Home office consultation on deregulating sound moderators
- Thread starter ZimCoxy136
- Start date
fixedwheel
Well-Known Member
Not read every post so this may have been mentioned already but as a moderator is recorded on a licence would removing them be classed as a reduction in firearms held by the public. Foolish as that is its a gift for a political party to brag about.
Post #14
Whilst it has been mentioned before, I also see this as a potential stumbling block. Imagine bragging about it only to be swiftly brought down with the facts that it is only moderator re-classification. It would appear as though the person spouting off about firearms reductions is telling a big porky using statistics to tell lies to the electorate. Whilst we all know that they do this anyway, they often don't like it being pointed out so easilyNot read every post so this may have been mentioned already but as a moderator is recorded on a licence would removing them be classed as a reduction in firearms held by the public. Foolish as that is its a gift for a political party to brag about.
Just remember Labour did not Get a classic win in this election - the others lost it ! Meaning Labour was the biggest poling party . They really do not have the peoples remit as such and the way they are going .. its very likely they will disappear like the Post WW2 Liberals if they carry on doing as they please without the majority of the UK not wanting them and certainly they wont win for many , many decades again if at all .Had fewer people been hoodwinked by the Labour "we will look after working people" lies, then the Conservatives would have tabled legislation about now.
Hey , it might actually be worth the pain to watch them disappear forever after one term
I don't think this worries them at all. Either too stupid, arrogant, or hypocritical.
David.
There were definitely ‘issues’ when they were added to section 5.
I may be wrong but were not pistol calibre expanding bullets kept as section 5 ?
Not quite.
Expanding bullets that only fit pistols are still section 5 - otherwise expanding 22 ammunition would be section 5 and as we all know - it ain't
Cheers
Bruce
Expanding bullets that only fit pistols are still section 5 - otherwise expanding 22 ammunition would be section 5 and as we all know - it ain't
Cheers
Bruce
DesG
Well-Known Member
The only ones I can think of would be 45ACP. Hardly worth the effort of banning them.
So .45 ACP is one that is not on section 5 as it's used in the De Lisle carbine but rounds such as .455" /.450, .25"ACP, 9mm Steyr, 5.5mm Velo Dog and other such obscurities are. It's not the most thought through legislation as I doubt the criminal element pay it much heed but it does mean that if you are caught with expanding ammunition / bullets/projectiles you are committing an offence. Note that the wording is "designed to expand or flatten" so ordinary lead only bullets are exempt.
tim@tcs
Well-Known Member
My 410 pistol was down as sect 1 short barrel shotgun. Only when the ban came in did I talk to the police about it. They tried to take it but couldn’t and in the end gave me open use after a few years of silly restrictions
I’d have just admitted to my FEO and had it recorded as a rifle but then I had a lot of section 7 stuff too
BenBhoy
Well-Known Member
@Conor O'Gorman any updates on this your end?
Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
Nothing to update.
Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
That really helps, thank you. For our part BASC has pressed the Home Office to continue what the last government started and take sound moderators out of the licensing system. We’ve been told by civil servants that this is still on the agenda, and we will continue to press.
Similar threads
