Dont forget the inevitable restriction on the number of cartridges held
Section 1 and 2 merge petition
- Thread starter Turkish
- Start date
Does this mean that any application going forward would require the applicant to have land and permission to shoot for shotgun ownership? And what about foreshore shooting........Under section 2 SGC no land was ever requested to be granted a certificate
And what about shotgun cartridges, am I gonna have to put them in a safe?
And what about shotgun cartridges, am I gonna have to put them in a safe?
Benelli m2
Well-Known Member
Yes and yes
If they achieve ‘greater alignment’ by merging s2 into s1 yes.
The point is to try to persuade them not to do that.
A part of the Tory Government 1988 Firearms Act that prohibited self-loading and pump action centrefire rifles also moved multi-shot self-loading and pump action shotguns to s1 if they had a magazine capacity of more than two shots or a detachable magazine. At the time I had a 16 bore Browning A-5 that would be affected by this.
It was duly added to my s1 Firearm Certificate (possessed to shoot "flocking birds") and I was asked to produce evidence of the land that it would be being used over. This was in the old days of a land condition requiring a named piece of land. So "For use at X" or "For use and X and any other land deemed suitable by the Chief Officer of Police for that area" or "For use at X and any other land".
My stalking rifles were the last most "For use at X and any other land". What I remember as the old "Condition III" as a fully open FAC was known as. So they asked what land I wished to nominate as being for this 16 bore A-5. So I told them the cottage its pond and surrounding farmland that at that time I owned known as "Pooltail". To which I was told they'd have to inspect it.
I pointed out that I shot duck on the land, plus at that time avian vermin...flocking birds, and that I could also do this with a side by side 12 bore, 10 bore, 8 bore or whatever and that therefore why did it now need to be inspected and approved for a mere 16 bore albeit one that as it had a four shot magazine was now classed as s1.
The point was taken. The condition was added "For use at Pooltail and any other land" and an inspection and approval was not deemed necessary. But looking back it may well be that if all shotguns on s2 were moved to s1 that owners would have to produce evidence of "good reason" which if not membership of a clay shooting ground and regular attendance there would perhaps require proof of which land the things were to be used over and proof or regular use over the nominated land.
Recall that after the Tory Government Dunblane legislation the rule of "use it or lose" it was made law in relation to s1 weapons and that proof of use can be required. No proof of use resulting in no longer any "good reason" and possible revocation of the authority to possess that particular weapon. To which see below regarding "grandfathering":
The "grandfathering" of shotguns kept for sentimental reasons but no longer used is permitted under s2. If be effectively ceasing to be allowed (by the fact all now coming under s1 remit which doesn't allow such) that old side by side kept only as a memory of a long passed family member or friend "This was once your grandfather's, Great Uncle Ned's, Captain Smith's at the Top Farm (or whatever)" may no longer be able to be retained.
It was duly added to my s1 Firearm Certificate (possessed to shoot "flocking birds") and I was asked to produce evidence of the land that it would be being used over. This was in the old days of a land condition requiring a named piece of land. So "For use at X" or "For use and X and any other land deemed suitable by the Chief Officer of Police for that area" or "For use at X and any other land".
My stalking rifles were the last most "For use at X and any other land". What I remember as the old "Condition III" as a fully open FAC was known as. So they asked what land I wished to nominate as being for this 16 bore A-5. So I told them the cottage its pond and surrounding farmland that at that time I owned known as "Pooltail". To which I was told they'd have to inspect it.
I pointed out that I shot duck on the land, plus at that time avian vermin...flocking birds, and that I could also do this with a side by side 12 bore, 10 bore, 8 bore or whatever and that therefore why did it now need to be inspected and approved for a mere 16 bore albeit one that as it had a four shot magazine was now classed as s1.
The point was taken. The condition was added "For use at Pooltail and any other land" and an inspection and approval was not deemed necessary. But looking back it may well be that if all shotguns on s2 were moved to s1 that owners would have to produce evidence of "good reason" which if not membership of a clay shooting ground and regular attendance there would perhaps require proof of which land the things were to be used over and proof or regular use over the nominated land.
Recall that after the Tory Government Dunblane legislation the rule of "use it or lose" it was made law in relation to s1 weapons and that proof of use can be required. No proof of use resulting in no longer any "good reason" and possible revocation of the authority to possess that particular weapon. To which see below regarding "grandfathering":
The "grandfathering" of shotguns kept for sentimental reasons but no longer used is permitted under s2. If be effectively ceasing to be allowed (by the fact all now coming under s1 remit which doesn't allow such) that old side by side kept only as a memory of a long passed family member or friend "This was once your grandfather's, Great Uncle Ned's, Captain Smith's at the Top Farm (or whatever)" may no longer be able to be retained.
Last edited:
kieran222
Well-Known Member
Changing or buying a shotgun is straight forward at the moment. Imagine having to put in a variation to swap a shotgun. Plenty of other down sides.
People should sign the petition, it's only takes a minute.
timbrayford
Well-Known Member
Land permission forms have no statutory standing!
timbrayford
Well-Known Member
Don't forget that clay shooters by default will not be able to accept an invitation to go pigeon or game shooting without prior authorisation from the FLD.
Yes. That may be correct. Just the same as a FAC holder with sporting rifles for "target shooting on approved ranges" cannot lawfully use his or her .22LR for rabbits or similar or their centrefire rifle for even foxes (or deer and etc.). Good point highlighting another possible bad outcome.
timbrayford
Well-Known Member
First hand experience of that one. For the past 40 odd years I've had a succession of vermin permissions to use my 22 on as well as use on the range, however the land changed hands along with the shooting rights just before my latest renewal. So the latest fac restricts its use to target only. There's nothing in the firearms act that prohibits the use of a firearm for any other lawful purpose once good reason has been established. Its pure spite from Hampshire FLD to do this.
Finally almost there with the petition but it shouldn't have taken over a week!
Our force will not issue a FAC without a land form - Does yours ?
Pathetic isn't it
timbrayford
Well-Known Member
Only after a lot of argument and me having to send them a copy of HO guidance with the relevant paragraph highlighted.
Similar threads
