Inert round

[enfieldspares]

Would an inert round need some kind of certification or can the possession of such an object be illegal.
What would the implications be of say making up a 223 fmj round with a spent primer in the case to be used as a key ring would such an object be considered unacceptable if seen in a public place on a bunch of keys your thoughts and advice please.

I always get a fit of the screaming ab dabs with such. To my mind an inert round should either have the primer removed or if not drilled with a small hole. Thus removing all doubt that this is not a round of ammunition where a single first strike of the primer failed to fire it. That's then maybe been picked up off a live firing battle practice range or other range or elsewhere. If OTOH the case body has been drilled that would also serve the purpose. I just don't trust cartridges that have a struck primer.

 

[gonzo]

My dummy rounds, I load with the primer pocket empty. As I certainly don't want to get a mix up with a misfire. (It's also not uncommon for people to drop misfire cases into the brass bins on ranges, after pulling the bullets. So making inert rounds from these would be a problem, even if no powder.)
I also often drop a 3mm hole in the case wall, just to make it extra obvious.

I friend once brought some 50cal inert rounds from a surplus shop, all with struck primers. He was suspicious about a couple of them, so we pulled all the heads. One was full of powder. We remade them fully inert and he went back to the shop to let them know.

Also...
A conversation I had with the BASC firearms legal people, regarding what constituted a pistol calibre.
The advice was that, if a calibre has ever been chambered in a rifle, then it could be argued that it could nolonger be a pistol calibre. One of the calibres mentioned as an exemple of rounds that had never been rifles chambered was 455webley. They were very interested to learn that I have a rifle chambered for that. As that info might save someone from a section 5 offence, for example if they had a HP .455 in a cartridge collection.

 

[Sinistral]

There are several UK collector sites advertising Eley-Kynoch berdan-primed rounds as 'inert'. One is below. The private sellers on these sites are sending out assembled cartridges by post. They remove the bullet, empty out the cordite strands or powder, squirt a drop of oil in (maybe), and re-assemble them as pukka rounds. Anyone familiar with British cartridges knows that the twin flash-holes next to the anvil are so tiny that they're impervious to liquid IF the cap primer is still in place. The only sure and certain way to deactivate berdan primers is by striking them. That of course reduces their market appeal to collectors, so it's not done.

Empty live-primed E-K cases are regularly sold at auctions as unlicensed Lots. Legally, bidders need a Section 1 FAC or RFD to buy these under the VCR Act 2006. The same applies to any mixed lot of reloading stuff IF it contains any live primers. Primers sold as a Lot are always labelled S1/RFD only, so there's just no consistency in this. To my knowledge, the only auctioneers who insist on the proper certification upfront is Holts of Norfolk. Holts will not sell complete E-K rounds labelled as 'inert' which have unstruck primers to unlicensed bidders.

Boxer-primed cases have larger flash-holes, so the primers can be deactivated with a special acidic solution. This doesn't always work. WD40 or ordinary oil definitely doesn't work. Imho it's best to remove boxer primers altogether to remove any doubt that dummy rounds are free from explosive material. Replacing live primers with identical Kranks dummy primers doesn't seem a good way of fooling anyone but yourself.

Quick Fire Auctions

enter general site description.

www.quickfireauctions.co.uk

 

[Foxyboy43]

My dummy rounds, I load with the primer pocket empty. As I certainly don't want to get a mix up with a misfire. (It's also not uncommon for people to drop misfire cases into the brass bins on ranges, after pulling the bullets. So making inert rounds from these would be a problem, even if no powder.)
I also often drop a 3mm hole in the case wall, just to make it extra obvious.

I friend once brought some 50cal inert rounds from a surplus shop, all with struck primers. He was suspicious about a couple of them, so we pulled all the heads. One was full of powder. We remade them fully inert and he went back to the shop to let them know.

