NABIS do not agree with removing sound moderators from FAC.

[20ppc]

I am also slightly confused about their reponse, as there's a section that seems fundamentally wrong...



We all only have 1 certificate that covers all our firearms right? We are not applying for a separate certificate for a sound moderator, we are applying for a variation of the existing certificate?

They obviously don’t have a clue about firearms licensing or how it works.

 

[Heym SR20]

@Heym SR20 I can’t agree that there isn’t much paperwork caused by having mods ‘on ticket’. You’re correct that there isn’t in the first instance but what about if they require replacement? That requires you to dispose of the old and put in for a 1:1. That may be easy in some forces but where I am a 1:1 currently takes 6 months. That’s seriously impractical. Even if dealt with efficiently, it still takes up FLD time on something of no benefit to public safety.

I do though see why a ‘free for all’ might concern the police. However, requiring that an FAC be shown, with appropriate firearm, as a condition of purchase seems a reasonable compromise that would all but entirely eliminate the administrative burden of swapping a mod.

Agreed and its the reason why we should go to a system of being able to hold certain number of rifles and you can simply exchange as and when you need / want to. Ditto for moderators. I see absolutely no benefit to public safety of all the paperwork to change a 243 into another 243 or even a 7x57. All that is needed is to transfer the 243 to another licence holder or RFD and then add the new rifle and notify FLD as appropriate.

By having all this nonsense of needing a 1 for 1 it just creates extra work with no good end result.

 

[20ppc]

I can understand why law enforcement authorities may be concerned at the deregulation of moderators.

Any gun is very noisy without a moderator/ silencer and anybody up to no good will know that as soon as the gun is fired everybody in the area will be alerted. Fire it a few times and every police officer will be fast approaching.

By contrast adding a moderator/ silencer you can use the gun and then just walk away undetected. It was for this very reason why silencers were developed for use by the SOE and others doing clandestine work in occupied Europe and why the other side treated them as spies and assassins and executed them accordingly.

A moderator in the hands of a criminal turns a noisy weapon into a silenced one, and it was for this reason that they are licensed and controlled.

At present the authorisation to acquire a moderator is pretty much granted alongside that of a rifle and it is really no additional paperwork.

Many will argue that a mod is just a piece of tube with some threading. It is. But then so is a barrel, and a rifle itself is just a piece of tube with a large interrupted thread (ie the bolt) and a few springs and a bit of wood.

You’ve definitely been watching too much television

 

[Dalua]

The ambiguity lies in whether something can be considered an "accessory" to a firearm when it is not actually attached to it, I believe.
Only when attached does it become an accessory. Maybe.

That's my view, maybe.
It seems the only explanation compatible with the way things work in terms of moderators which could be used for S1 firearms (e.g. mods for air-rifles, which work for S1 air-rifles and rimfires, mods for S2 .410s which would undoubtedly work on, at the very least, pistol-calibre firearms) being freely bought, sold and possessed.

e.g. I have several 1/2"UNF mods for sub-12-ftlb airguns, but only two FAC slots for mods for .22LR and .22 FAC air. Am I unlawfully in possession of the mods not 'on my FAC' - all of which would work with the S1 firearms?
I have four other 1/2" UNF-threaded mods 'on my FAC' for other cals, which would of course also all fit each other and the .22's above - am I in unlawful possession of those, too?

I don't think so - but the only explanation which seems to make sense is not the 'magical thinking' one which goes 'this mod is for this rifle and no other' (despite the fact it would fit and could be used on several other rifles possessed), but rather that the 'slot' for a particular rifle (or a number of rifles) is actually 'filled' in law only when a mod is actually attached to (one of the) the rifle(s) for which it is authorised to be used. You can only fit one mod to a rifle at a time.

Interesting.

 

[Liveonce]

is not the distinction in the eyes of the law that airgun mods are not proofed but section 1 (and 2?) are.

 

[Dickie]

That poorly written objection with lacking facts and cohesions by an organisation that has national and intelligence in the title says it all really

 

[Dalua]

is not the distinction in the eyes of the law that airgun mods are not proofed but section 1 (and 2?) are.

I don't think so. I'm not aware of any law that describes such a distinction, nor do any mods AFAIK need to be proofed.
If they did, presumably mods for S2 shotguns (not ever restricted, but presumably usable on S1 shotguns) would need to be proofed and yet would not be ' 'S1 items', and mods for S1 airguns....??

