Current Firearms Bill and reloading restrictions

[MAH]

Surely the very fact that intelligent people who understand reloading can interpret this in very different ways indicates that there is a problem

Exactly my thinking.
I'm optimistic the legislation is intended to help catch bad guys.
But the risk of scope creep and misinterpretation, is clearly there.

Having said that, if the guidelines mentioned in post #67, remain in place, I will be more relaxed about the degree of risk and how to mitigate it.

M

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/11162/page_11530/Firearms_guide_November_2022.pdf

 

[JTO]

I think the insertion of the words "without reasonable excuse" in a few places might sort things out.

 

[25 Sharps]

Surely the simple solution is to have as many components as you want but never be in possession of more than your permitted allowance of cases? After all it is the cases that are reusable and all the other parts are consumables.

That’s a crap idea, I have various cases at various stages of preparation and life (don’t load full fat .357 loads for the pistol more than 3 times then the case gets demoted to gallery loads). I also have lots of spare brass that I’ve picked up cheap to replace those I get through.

Same as brass with a false neck, for forming .223 to 25-45 or .270 too .280. I have no .270 on my ticket but lots of .270 brass.

Plus there’d be a lot of bottle openers and key rings to recall!

 

[Andrewslater]

That’s a crap idea, I have various cases at various stages of preparation and life (don’t load full fat .357 loads for the pistol more than 3 times then the case gets demoted to gallery loads). I also have lots of spare brass that I’ve picked up cheap to replace those I get through.

Same as brass with a false neck, for forming .223 to 25-45 or .270 too .280. I have no .270 on my ticket but lots of .270 brass.

Plus there’d be a lot of bottle openers and key rings to recall!

Start asking friends ti store it then. In all seriousness hopefully this doesn't restrict us from hoarding but if it does you’ll just have to have a sort out.

 

[25 Sharps]

Start asking friends ti store it then. In all seriousness hopefully this doesn't restrict us from hoarding but if it does you’ll just have to have a sort out.

My friends don’t have .270 and .280 brass is bastard hard to get hold of.

I shall just apply for 900-1000 of each calibre, which is what I had for all my CFs when expanding bullets were section 5. Probably 3000 for .357.

 

[25 Sharps]

Surely the sensible route would be to make it illegal to be in possession of all component parts at one time, unless in possession of an FAC?

 

[Andrewslater]

Surely the sensible route would be to make it illegal to be in possession of all component parts at one time, unless in possession of an FAC?

Is that not already the case? I didn’t think you could possess primers or powder without an FAC?

 

[stubear]

Is that not already the case? I didn’t think you could possess primers or powder without an FAC?

You can’t so far as I’m aware - which is why I’m of the view that this is unneeded and unnecessary legislation cooked up by bone idle useless grey suits desperate to appear like they’re doing “something” by targeting an overwhelmingly law abiding sector of the community rather than actually doing something we need.

 

[25 Sharps]

Is that not already the case? I didn’t think you could possess primers or powder without an FAC?

You cannot purchase primers without an FAC, you can possess them.

You cannot acquire powder without a certificate, but you can posses it without.

So if my FAC finished tomorrow and I was still in possession of primers and and powder o would not be breaking the law.

 

[25 Sharps]

You can’t so far as I’m aware - which is why I’m of the view that this is unneeded and unnecessary legislation cooked up by bone idle useless grey suits desperate to appear like they’re doing “something” by targeting an overwhelmingly law abiding sector of the community rather than actually doing something we need.

You can posses, you cannot acquire.

 

[Liveonce]

You can posses, you cannot acquire.

How can you possess something that you cannot acquire? surly you have to acquire it first to be in possession of it?

not saying you are wrong as the explosive regulations are hard reading can be read that you do not need and explosive certificate to acquire and keep shooters powders so long as you have an FAC, SGC, RFD.

Acquire buy or obtain.
possess. have as belonging to one, own.

 

[Andrewslater]

You cannot purchase primers without an FAC, you can possess them.

You cannot acquire powder without a certificate, but you can posses it without.

