Antique Guns

Webley Boy

Well-Known Member
You would think that we have enough criminals in this country without the Government making some more, but that is precisely what they are about to do.

Under the new Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 (which comes into force on 14th July) it will now be an offence for anyone who is prohibited from owning a firearm under Section 21 of the 1968 Act, to be in possession of an 'antique' gun classified under Section 58 of the act (obsolete calibre or pre 1939 muzzle loading gun).

To clarify, S21 of the 1968 Act prohibits persons who have been sentenced to prison etc for 3 years or more, from ever being in possession of a gun (even so far as picking one up). Those who have been sentenced between 3 months and 3 years are prohibited for five years.

So, here is a fictitious example: Joe Bloggs was a naughty boy in his younger days being led astray by his mates. He was caught thieving or some similar offence and was convicted and sentenced to 3 years inside. He was a good boy inside and released early. He learned the errors of his ways and for the last 20 years has been a model citizen. He always had an interest in guns (especially antique ones) and has been collecting them for years. Being the model citizen he is, he has never fired them as this would be illegal.

If, on July the 14th, he does not hand them in, he will be a criminal again. How just is that? How will this prevent the real criminal from obtaining guns and using them in crime?
 
I'm not going to lose any sleep over a few ex cons having to hand in (or otherwise get rid of) their antique firearms.
 
Your hypothetical story can quite easily be the other way round.#

Johnny is a naughty boy, he has realised he can collect antique guns and uses them to rob banks.

Just using hypothetical made up stories is pointless....

The over all morale of the story - don't be a naughty boy.
 
You would think that we have enough criminals in this country without the Government making some more, but that is precisely what they are about to do.

Under the new Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 (which comes into force on 14th July) it will now be an offence for anyone who is prohibited from owning a firearm under Section 21 of the 1968 Act, to be in possession of an 'antique' gun classified under Section 58 of the act (obsolete calibre or pre 1939 muzzle loading gun).

To clarify, S21 of the 1968 Act prohibits persons who have been sentenced to prison etc for 3 years or more, from ever being in possession of a gun (even so far as picking one up). Those who have been sentenced between 3 months and 3 years are prohibited for five years.

So, here is a fictitious example: Joe Bloggs was a naughty boy in his younger days being led astray by his mates. He was caught thieving or some similar offence and was convicted and sentenced to 3 years inside. He was a good boy inside and released early. He learned the errors of his ways and for the last 20 years has been a model citizen. He always had an interest in guns (especially antique ones) and has been collecting them for years. Being the model citizen he is, he has never fired them as this would be illegal.

If, on July the 14th, he does not hand them in, he will be a criminal again. How just is that? How will this prevent the real criminal from obtaining guns and using them in crime?


Much as I have criticised our firearms laws for being petty and bureaucratic this new one has my support. In your (hopefully) hypothetical example "Joe Bloggs" to whom you refer should have thought of this before he embarked on his career of crime. To get banged up for 3 or more years must take a major effort of criminal conduct. e.g. a couple of years ago we were burgled by a crook with 30 odd previous convictions and all he got was to be sent on a "thinking Course" for 18 months. :banghead:

atb Tim
 
Oh you are a hard lot. Whatever happened to giving a person a second chance?

Yes it is a purely hypothetical example and I don't personally know of anyone like that, but there are tens if not hundreds of thousands of antique arms out there and it stands to reason that some people will be in that situation or something like it. I'm not talking about your violent or habitual criminal, I'm talking about someone who may have made a mistake a long time ago and wants to get back into society. Why should he be stigmatised for the rest of his life?

The other point is more practical. How on earth are the police going to enforce it? Anybody (not just RFD's) can sell an antique gun to anyone else. Who knows who has them?

My argument is that this is just another useless piece of legislation designed to 'assure' the public that the government is doing something about it. It will do nothing to reduce gun crime (just like the handgun ban). All it will do is add burden to an already overstreched police force and potentially criminalise some people who don't deserve it.
 
correct they have to be seen doing something even this its futile ,like knife and gun amnestys the crims are not going to hand them in,its just a ploy to get them out of circulation it doesnt make a drop of difference
 
There is a little-known right of appeal to the Crown or Sherriff Court. A prohibited person can apply to have the ban lifted.

