Home office consultation on deregulating sound moderators
- Thread starter ZimCoxy136
- Start date
Stevie/P
Well-Known Member
Done
Done and I wrote this in the comments part.
"I have a sound moderator for my sub 12 ft/lbs BSA .177" air rifle and am allowed to acquire and possess without certification. I do not, personally use any sound moderator my two rifles as they have iron sights fitted so are in any case unsuitable.
However notwithstanding that I therefore have no wish for one an FAC holder cannot acquire or possess a sound moderator for any s1 firearm without a separate variation to their Firearms Certificate to acquire or possess. For those that do wish to have such I agree with the proposals that the primary legislation be amended to remove that need.
In itself a sound moderator cannot chamber a cartridge and cannot fire a cartridge. Therefore if the s57 (1) (d) of the Firearms Act 1968 were repealed they would cease to be subject to control as they are not under the definition of s57 (1) (a) as defined under s57(1B) a "lethal barreled weapon". Without the s1 firearm it attaches to it a sound moderator is a mere expensive piece of pipework.
The wish of the two Proof Houses to seek to make money by having these things proof tested does not make them firearms. The Firearms Act and the items it controls under s1 should be about public safety and that and the Gun Barrel Proof Act should be about that and not about generating a revenue stream for the London Proof House or the Birmingham Proof House."
"I have a sound moderator for my sub 12 ft/lbs BSA .177" air rifle and am allowed to acquire and possess without certification. I do not, personally use any sound moderator my two rifles as they have iron sights fitted so are in any case unsuitable.
However notwithstanding that I therefore have no wish for one an FAC holder cannot acquire or possess a sound moderator for any s1 firearm without a separate variation to their Firearms Certificate to acquire or possess. For those that do wish to have such I agree with the proposals that the primary legislation be amended to remove that need.
In itself a sound moderator cannot chamber a cartridge and cannot fire a cartridge. Therefore if the s57 (1) (d) of the Firearms Act 1968 were repealed they would cease to be subject to control as they are not under the definition of s57 (1) (a) as defined under s57(1B) a "lethal barreled weapon". Without the s1 firearm it attaches to it a sound moderator is a mere expensive piece of pipework.
The wish of the two Proof Houses to seek to make money by having these things proof tested does not make them firearms. The Firearms Act and the items it controls under s1 should be about public safety and that and the Gun Barrel Proof Act should be about that and not about generating a revenue stream for the London Proof House or the Birmingham Proof House."
Done.
Done !
Can't even see antis objecting to this one !
Whitefront
Well-Known Member
Sadly, I can see the antis trying to instigate meeja stories with headlines like: "Tories in deadly silencer free-for-all". Hope not.
Malxwal
Well-Known Member
Never underestimate the stupidity of the anti....
Stalker62
Well-Known Member
Done.
I am afraid I did not have your patience, with this bollocks.
"For the love of God, the need to put moderators on an FAC is, and always have been, utterly pointless.
Do something useful and sack it off".
I commented that the artificial inflation of firearms in the public domain would be instantly reduced.
LOL! I tagged on few extra words in my letter to my MP as below:
The Firearms Act and the items it controls under s1 should be about public safety and that and the Gun Barrel Proof Act should be about that and not about generating a revenue stream for the London Proof House or the Birmingham Proof House as a "make work" scheme for the otherwise unemployable.
Done
Bouncingoffthelocks
Well-Known Member
thanks for this, done
Similar threads
