New UK Firearms Safety Consultation

The 'High Muzzle Energy' restrictions have been in the pipeline for a while, if I recall correctly this was almost conceded by 'the orgs' in order to avert a ban. I guess it will be rather hard for them to argue against it now having suggested that was the solution to the perceived risk which was going to have them banned. That said, the evidence which suggests these rifles are actually a risk to the public, rather than a theoretical one, is lacking. Anyway, the police already have this power in reality. I wonder how many .50 cal owners have been allowed to renew/obtain a 50 without having level 3 security?

I can't see what they're getting at with reloading components. 'Make it an offence to possess reloading components with intent to manufacture more than permitted amounts' (or some such). I'd have thought that is an offence already as you're not permitted to have more ammunition than authorised, which for an FAC holder is your permitted amount for for Joe Bloggs is none at all! If the police have evidence that you intend to do this then you're likely to get nicked.

To be honest, if that is all they want to do then I don't care as it really would be a case of restating the existing law. However, I'd be more worried that it then transpires into a ban on mail order of brass and bullets, inevitably pushing up the price.

The airgun bit is the most worrying to my mind. I have a theory that the powers that be know that most people get into shooting by using an air rifle as a teenager (I did). The vast majority do so responsibly. I can't help but think the idea is to strangle off new people coming into shooting by getting it to the point that you can't get into shooting without first going through the rigmarole of getting a license, club probation etc.

I don't doubt that there is an issue with 'yoofs' mucking about with airguns. However, I would be surprised if those who do so already are not committing offences under the existing legislation. If that hasn't worked, and there is plenty of it, I'm really not holding my breath that this will. Delinquents will still get cheap air rifles from irresponsible adults (many of them wouldn't be behaving as they do if the adults in their lives weren't), I fear all this will do is mean that law abiding parents will be unable to let their kids use an air rifle as it won't be practical to provide 1 on 1 supervision. I spent hundreds of hours of my teenage years in the fields and woods with my air rifle. My Dad is into shooting but I can't see he would have had the time to supervise it all!
Changes to Miniature range operations doesn't appear too unreasonable

HME definition of 13600 joules is way above even my 404 Jeff - what has a ME of 13600 joules other than 50 cal ?

What do they mean by evidence of intent to manufacture more than your allotted allowance?? Are they suggesting that it would be an offence to hold more powder / primers and bullets, which if all put together at once, would exceed your allowance ?
I simply cant see how the reloading bit is enforced unless either we submit to working mind reading or the sale of components is limited to that quantity required to manufacture our limit in a specific calibre Eg you can only buy up to 100 7mm bullets if thats the limit of possession of complete cartridges. Going to make bulk discounts and purchasing powder tricky...

I believe there is a Russian equivalent to the 50cal, but not sure anyone chambers a civilian type rifle in it.

Even things like the 416 Barrett and 408 Cheytac don't manage 10,000 ft/lbs.

Can't break rank too much though. They'll start off with 10,000 as HME then it'll be 5,000, then 3,000....

That said, I'm not sure much can be done about this security bit though. Even the consultation document notes that many FAC holders for 50cals said they would accept greater security. I imagine that by 'accept' they meant if that was the alternative to a ban, so hardly free consent, but they'll struggle to row back on it now.
I also think that the reloading issue is already dealt with in part. I have heard that a number of RFDs have been asked (read 'told') by their local force that they should not sell pistol bullets without seeing an FAC for that calibre.

If they must go down this route, I would hope that someone can make them see sense and realise that the problem, to the extent that there is one, is going to be in relation to pistol bullets and brass. I've even had it from my FEO that they are concerned about rifle ammunition getting into the wrong hands but it just makes no sense, without some real evidence I do not accept that criminals have any interest in 243, 270, 308 ammo etc.
Looking at their consultation document, precisely none.

If I recall, the whole 50cal ban was predicated on the theory that terrorists could steal a 50cal and then import themselves some high explosive or armour piercing rounds and do some mischief. I am not convinced there was any real intelligence to back this up. It was almost as though they had nicked the plot from a Frederick Forsyth book and decided to legislate against it!

It also seemed to completely avoid those proposing the legislation that it takes an awful lot of practice to use a 50cal at the kind of ranges its designed for. I'll hold my hands up and say I would have no hope of hitting a target at a mile with a 50cal and I'm sure 90%+ of the people on this forum couldn't. On that basis I really doubt that someone who has stolen one and never fired a rifle in their life could suddenly start sniping people at range.
Well I can process 300 rounds of X calibre, I have 700 primers in stock, powder for 1,300 rounds and 470 bullets of different weights – my motive continuity of supply for my favourite load.

How do I prove that?
Obviously if you hold strong views on any of the material contained then now might be a good time to spend a few minutes submitting your views.
I for one belong to an old established club enjoying access to two famous military ranges and would not like to see that access curbed in any way.

Any change is unreasonable.

Not so sure, this is about the only thing in there that I have any time for. If it really is the case that you could have a .223 on the basis of running a miniature rifle range, without any certification whatsoever, that does seem a bit of a loophole.

I'd have thought the answer would be to make it .22LR only and bring in some form of regulation, not necessarily an FAC though, to mean that there is some oversight. It would be a real shame if Scouts had to give up using .22LRs due to regulation. However, the idea that there are 9 pubs in the country where there are readily available firearms I can see would concern some.
Different strokes again.... in my part of the world you need a v strong case to obtain more than 1k of powder even though you can hold 1000 rounds per calibre on your FAC ( you do the maths - say 8mm x 150gn bullets x 50gns powder into 1k....less than 300 rounds per K) Powder (and primers) can only be obtained upon production of a police authority to purchase which has to be applied for on a pro forma - applied for in advance and taking about 2 wks to receive. So iro powder over here no big change from the current MO. Rumour machine has it that powder (possibly black?) was being used as an igniter for bigger bangs - if u get my NI drift so further controls needed. Bit of a faff but better than not being able to possess! Welcome to my World!!
I would have no problem showing certificate to purchase reloading components, however I would absolutely have a problem with the amounts of components held v the number of complete rounds of ammunition on your licence.
Think about it, you would generally be unable to buy bulk bullets or primers, or even 3.5kg tubs of powder making it even more expensive to reload. If this passed then there would be a lot of people instantly turned into criminals.