 

[charlie222]

This is another case of people making jobs for themselves. Surely the most relevant statistic would be how many legally held mods have been used in crimes? If the number is tiny as I would expect, there's no point in strengthening the existing laws.

 

[Rafter]

I laughed at that.

Obviously, what they need to do is make using moderators in a crime extra illegal.

Or maybe extra extra illegal.

That will fix it.

 

[nun_hunter]

I laughed at that.

Obviously, what they need to do is make using moderators in a crime extra illegal.

Or maybe extra extra illegal.

That will fix it.

Ah yes, just like the Zombie knives, let's create another law that narrowly specifies an offence that is already covered by existing laws

 

[HonestJohn]

Ah yes, just like the Zombie knives, let's create another law that narrowly specifies an offence that is already covered by existing laws

Speaking of zombie knives. Presumably the government A. Believe zombies are real and B. They carry knives

I personally thought they were mostly musicians

 

[Tazz]

Not to mention leaving a clear paper trail/credit card trail, several witnesses and CCTV footage...

And surely, if handguns are illegal in the UK, why would anyone supply or import a sound moderator for a handgun? You couldn't put it on anything OTHER than a handgun, so if someone came and asked to buy one it might just raise a suspicion that they were not on the straight and narrow?

Or terribly intelligent?

Or both

 

[jb7x57]

Why not keep them on certificate
If you have 6 guns your cert says you are allowed to possess up to 6 moderators at time no restriction on changing them just produce proof of sale and purchase without any variation that would make life easier and keep the idiots happy who watch to many films showing a firearm totally silent with one fitted

 

[Tazz]

If someone has gone to all the trouble to source an illegal firearm and obtain ammunition for it they can surely source/manufacture a moderator. In most European countries moderators are on a blanket ban but criminals still acquire weapon, ammunition and a moderator. Let’s not let an opportunity to significantly reduce administrative work for the Police FD’s and reduce admin for the applicant fall over while focusing on a risk that doesn’t exist in reality

 

[Rake Aboot]

Legally you can buy any moderator off ticket anyway . You just have to declare it’s not for use with a Firearm.
I actually bought a Predator P8 on eBay , new unused for £50. Guy bought it in a returned mail auction and I simply had it added to my fac once I had it and used it on my .222

As has been said, it’s only a firearm if it’s being screwed onto the end of a firearm.
Whether a respectable rfd will sell you one is a different matter but if it’s brand new and not assigned to fac then there’s no reason why not

I’m sure my local rfd (Ed) can add to this ( to tell me I’m talking pish lol) but I don’t think I am.

 

[Liveonce]

I don't think so. I'm not aware of any law that describes such a distinction, nor do any mods AFAIK need to be proofed.
If they did, presumably mods for S2 shotguns (not ever restricted, but presumably usable on S1 shotguns) would need to be proofed and yet would not be ' 'S1 items', and mods for S1 airguns....??

looks like they need proofing as I read it.

https://www.gunproof.com/downloads/conversion-barrels-and-fitting-muzzle-attachments

Certainly the mods I have for my S1 show a proof mark, but not the one I have for my now old airgun.

 

[Rake Aboot]

They don’t need proofed. Folk used to think if you were selling one it needed to be but no.

Actually I’ve read that link above but as I’ve said. I’ve bought and sold lots the weren’t proofed. That includes from dealers

 

[andyk]

From speaking to one of the mod manufacturers, they have them proofed because their insurer insisted upon it as a way of showing they’re safe and not because it’s a legal requirement.

Now, you might disagree that it shows they’re safe (particularly as I’ve heard the proof house proofs one from the batch and then just stamps the rest) but I guess some insurance clerk who doesn’t know what a moderator is will just see ‘independently tested by the proof house’ and get a warm and fuzzy feeling.

 

[Liveonce]

Wow looks like we are not really clear on the law around buying, selling and proofing sound moderators.

I take comfort in knowing mine have been proofed and have only ever purchased from an RFD.

Looks like a question for BASC as some are interpreting the law we don’t need them on ticket to have several for the same firearm with just the one entry on your certificate to be legal when any one of them is screwed on to the firearm.

 

[GlennUK]

It appears to me that the mod does not become an 'accessory' unless it is specifically made for fac purposes, is fitted or purchased with the intent to fitting to an fac rifle.

And possession of such an accessory is likely to be an offence unless you have the appropriate entry on you FAC.

If you have a moderator that fits both an fac and sub12 air rifle then possession may be an offence if you intend to use it on your fac rifle, and not if you don't.

From.looking online this am several retailers require I'd upon delivery, others not.