Also...
A conversation I had with the BASC firearms legal people, regarding what constituted a pistol calibre.
The advice was that, if a calibre has ever been chambered in a rifle, then it could be argued that it could nolonger be a pistol calibre. One of the calibres mentioned as an exemple of rounds that had never been rifles chambered was 455webley. They were very interested to learn that I have a rifle chambered for that. As that info might save someone from a section 5 offence, for example if they had a HP .455 in a cartridge collection.

Interpretation is a wonderful thing until it reaches up and bites you.
Years ago a dear pal left me a Powell rook rifle (.360 IIRC) which was on FAC for possession only (i.e. no ammo). The RFD who was holding it rightly would not give it to me until it was on my own FAC so I set the wheels in motion to have it added. Shortly afterwards whilst checking something else I noticed that the rifle was listed as an obsolete calibre so did not need to be-on certificate at all. Long story short spoke to licensing branch who insisted on having a ballistics test done which concluded that as the rifle accepted and chambered a 38 Special pistol round it must stay on certificate. A further study of the legislation revealed that the determining factor was what the rifle was chambered for at time of manufacture rather than what it might accept afterwards. Much discussion with said licensing people ensued which culminated in a discussion with the head of the branch who of course quoted the result of the ballistics test concluding that an FAC was indeed required.
Hmmmm. I then quoted again the legislation which specified chambering at time of manufacture and in what can only be described as genius advised said officer that a 12 bore shotgun would accept a 50cal Browning round so by their reasoning that made it an anti-aircraft cannon rather than a smooth-barrelled firearm designed to merely shoot birds/rabbits etc…..
Suffice to say I still have the old Rook rifle - off certificate!

 

[Stevie/P]

Interpretation is a wonderful thing until it reaches up and bites you.
Years ago a dear pal left me a Powell rook rifle (.360 IIRC) which was on FAC for possession only (i.e. no ammo). The RFD who was holding it rightly would not give it to me until it was on my own FAC so I set the wheels in motion to have it added. Shortly afterwards whilst checking something else I noticed that the rifle was listed as an obsolete calibre so did not need to be-on certificate at all. Long story short spoke to licensing branch who insisted on having a ballistics test done which concluded that as the rifle accepted and chambered a 38 Special pistol round it must stay on certificate. A further study of the legislation revealed that the determining factor was what the rifle was chambered for at time of manufacture rather than what it might accept afterwards. Much discussion with said licensing people ensued which culminated in a discussion with the head of the branch who of course quoted the result of the ballistics test concluding that an FAC was indeed required.
Hmmmm. I then quoted again the legislation which specified chambering at time of manufacture and in what can only be described as genius advised said officer that a 12 bore shotgun would accept a 50cal Browning round so by their reasoning that made it an anti-aircraft cannon rather than a smooth-barrelled firearm designed to merely shoot birds/rabbits etc…..
Suffice to say I still have the old Rook rifle - off certificate!

Brilliant well done you

 

[Laurie]

Sadly, what @Foxyboy43 's post confirms is that our firearms laws are absolute minefields.

@Sinistral 's information was enlightening re Berdan primer (non) deactivation. Years back, I inadvertently acquired an old (live) Kynoch 7.65X53mm RNSP sporting round in what was sold as a consignment of loose surplus military 7.92X57mm Mauser ball cartridges, so I was technically illegally in possession of a round not authorised on my FAC. Rather than take it back to the RFD, I thought I'd deactivate it by dumping the powder then firing the Berdan primer before reseating the bullet. (If it had been Boxer, I'd have simply decapped it not being bothered about losing 100% authenticity.) I should have just fired it off in my 8mm Mauser rifle, or then again maybe I tried that and the case wouldn't chamber - so long ago I can't remember now.

What I came up with was jamming it as far as it would go into a 308 Win Lee Loader die body, placing it with the die on the garage floor and the case-head pointing up towards me and striking the primer with the Loader kit's decapping rod and pin hitting the blunt end with a hammer. Bad move! I forgot that when chambered in a firearm the bolt-face holds the primer in its pocket and it was unsupported here. It worked fine from the point of view of discharging the primer - huge 'crack' that left my ears ringing and my fingers holding the decapper rod / alfresco firing pin battered and sore, and the spent primer went off .... who knows where, but luckily not into my face or an eye.

