One for one variation procedure - why?

[badmolassesaccident]

At least you can own a moderator. Here in Oz legally owned moderators are very few and far between.
I really can't see this changing, ever. It just shows that once there is a regulation in writing, it just can't be undone easily.
Grant.

Is there any way to get a moderator in AU? Excluding professional shooters.

 

[Pete1774]

That fine until you fit it to a FAC rifle, it then needs to be on your FAC.

Of course it unscrews

The comment was referring to a replacement mod and in my case there is already one on my FAC listed as; Maker's name Unknown.

 

[timbrayford]

bit late then, current act came in in the 60's

The base act was 1920 which has been added and embellished to. Notably the 1967 amendment which introduced s2 shotgun controls was intended to prevent armed crime as opposed to a peasants revolt to overthrow the monarchy & establishment. Hence the difference between s1 & s2. Of course a lot has changed since the original 1920 act, short barreled handguns, machine guns and c/f semi autos are beyond the reach of almost all civilian shooters and anyone intending to start an armed revolution will either use smuggled s5 like the AK47 or source from corrupt army personnel etc. anyway!

 

[Klenchblaize]

Once you have your driving licence you can own and drive any car...whether it is a 5 litre Mercedes or a fiat 500....and any number of cars...they are all registered with Swansea and you notify who is the new owner when you buy and sell. It is the driver not the vehicle that poses a risk to others.

Seems a reasonable model to follow for firearms.

But let’s hope we aren’t required to take out third-party gun ownership insurance, and commensurate with the calibre of weapon rifle/s you’re running.

There being a sliding scale of premiums based on MV/ME and “Boy Racer” chamberings of the Creedmoor variety.

K

 

[Alantoo]

But let’s hope we aren’t required to take out third-party gun ownership insurance, and commensurate with the calibre of weapon rifle/s you’re running.

There being a sliding scale of premiums based on MV/ME and “Boy Racer” chamberings of the Creedmoor variety.

K

I would not worry on that score.

Current BASC membership and insurance is not on a sliding scale based on MV of firearms held.

I think the insurance companies are pretty realistic in their assessment of risk. The muzzle velocity would have no affect on the actual hazard to the public.

The insurance companies are pretty hard headed and base their policy premiums on actuarial tables, unlike the politicians who seem to base the firearms legislation on the perceived risk and volume of tabloid outcry.

Alan

 

[SamHuntVic]

Is there any way to get a moderator in AU? Excluding professional shooters.

Extremely difficult, this article demonstrates the process. Note application can take up to a year. One of the methods to make people give up.
Grant.
So, You Want a Silencer – Simon Munslow Breaks Down the Process Part 1

 

[theshedtinkerer]

I'm hoping that someone can explain the legal basis for the current system the police require to be followed for a one for one variation.
e.g I have a 22 rimfire rifle on my certificate and I want to trade it in to a local RFD and purchase another 22 rimfire rifle from him
At present, it is my understanding that if want to do this without giving the police any money, the following procedure needs to be followed:
a. Dispose of my existing 22 rimfire rifle and inform the police of that fact within 7 days of the disposal
b. Send my existing certificate along with the form applying for a variation for a 22 rimfire rifle to the police and wait for them to process that application and send out a new certificate which contains an authority to purchase a 22 rimfire rifle
c. Go to the RFD, present my new certificate showing the authority to purchase and take possession of the new rifle
I have read (and re-read) the firearms act but cannot find anything close to any legal reasoning for why this procedure is necessary
I really think that this is a part of the firearms licensing process which could be simplified and provide benefits to both gun owners and the police.

Cheers

Bruce

When has reason ever applied to UK legislation ... particularly firearms legislation? As an example the 45-70 is not legal for Deer in Scotland as it does not have muzzle velocity of 2,450 fps or more. The same is true for the venerable 9.3 x 62mm (293 grains @ 2,290 fps) that will knock down Cape Buffalo and other serious critters, but not Roe Deer in Scotland.

 

[theshedtinkerer]

I would not worry on that score.

Current BASC membership and insurance is not on a sliding scale based on MV of firearms held.

I think the insurance companies are pretty realistic in their assessment of risk. The muzzle velocity would have no affect on the actual hazard to the public.

The insurance companies are pretty hard headed and base their policy premiums on actuarial tables, unlike the politicians who seem to base the firearms legislation on the perceived risk and volume of tabloid outcry.

Alan

Insurance cover for injury caused by the use of firearms is surprisingly low. That component of your membership is actually only a few pounds (about three last time I spoke to an insurance company active in the sector). The actuarial risk is miniscule.

 

[IBD]

To be like some of Europe where you get a gun license for 6 guns.
Can be any shotgun or rifle, any calibre.
If you want more you get another license.

 

[bfltd0]

You know, this recurring thread of questioning the 1-4-1 variation process which then inevitably leads to everyone's wish list of how they want their FAC to be administered always lifts my spirit, every time, without fail.

For it shows me that there are still shooters who can and do dare to dream, which means our will cannot be broken.

Even when they introduce a lead ban lead, a 1 year duration for FACs, mandatory DSC2 as the only qual for stalking, limit ammo possession to 50 rounds total, we will still be smiling, because we can still dream!