So if my FAC finished tomorrow and I was still in possession of primers and and powder o would not be breaking the law.

thats madness. Learn a new thing every day.

 

[25 Sharps]

How can you possess something that you cannot acquire? surly you have to acquire it first to be in possession of it?

not saying you are wrong as the explosive regulations are hard reading can be read that you do not need and explosive certificate to acquire and keep shooters powders so long as you have an FAC, SGC, RFD.

Acquire buy or obtain.
possess. have as belonging to one, own.

The only situation I can think of is the situation I described above, (see a couple of posts above) or a partner dies and you are left with their powder.

 

[25 Sharps]

thats madness. Learn a new thing every day.

Just re-read the VCR act, the law for primers is based around the sale of primers. They can be given quite freely.

 

[scrumbag]

I believe you can possess S2 ammo without a certificate as well.

As I understand it, the motivation for the tightening of “ammunition manufacture” legislation came about as there was concern about certain S58 obsolete firearms being too easy to make ammo for and be used for criminal purposes. (Particular concern was 44 Russian chambered revolvers I understand but I’d be happy to be corrected)

Certain chamberings were removed from the S58 list and I think that should be the end of personally. A shame collectors and historic arms historians now have extra hassle for there legitimate activities.

The right answer would be effective policing and prosecution but that is apparently too difficult.

I think there are 38 laws on the statute books at the moment that have clauses that pertain to firearms in them… surely that should be enough…

 

[Liveonce]

The only situation I can think of is the situation I described above, (see a couple of posts above) or a partner dies and you are left with their powder.

possibly however if it was section 1 ammo you would not expect to keep that after you no longer had a certificate and if you die the police can issue a temporary certificate to next of kin for ammo and guns so they are legally held to be disposed of.

would be good if conor at basc jumped in to confirm the situation with powder.

 

[njc110381]

I don't understand the fuss, personally. Holding components doesn't in any way suggest that your intent is to put together more than your hold allowance. I know it leaves us open to a possibility, but really, that's just scaremongering in my opinion.

I have a 10kg bag of rice in my kitchen cupboard. Does that prove beyond reasonable doubt that I'll eat it all at once? No
I have jerry cans of diesel and bags of lawn fertiliser in the garage, and I own a car. Does that mean I intend to make an IRA style car bomb? No

Proof of intent needs to come from somewhere. I bet if a chemist went through your kitchen and bathroom cupboards at home, more often than not you would be terrorists if that applied. I know, I was convicted of it when I was a teenager! Why? Because I made explosives and used them - there's the intent. The same could be said of text messages or other evidence that I was going to do it. They can't just assume that you will, otherwise we'd all be guilty of something. "This man was going to run over a group of people standing at the bus stop!" - "No your honour, that is simply the most direct route to my place of work".

This is being put in place so as when they drag in some spotty kid for being in a gang and find an ammo box full of inert 9mm rounds and a tub of powder under his bed, they can act accordingly.

 

[25 Sharps]

possibly however if it was section 1 ammo you would not expect to keep that after you no longer had a certificate and if you die the police can issue a temporary certificate to next of kin for ammo and guns so they are legally held to be disposed of.

would be good if conor at basc jumped in to confirm the situation with powder.

Not talking about ammunition though, that is a restricted item.

It’s not really worth debating the fact is it is not illegal to possess, it is illegal to acquire, and it’s almost impossible to possess without acquiring legally.

 

[Liveonce]

Not talking about ammunition though, that is a restricted item.

It’s not really worth debating the fact is it is not illegal to possess, it is illegal to acquire, and it’s almost impossible to possess without acquiring legally.

So is shooters powder, smokeless, a restricted item, it is a schedule 2 explosive, Explosive regulation 2014, and exempt from an acquire and keep explosives certificate if you posses a FAC or SGC.
Unlike black powder that does require an explosive certificate.

Think the proposed legislation is also aimed at FAC, RFD holders who may go rogue and make and supply ammunition to criminals, hence no exemption within the legislation for licence holders.

 

[DVS1]

Are you planning to speed though?

Yes...within the legal road speed limits