I have personally experienced two such appeals where the individual presented no threat whatsoever to public safety or the peace.

In both cases the chief officer of police was represented by counsel in Court but made no objection to the application. In both cases (one a five year prohibition and the other a life prohibition) the prohibitions were lifted by the presiding judge.

So there is a route in law to remedy the situation for the right applicants.
 
Oh you are a hard lot. Whatever happened to giving a person a second chance?

Why should he be stigmatised for the rest of his life?

Funnily enough one of the items that I lost in an earlier burglary was a rare and fine quality John Manton 20bore muzzle loader that was made around 1819 and subsequently converted from flintlock to percussion, it was worth around a couple of thousand pounds.

Incredibly the crooks that stole it cut down the stock and barrels and attempted to rob a post office with it.

So yes, criminals do use antique guns to commit crimes and in my experience of being on the receiving end it has been through crooks being given a second chance, after second chance after second chance.... ad infinitum.

Perhaps it is time that the criminal justice system had reality check and recognised that only time that the offender can be prevented from reoffending is whilst they are held in secure custody.

atb Tim
 
Lee Rigby is why. And other criminal use of a s58 weapons. The revolver used was a Dutch revolver, now classed as obsolete. What was loaded into it, causing the injuries to the one guy's hand was modern 9mm ammunition, or some such. Thus why the cylinder blew to pieces I am given to understand.

44 Russian is s58 but the cases are easily made by cutting down readily available 44 Magnum, or 44 Special cases. Apparently some petty criminals now realise making ammunition for freely sold s58 weapons is less hassle....and no legal impact if in possession at their house of a s58 weapon and no ammunition...than being caught in possession of a modern handgun that is immediately an offence under s5.
 
Last edited:
Actually the two scumbags that killed Lee Rigby had an obsolete calibre 8mm pistol that blew up when they pulled the trigger loaded with home loaded ammo
Geordie
 
Lee Rigby is why. And other criminal use of a s58 weapons. The revolver used was a Dutch revolver, now classed as obsolete. What was loaded into it, causing the injuries to the one guy's hand was modern 9mm ammunition, or some such. Thus why the cylinder blew to pieces I am given to understand.

44 Russian is s58 but the cases are easily made by cutting down readily available 44 Magnum, or 44 Special cases. Apparently some petty criminals now realise making ammunition for freely sold s58 weapons is less hassle....and no legal impact if in possession at their house of a s58 weapon and no ammunition...than being caught in possession of a modern handgun that is immediately an offence under s5.


ACPO were sniffing round the .44 Russian in 2011:

"NABIS
There is a growing trend in relation to .44 Smith and Wesson Russian cartridges, around
the recovery of such ballistic items from criminal use. It is currently in the list of
obsolete calibre and can therefore be possessed as an antique and readily available for
purchase over the internet. DCC Marsh would seek to support its reclassification and
proactive arrangements for their recovery and confiscation.
Action:
Mr Parker to supply DCC Marsh and Mr Widdecombe with the escalating issues
in order to keep at the forefront of considerations for reclassification.
Action:
DCC Marsh to make further contact with Sarah Severn (Home Office) for an
update as to her views."
 
The old s.21 prohibition was a ban on relevant persons having a certificate. This, of course, effectively stopped them from legally acquiring and possessing regulated firearms.

However, there was a clear right of appeal. Success (quite common, actually) removed the prohibition on being granted a certificate. Once the formerly prohibited person was allowed to hold a certificate, the right to possess authorised firearms was re-established.

In the case of s.58 firearms (antiques), where there is no requirement for a possessor to hold a certificate, what appeal mechanism will there be to remove the prohibition ?
 
