This is worrying, we are agreeing on far too much these days!! 
Sounds like you need to educate your friend though!
Sounds like you need to educate your friend though!
Changes really are coming in firearms licensing….
- Thread starter Foxyboy43
- Start date
When i read it they play down the whole component part bit not recommending any particular extra numeric amount and stressing that powder and primers are still parts necessary to manufacture that require the FAC to be produced. Seems to be more talk of cost V benefit analysis ( which is basically a dump the plan ) to do more on this matter . We can't post Primers and powder without an explosives licensed carrier , so hopefully the average shooting guy and RFD is just fine . Numbers of ammo possessed etc has always been overplayed, I doubt anyone could survive shooting 1000 rounds, even in a nation where an ARV response might be an hour or more away, the effect would be horrifying though unlikely in the extreme ( The IRA never managed 1000 rounds in a single offensive action i suspect with full auto) . Yet they do state £40 ph costs in inspection time for one officer if they were to start counting ( surely someone with criminal intent would stock pile where they were not to be found ?)This is the worse part...
No more stock piling reloading supplies
Leec6.5
Well-Known Member
My
He couldn’t believe his eyes when he first clapped eyes on it!
friend has the same opinion!This is worrying, we are agreeing on far too much these days!!
Sounds like you need to educate your friend though!
He couldn’t believe his eyes when he first clapped eyes on it!
Foxyboy43
Well-Known Member
I wish I could be so sure! A couple of pals have already had to put in top spec systems and additional locks already.
Leec6.5
Well-Known Member
Boy have you gey a shock coming !
I reckon things are gonna get a lot more worse in the future Mark my words!
Jeff8861
Well-Known Member
No I haven't and I know what is coming and it's not from anyone on YouTube
geoffw
Well-Known Member
The proposal wording is that there has to be INTENT to load more than your allowance of rounds.
I know, I was responding specifically to someone suggesting we should keep at least one component (brass) at your allowance level to allow higher quantities of other components to be held.
I was pointing out most reloaders hold more of all components than their allowance generally.
ChesterP
Well-Known Member
The way I read the proposals there is not necessarily intent to put on licence all reloading components but there is a move to caution against reloading or intent to reload more than your certified allowances. We'll know more only when the law is updated, so for now, I'm taking that youtube report with a huge pinch of salt, especially considering that individual's past record. Not one I'd want subscribe to, and not someone I'd consider particularly reliable.
SteveFisher
Well-Known Member
How is it scaremongering when the actual consultation proposals ARE quite scary? they say they will draft the law on reloading components so as not to penalize home loaders - will they? Can we trust them? Government behaviour says we can never trust them.
SteveFisher
Well-Known Member
The government response to the consultation is plain enough - it doesn't depend on your view of one youtuber. They intend to make it a criminal offence to possess more components than you need to make your allocated stock of ammo - how they decide on that is yet to be determined, their wording is vague, this may well be a serious concern so I'm at a loss to understand why people simply dismiss it.
SteveFisher
Well-Known Member
I believe enough people have quoted my comment now and not seen my follow up replies. Getting notifications up the wazoo
We will only know when the final law comes out next year.
if we wait for the law, we've already lost. Lobbying to ensure draft legislation is worded to protect legitimate shooters should be happening now. BASC et al need to do what they are paid to do.
We already had that chance...its been and gone.
Gov had a big consultation and everyone was able to respond.. be it members of the public, shooters and RFD. Basc publisized it massively quite some time ago and urged people to respond. This is the end result of that consultation before it goes into final draft with parliament next year.
If you look at the percentages, the vast majority who commented on their consultation ( a 15 minute survey), was the public.. barely anyone in the shooting community bothered it seems.
We are our own worse enemy sometimes.
Last edited:
Historically, yes.
But FEO organisations like D&C have recently sought to reduce [sane] allocations over time.
Maintaining consistent loads over time requires that reloaders acquire components in batches. At test recursively. This is a simple concept and one which was well understood by the writer of the 2021 HOG as seen below.
Perhaps the most perplexing and frustrating issue is that there seems to be no evidence of criminality on the part of legal reloaders. So what does this fix?
It is clear what it is likely to break: consistent shooting performance. That will probably impact international shooting competition performance, and potentially shooting performance in areas of vermin control and deer management.
SteveFisher
Well-Known Member
SteveFisher
Well-Known Member
I responded.
It's not lost btw, I have had good results from lobbying MPs in the past. You don't need many in the early stages to get amendments added. The reloading suggestion is, as has been pointed out, solving a problem that doesn't seem to exist - for that reason alone there will be plenty of MPs happy to nay say it. Christopher Chope would be a good bet, and of course everyone's individual MPs.
There were many sadly that didn't and never do, for whatever reason, i don't know..
But yes lobbying MPs is always a good shout. I used to always lobby my local MP..until parties changed locally and this person doesn't approve..
Similar threads
