Rifled choks for shotguns
- Thread starter EC225
- Start date
Thanks folks.
Now I’ve seen it in black and white in The Home Office Guide on Firearms Licensing Law I’m reasonably sure I won’t get clapped in irons for owning/using a rifled choke, and inspired by
I think a good look around the UK for a Carlson’s rifled choke is called for. I know I can order one direct from Baretta, but I don’t think theirs are rifled the full length.
Now I’ve seen it in black and white in The Home Office Guide on Firearms Licensing Law I’m reasonably sure I won’t get clapped in irons for owning/using a rifled choke, and inspired by
I think a good look around the UK for a Carlson’s rifled choke is called for. I know I can order one direct from Baretta, but I don’t think theirs are rifled the full length.
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
Ah well there is a fly in the ointment. The Guidance refers to the things themselves NOT to then status of a gun once it is fitted to them.
Thus, for example, you can possess a magazine. No problem. No licence. You can possess a single barrel shotgun with a barrel over 24" on s2. No problem.
Now put the two together. No licensable magazine PLUS shotgun of s2. And you've what? For the most part, alas, it seems that an accessory to a firearm in the UK can if fitted to that firearm change its status. Which may not necessarily be to your liking.
My advice? Write to the Home Office (who will eventually reply) and they will answer. I did this back in 1986 regarding those 12 bore/.410 gauge adapters and got a letter saying on their opinion they weren't subject to any control.
Heym SR20
Well-Known Member
Besides you will need an FAC to posess slugs or solid projectiles for use in a rifled choke shotgun.
Last edited:
Smellydog
Well-Known Member
No you don't.
Heym SR20
Well-Known Member
Now the real question is an oval bored gun a smooth bore or a rifled gun?And the "Colindian" as below:
HOLTS Auctioneers
HOLTS are Europe's leading Auctioneers of Fine Modern & Antique Guns.www.holtsauctioneers.com
These were all, mostly, attempts for a gun that could be used as a shotgun yet have the capability to take large or medium cloven footed game that required a slug to either kill or kill at distance. An attempt to allow the man going after a bird for the pot to take larger quarry.
The idea being that in India which was the main market for these things you'd go out for duck or whatever else winged game was about bit of you saw deer or larger then you could open the gun, load two "ball" or "bullet" and be able to kill it.
So they weren't as such a poor man's double rifle (although could be used as would have been in the 1880s/90s an old school blackpowder breechloading 12 bore double rifle) but rather an attempt to give better accuracy at distance in a "shotgun" type weapon (with a specially designed projectile) than a mere smoothbore shotgun would firing a simple round ball.
The book "With Gun, Rifle and Hound" by "Snaffles" mentions them. By the time of smokeless metallic small bore (as in at that time anything under .400 or so) rifles they had seemingly become less popular as had the old school 12 bore double rifles.
Edit - read the particulars in detail with glasses - it was sold as a Section 1 Firearm.
reiver
Well-Known Member
True but if they are loaded in a cartridge then you need them on your fac .
As for rifled choke I would not bother . I just use 1/4 choke in my s/a and will put 5 slugs in at size of a beer mat at 50 meters .
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
Ah. Yes. Indeed! Supposedly it is held that an oval bore is supposedly merely a different form of two groove rifling. The same as the later (although nothing is new ever in firearms...there's always some obscure now forgotten patent) Heckler & Kock polygonal rifling which was, sort or, Whitworth like in form. But not. If that makes sense?
Heym SR20
Well-Known Member
Yup - I suppose it imparts a spin on the bullet which greatly improves its accuracy and in particular accuracy at range. Native Troops were provided with smooth bores, whereas the British had rifles. Smooth bores work well at close range and in volleys, but if the get a bit restless a rifle allows you to deal with issue from a position of safety.