Incidentally, the risks of inadvertently an unauthorised round or rounds in loose ammo lots seem to be considerable. Many years after the above episode, I agreed to demill around 1,000 .30-06 rounds that were in too poor condition to be fired for a local RFD. It turned out the box of loose rubbish contained four .318 Westley-Richards Nitro Express rounds, two 'solids' and two RNSP, all 250gn which I demilled and deprimed for my collection of unusual inert rounds. This was during the 'S5 expanding bullet' nonsense period, and it was then that I looked up the guidance about drilling bullet bases. I can't remember from where, but believe me I wouldn't have gone to this trouble if it hadn't been pukka gen.

 

[Pedro]

"Practice rounds" in Armed Service parlance. There's nothing to stop you having a bit of brass with some lead sticking out of the end (other materials are available). But of course ideally with no sort of primer in place or powder therein. Also ideally some method whereby the casual observer can identify it as an inert round. For example official .303 practice rounds are easily identifiable by their indentations and red paint.


Spot the practice rounds....

It's also worth explaining the difference when talking to those not au fait with firearms to blank rounds.

 

[enfieldspares]

Surely that's "drill rounds" not "practice rounds"?

 

[Pedro]

Surely that's "drill rounds" not "practice rounds"?

‘Course it is. D’oh! More practice (or drill) needed…

 

[VSS]

Steady the Buffs! As ever in this “United Kingdom” there are differences depending where one lives. In NI magazines were recently included as “licensable” by PSNI without consultation and causing much confusion. As late as last month a compromise has been reached whereby PSNI will pause their view that magazines are essentially component parts of a firearm so must be licensed until such times that a final decision is agreed. For those who may be affected this extract of minutes from last month’s meeting might be of interest - particularly item 4!

1. The EU Firearms Directive is not domestic NI law and not relevant to this magazines issue, other than clarity that even the EU agrees that magazines are not especially dangerous and not worthy of regard as component parts. It is simply an implementing directive; the BREXIT agreement in respect of NI doesn't include EU Firearms Directive implementation.
2. Given the EU Firearms Directive position, perhaps it is time for Northern Ireland to lose the line in its Firearms Order including magazines as component parts. This was discussed by the shooting representatives present and hopefully common sense will prevail in due course and bring NI in to line with the GB mainland position. We understand the legacy NI issue, but time has moved on.
3. SACS and its partner bodies put forward solutions to the current issue. These would involve no applications, variations, extra fees and far less work for PSNI. PSNI have taken these suggestions away and will come back to us shortly with a proposal, which we can then take to our members for approval.
4. Importantly, whilst we all work on a solution, PSNI have agreed to pause the current magazines registration and application scheme. It no longer operates; you do not need to make any applications for magazines.
   Soooo watch this space!

I think, by "magazines", @SpikeD meant printed media, not gun components, so you've got your wires crossed a bit there.

 

[Foxyboy43]

I think, by "magazines", @SpikeD meant printed media, not gun components, so you've got your wires crossed a bit there.

Just read it again! Mea culpa - I can only say in a pathetic defence that magazines (bullet-holding types) and licensing of same are very hot over here at the moment so my butterfly gazelle-like mind was all over the post to ensure that our position was clear. Utter numpty!
Apologies to Spike and thank you for your post.
Nurse!

 

[kenbro]

Interpretation is a wonderful thing until it reaches up and bites you.
Years ago a dear pal left me a Powell rook rifle (.360 IIRC) which was on FAC for possession only (i.e. no ammo). The RFD who was holding it rightly would not give it to me until it was on my own FAC so I set the wheels in motion to have it added. Shortly afterwards whilst checking something else I noticed that the rifle was listed as an obsolete calibre so did not need to be-on certificate at all. Long story short spoke to licensing branch who insisted on having a ballistics test done which concluded that as the rifle accepted and chambered a 38 Special pistol round it must stay on certificate. A further study of the legislation revealed that the determining factor was what the rifle was chambered for at time of manufacture rather than what it might accept afterwards. Much discussion with said licensing people ensued which culminated in a discussion with the head of the branch who of course quoted the result of the ballistics test concluding that an FAC was indeed required.
Hmmmm. I then quoted again the legislation which specified chambering at time of manufacture and in what can only be described as genius advised said officer that a 12 bore shotgun would accept a 50cal Browning round so by their reasoning that made it an anti-aircraft cannon rather than a smooth-barrelled firearm designed to merely shoot birds/rabbits etc…..
Suffice to say I still have the old Rook rifle - off certificate!