ACPO were sniffing round the .44 Russian in 2011:

"NABIS
There is a growing trend in relation to .44 Smith and Wesson Russian cartridges, around
the recovery of such ballistic items from criminal use. It is currently in the list of
obsolete calibre and can therefore be possessed as an antique and readily available for
purchase over the internet. DCC Marsh would seek to support its reclassification and
proactive arrangements for their recovery and confiscation.
Action:
Mr Parker to supply DCC Marsh and Mr Widdecombe with the escalating issues
in order to keep at the forefront of considerations for reclassification.
Action:
DCC Marsh to make further contact with Sarah Severn (Home Office) for an
update as to her views."


What is the legal definition of obsolete calibre when there is so much reloading equipment available????
 
I am not sure the law will prevent any crimes, real criminals will get proper pistols, Idiots will use replicas or air soft or whatever makes them feel good, you only had to look at the guns at the shooting show, until the time fits the crime, banning this or that will never work.
 
The old s.21 prohibition was a ban on relevant persons having a certificate. This, of course, effectively stopped them from legally acquiring and possessing regulated firearms.

However, there was a clear right of appeal. Success (quite common, actually) removed the prohibition on being granted a certificate. Once the formerly prohibited person was allowed to hold a certificate, the right to possess authorised firearms was re-established.

In the case of s.58 firearms (antiques), where there is no requirement for a possessor to hold a certificate, what appeal mechanism will there be to remove the prohibition ?

That is not quite right.

This is what the Home Office guidance 2013 has to say in chapter 5 paragraph 5.

'5.5 Persons prohibited under section 21 of the 1968 Act (see paragraph 12.4 for its terms) may not possess any firearms or ammunition, not just those for which a certificate is required. Thus the prohibition extends to all air weapons, air gun pellets and shot gun ammunition.'
 
The proposal is clearly to close a specific loophole being exploited by the criminal fraternity in order to obtain firearms, possibly cheaper than on the black market, and use them in the commission of crime.

I don't see what the issue is other than a legitimate collector of such items would have to have the item deactivated probably at their expense.

If NABIS are advising consideration of the change to legislation it will be on the basis of the amount of specific firearms being recovered from Police enquiries.

As someone said the reloading route could make any obsolete calibre the opposite - it seems like a common sense route to take. Why I don't agree with the pistol ban we are where we are; and what difference would it make to a collector if the item had been deactivated?

The prohibited persons exemption only becomes relevant when they are 'caught' by the authorities, not necessarily when they are purchasing them.
 
NABIS are seeing a large rise in the use of old muzzle loading antique guns in criminal activity. An old muzzle loading duelling pistol is just as deadly as it was 200 years ago, and as of today can be in lawfully possessed by anybody.

If you have had a criminal conviction in the past you can still own and possess firearms if you reformed and have been bagging yourself for at least five years.
 
I don't see what the issue is other than a legitimate collector of such items would have to have the item deactivated probably at their expense.

I can assure you that legitimate collectors would object most strongly to having them deactivated, regardless of who pays for it. Collectors want to collect the original articles, not vandalised, incomplete, useless and scarred remnants. Collectors also don't like seeing antiques being misused by criminals any more than anyone else would.


Imagine a green eco-friendly world in 20 years time, where collectors of classic Ferraris and other ghastly smelly polluting petrol-powered cars are told that they must have them deactivated by machining slots in the blocks, cutting the camshafts and plugging the exhausts. How could society risk the chance that they may try to use these machines..? How could any responsible owner possibly object..?

Surely the obvious problem with the obsolete calibre change is that people previously owning items legally are now to be prevented from doing so as a result of the law changing, not as a result of their own actions. Under these circumstances they should be entitled to compensation for the value of the items that they may no longer possess.

Also please remember that ownership of sporting rifles is just as vulnerable to legislative actions as ownership of old pistols. Unfortunately the various shooting and collecting fields are so narrow minded and sectarian that we have a joyful willingness to point fingers at others and claim that they are the problem, not us, and they should be controlled to extinction. Not us, of course, we're the good guys.. I remember a group of Essex girls being asked if they behaved like Essex girls. They said no, of course not, they were quite normal. But they'd heard that the girls down Romford way were like that.
 
Back
Top