Yes that states to acquire, not to possess.
Changes really are coming in firearms licensing….
- Thread starter Foxyboy43
- Start date
how do you possess without acquiring?
acquire
1. to come into possession or ownership of; get as one's own
Yes, I know what aquire means and what possess means, which is not the same thing.
Someone can be in possession of something and claim they do not know how they acquired it, they cannot however deny they are in possession of it.
Last edited:
Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
BASC's response to the outcome of the consultation was on 18th July 2022 and is outlined on the following webpages:
basc.org.uk
basc.org.uk
Government rejects airgun age restriction proposal - The British Association for Shooting and Conservation
After a lengthy BASC campaign, the Home Office's proposal to restrict airgun use by 14-17 year olds has been dropped by the government.
basc.org.uk
"It's not just a victory for shooting" - The British Association for Shooting and Conservation
Head of firearms Martin Parker discusses the government’s decision to drop the proposal to restrict the use of airguns for under-18s.
basc.org.uk
indeed but the detail in the legislation is in the detail
The Explosives Regulations 2014
looks like you can keep it without out an acquire and keep certificate provided it is acquired by in are case a FAC/SGC holder, up to 15kg.
So if you were in possession of it but did not have a FAC/SGC then you would be breaking the law unless licenced to keep/store.
Then the record keeping requirements are interesting reading.
MAH
Well-Known Member
I disagree.
If the number of empty cases doesn't exceed your authorisation for ammunition, (lets say 250 rounds of 308) then you can still have 1000 LR primers and a couple of tubs of powder, maybe a box of 4 different bullet weights. The key point is you can't reload more than you're authorisation because you don't have that may cases.
I believe this legislation is aimed at the criminals reloading obsolete calibre to feed off ticket obsolete calibre pistols.
I am not worried by it.
M
MAH
Well-Known Member
If I was in that position, then I'd sell or scrap some cases.
We can still enjoy experimenting with different loads bullet weights etc
I am more than happy to compromise a bit if it helps the poilce deal with the scum supply ammunition to criminals
I think of Olvier (the wee girl in Liverpool) and feel comfortable that I support change that might make a difference.
M.
you hide them away
This is just smoke-and-daggers rather than an open discussion that they are failing to control knife crime, far simpler to show you are tough on crime by more controls on firearm ownership. Eventually they will run out of these maverick ideas, that deliver no meaningful benefit but look good on paper and keeps them in a job.
Well, not at the momentyou hide them away
This is just smoke-and-daggers rather than an open discussion that they are failing to control knife crime, far simpler to show you are tough on crime by more controls on firearm ownership. Eventually they will run out of these maverick ideas, that deliver no meaningful benefit but look good on paper and keeps them in a job.
Last edited:
prior to BREXIT these were happy to send to the U.K. primers, bullets, cases with no questions asked, they have only stopped because they cannot be bothered to sort out the VAT requirements.
So how hard is it to pop across the channel and return with a few primers? after all 25,000 plus have this year so far crossed in small boats.
The scum will find away if the rewards are bigger enough, just like the people trafficking the 25,000 across in new inflatable boats fitted with new outboard, that we scrap.
So how hard is it to pop across the channel and return with a few primers? after all 25,000 plus have this year so far crossed in small boats.
The scum will find away if the rewards are bigger enough, just like the people trafficking the 25,000 across in new inflatable boats fitted with new outboard, that we scrap.
MAH
Well-Known Member
Personally
I don't think it's aimed at legitimate shooter, and the document BASC circulated includes words to that effect.
I guess we will have to wait until legislation is passed to see the end result.
Maybe the wording will change.
M
Read this dribble
Description and scale of key monetised costs by ‘main affected groups’
All costs are over 10 years. Total cost is estimated to be between £1.4 and £30.9 million (PV), with a central estimate of £6.3 million (PV). Costs to the CJS to enforce the new offences are estimated to be £1.1 to £17.7 million (PV), with a central estimate of £4.4 million (PV). Estimated enforcement costs to the police are between £0.1 to £3.9 million (PV), with a central estimate of £0.8 million (PV).
big numbers for what in practice must be very few offenders that get prosecuted.