You’ll need to put it on certificate if you want to fire it… but I’m sure you know that.
Ken.

 

[Foxyboy43]

You’ll need to put it on certificate if you want to fire it… but I’m sure you know that.
Ken.

Indeed so thank you K and precisely what the licensing branch (reluctantly) said. I haven’t researched Rook ammunition but at least I know with some authority that it accepts 38 Special of which there is rather a lot over here…..

 

[shakey jake]

Just read it again! Mea culpa - I can only say in a pathetic defence that magazines (bullet-holding types) and licensing of same are very hot over here at the moment so my butterfly gazelle-like mind was all over the post to ensure that our position was clear. Utter numpty!
Apologies to Spike and thank you for your post.
Nurse!

magazines hold rounds not bullets dont they

 

[Foxyboy43]

magazines hold rounds not bullets dont they

Correct of course - my authorographical error though I suppose by implication they must hold bullets too….

 

[Klenchblaize]

I’ve made 22 Remington Jet Earrings for my Wife and a Teddy Bear which aren’t on my ticket and so far no issues.

K

 

[Stevie/P]

Would an inert round need some kind of certification or can the possession of such an object be illegal.
What would the implications be of say making up a 223 fmj round with a spent primer in the case to be used as a key ring would such an object be considered unacceptable if seen in a public place on a bunch of keys your thoughts and advice please.

So to put this into some kind of context if I was to resize a piece of .308 brass remove the struck primer drill out the base of a .308 fmj bullet with a 4mm drill to the end of its Bering section insert said bullet into the case and crimp then pass on to a friend as a decorative key ring am I committing any offence regarding the firearms law or for that matter any other law.

 

[Miki]

So to put this into some kind of context if I was to resize a piece of .308 brass remove the struck primer drill out the base of a .308 fmj bullet with a 4mm drill to the end of its Bering section insert said bullet into the case and crimp then pass on to a friend as a decorative key ring am I committing any offence regarding the firearms law or for that matter any other law.

No.

 

[Sinistral]

Indeed so thank you K and precisely what the licensing branch (reluctantly) said.

I haven’t researched Rook ammunition but at least I know with some authority that it accepts 38 Special of which there is rather a lot over here…..

Your FLD authority sounds a bit dubious, as I have all the Rook Rifle calibres on my gunroom wall to compare (properly punch-fired & deactivated of course).
These are low pressure small calibre numbers, so the only RR candidate fat enough to match is the .360 No 5.
Given the figures, a standard .38 Special round is too long so will not fit.
Why not try this out with a dummy round as you've got the rifle?
.38 Special overall length is 39.4mm (CIP), .360 No. 5 is 34.8mm.
.38 Special @ 1500 bar Max , .360 No 5 @ 1000 bar Max.

.360 Nº 5 Revolver&Rifle / MUNICION.ORG

 

[Sinistral]

So to put this into some kind of context if I was to resize a piece of .308 brass remove the struck primer drill out the base of a .308 fmj bullet with a 4mm drill to the end of its Bering section insert said bullet into the case and crimp then pass on to a friend as a decorative key ring am I committing any offence regarding the firearms law or for that matter any other law.

No reason to do that any more for 'Expanding' bullets.
Scroll down a few pages to point 45 of this circular from the Home Office.
FMJ bullets are just lumps of metal, and always have been.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/610380/2017_04_19_-_PCA2017_firearms_provisions_-_HO_Circular_-_final.pdf