And think back to the time of the first major firearms legislation about 100 years ago. The Bolshy Russians had recently executed the cousin of the King George V, and the Irish had one home rule and were having a nasty civil war. A shotgun, deadly close up is really pretty ineffective with shot much beyond 50 yds. Even the largest .36” diameter pellets allowed under the law are not going to do a lot of damage even if they hit you. A high velocity 303, 8x57, 7x57, 30-06 or even 270 (its just celebrated its centenary) in the hands of a good marksman with good eyes is going to be good for causing mischief at several hundred yards. Those express sights marked 500yds etc were not really for hunting, they were there if you needed a rifle in case of a skirmish etc. Up here in Scotland there has recently been quite a bit of press coverage up an African King and Queen claiming part of Southern Scotland as the “ Lost Kingdom of Kubala”. 100 to 150 years ago there were plenty of Scots and Englishmen pottering about Africa claiming all sorts parts of Africa in the Queen Victoria or King Edward or George and the locals took a similar view and used their own version of the Sheriff Court and local justice to renounce the claims !
Last edited:
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
That reminds me. I may get this slightly wrong but if so someone will correct me. The "rules" in the British Army were that an officer could have his personal rifle transported free with the weapons held on inventory in the regiment's armoury if it a) was chambered in and sighted for the "mark" of .303 in service use and b) sighted out to 2,000 yards. Or it may have been 1,000 yards or some long distance anyway.
Now I may be wrong on detail and if it needed both a) and b) to apply or only one of the two. But coming back to sighting distance you can tell a vintage rifle made for a customer in or going to Africa from a vintage rifle made for a customer in or going to India by how far it is sighted to. A rifle made for Africa may (not always) but may often be found with sights out to 1,000 yards or so. My 1905 Model .280 Ross that I came third with in Historic Rifle "Running Deer" at Bisley in 1995 was.
So why the longer distance at which you'd never never engage a deer or whatever else surely? The longer distance was for "browning" herds of animals on the plains that you'd then send trackers out to retrieve the ones you'd killed and bring them back for meat for the camp. Whereas of course in India there wasn't such a thing done.
So if a vintage sporting rifle has sights out to a silly amount of yards it may have been for a customer taking it to Africa. Or if in .303 and sighted to 2,000 yards or 1,000 yards (see b)) for an officer who wanted to take advantage of having it transported free when his regiment transferred from one posting to another. But as said as to if a) and b) both needed to apply and/or if b) was 2,000 yards or 1,000 yards or another distance I'll happily be corrected.
Last edited:
Wapinschaw
Well-Known Member
You opened a can of worms there!
stonepark
Well-Known Member
When considering whether a particular weapon should be regarded as a firearm to which sections 1, 2 or 5 of the 1968 Act applies or which is covered by the 1982 Act, it is important to remember that the purpose of the legislation is to control the supply and possession of all rifles, guns and pistols which could be used for criminal or subversive purposes while recognising that individuals may own and use firearms and other devices for legitimate purposes. In the absence of a decision by a court, the Secretary of State takes the view that the following devices should not be regarded as firearms within the definition of the Act:
m) rifled choke tubes for shot guns are considered to be an accessory and not an essential component part of a firearm as specified by section 57 of the 1968 Act.
m) rifled choke tubes for shot guns are considered to be an accessory and not an essential component part of a firearm as specified by section 57 of the 1968 Act.
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
Yes. Also though be aware that is likely what a Mr Singh thought about flare launcher pens. And found out that the "a court" decided that a mere screw in threaded cup was a barrel. And convicted him. Despite until then these things being sold freely and outwith any controls. And most of us then also thinking they were in no way, shape, or form firearms.
See 7) below and also below that from the CPS.
Firearms | The Crown Prosecution Service
Whether something is a “lethal barrelled weapon” is a question of fact see R v Singh (1989) Crim. L.R. 724, CA, which involved an evidential dispute as to whether a flare launcher was barrelled.
Last edited:
stonepark
Well-Known Member
Yes. Also though be aware that is likely what a Mr Singh thought about flare launcher pens. And found out that the "a court" decided that a mere screw in threaded cup was a barrel. And convicted him. Despite until then these things being sold freely and outwith any controls. And most of us then also thinking they were in no way, shape, or form firearms.
See 7) below and also below that from the CPS.
Firearms | The Crown Prosecution Service
www.cps.gov.uk
Whether something is a “lethal barrelled weapon” is a question of fact see R v Singh (1989) Crim. L.R. 724, CA, which involved an evidential dispute as to whether a flare launcher was barrelled.
Later case, took the opposite view...
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
Not as far as I recall. That was a flare pen with a spigot. Singh was a launcher where the flare screwed in to the pen.
Similar threads