Description and scale of key monetised costs by ‘main affected groups’
All costs are over 10 years. Total cost is estimated to be between £1.4 and £30.9 million (PV), with a central estimate of £6.3 million (PV). Costs to the CJS to enforce the new offences are estimated to be £1.1 to £17.7 million (PV), with a central estimate of £4.4 million (PV). Estimated enforcement costs to the police are between £0.1 to £3.9 million (PV), with a central estimate of £0.8 million (PV).
big numbers for what in practice must be very few offenders that get prosecuted.
Rubbish. Don't be paranoid. It may well be workable for 50 cal (not sure) but it is unworkable for pretty much everybody else.
Exactly, if they bring in tighter controls on all components you just put your number held up. Batches of 500 for target shooting plus 300 (load dev, zeroing, practice plus stalking) for deer please officer.
Leec6.5
Well-Known Member
100% looked at his channel earlier at the recommendation of a friend!
110% bellend is all i have to say about him and his channel
Increase your allowance ! You clearly have the need.
Your current allowance is only lower because we all pick a number that represents the number of rounds we are likely to have loaded at any one time as per current legislation. If they want to change the basis of the legislation then we change the basis of our needs i.e. reflect our buying patterns not our loading patterns. The net result of course is that they would be effectively be increasing the amount of loaded ammunition we can have which presumably is less desirable to the Home Office, but there you go.
gonzo
Well-Known Member
The problem with the 'intent' is that some poor bugger is going to end up being the test case for it. Unless the guidence to police is strong (and they decode to take any notice of it).
I can see the situation where a constabulary take the view that if you only have 200rnds authority on your FAC, that you should only have 200 primers in your possession. And someone is going to be put through the wringer to defend it. And then probably have to battle to get their certs back afterwards.
The miniature rifle range exemption is something I use. And I agreed with the requirement for guns to be held on an FAC, in my response.
For target shooting, the NSRA are really tight on who they issue exemption certificates to. But they are not the only ones who can issue a 'rcognised' cert. And wonder if the others are quite to careful, as there have been problems.
However, I believe the HO did not intend to fully remove the exemption, which is most useful to allow non club members to shoot (therefore be in posession of guns) on a range. It's a very useful facility for clubs to allow prospective members to try out the sport. Espacially small clubs that are not able to go for full HO approved status.
I did ask for a wider definition for what constitutes a miniature rifle. To include the 17 rimfires etc.
Also to keep the existing position on range insurance. ie it should not be a condition. As many miniatire ranges really are run on a shoestring.
I can see the situation where a constabulary take the view that if you only have 200rnds authority on your FAC, that you should only have 200 primers in your possession. And someone is going to be put through the wringer to defend it. And then probably have to battle to get their certs back afterwards.
The miniature rifle range exemption is something I use. And I agreed with the requirement for guns to be held on an FAC, in my response.
For target shooting, the NSRA are really tight on who they issue exemption certificates to. But they are not the only ones who can issue a 'rcognised' cert. And wonder if the others are quite to careful, as there have been problems.
However, I believe the HO did not intend to fully remove the exemption, which is most useful to allow non club members to shoot (therefore be in posession of guns) on a range. It's a very useful facility for clubs to allow prospective members to try out the sport. Espacially small clubs that are not able to go for full HO approved status.
I did ask for a wider definition for what constitutes a miniature rifle. To include the 17 rimfires etc.
Also to keep the existing position on range insurance. ie it should not be a condition. As many miniatire ranges really are run on a shoestring.
Yea there is merit in that, I decreased all my allowances once expanding bullets came off sect 5 as I didn’t need 900 of all my centrefires any more.
But, that said, some calibres like .22 hornet and .223 (which I form into .223 AI and 25-45) I have thousands of cases so allowance needs to increase somewhat!
Similar threads
