The BBC sticking the knife in again

Roro

Well-Known Member

mealiejimmy

Well-Known Member
I don't see it that way at all.
Panorama are highlighting a loophole in the law that has allowed guns to come into the UK legally (because they are considered obsolete and ammunition is unavailable) which are then used in crime because someone has manufactured ammunition for them.
If the law was changed to make such weapons illegal then how would that hurt FAC and SGC holders - I'd have a lot less of a problem with that than banning 50 cals and MARS rifles - which have never been used in crimes.
The biggest threat to us from this story is potential restrictions on reloading

Cheers

Bruce
 

Heym SR20

Well-Known Member
The law is very clear on the matter - obsolete firearms can be possessed without a licence. However as soon as you possess their ammunition, it becomes a licensed firearm and thus needs the appropriate FAC or Shotgun Certificate. Same applies to muzzle loading weapons if you possess bullets / shot and powder.

If you possess, sell or use firearms without the proper authority it is a serious criminal offence with mandatory prison sentence. And the law makes no distinction between firearms, even imitation - if you use a firearm, even an imitation, its lots of jail time.

The courts are taking a very dim view on this - there was an individual sent down yesterday in Edinburgh for 12 years for bomb making. According to the photos of the evidence released to the press he had a load of fireworks, and a model rocket initiator, but this combined with literature on bomb making and his far right views were sufficient to prosecute and to find him guilty.

On the case of the Panorama programme, the individual RFD has been found guilty and sent down for a good spell, and I suspect many of his clients will also soon be doing so - or at least would hope so.
 

reloader54

Well-Known Member
I don't see it that way at all.
Panorama are highlighting a loophole in the law that has allowed guns to come into the UK legally (because they are considered obsolete and ammunition is unavailable) which are then used in crime because someone has manufactured ammunition for them.
If the law was changed to make such weapons illegal then how would that hurt FAC and SGC holders - I'd have a lot less of a problem with that than banning 50 cals and MARS rifles - which have never been used in crimes.
The biggest threat to us from this story is potential restrictions on reloading

Cheers

Bruce


with respect jimmie, bruce, I can see your point as can many others, however there are already laws in place regarding manufacture of "obsolete" ammunition, just as there are possession of antique firearms themselves, however these laws never stopped criminals from using them for crime. because of course they're well,,, criminals.
how many guns and ammo have been brought in from europe with the numbers of illegal immigrants/asylum seekers?? I dont know ,neither do you, neither does the police or anyone else. what I do know is law abiding gun owners and as you fear reloaders of all types will pay the price just like every other bloody time.
 

enfieldspares

Well-Known Member
I posted this before, so I'll post it again. Before the handgun ban pretty much ALL cartridge firing weapons were either s2 shot guns or s1 to be held on an FAC. When the handgun ban was passed the Government didn't want to be accused of requiring the destruction of the many s1 handguns that were held that were of the black powder era. So the idea of s58 was created to list calibres that were not readily available and so the handguns that fired them couldn't effectively, be used as other than an expensive metal paperweight.

This was alongside the lesser known s7.1 and s7.3 exemptions that allowed owners of historic handguns to continue to retain pre-1919 made weapons...including Colt 1911s, Webley Nk VIs and etc...on s1 subject to "good reason" and in the case of s7.1 not being on a list of certain cartridges such as 9mm Parabellum, .32 ACP, ,44 Special and Etc.. So although these are ALL s5 weapons they can under s7.1 and s7.3 be possessed on an FAC under s1...with conditions...

s58 also created obsolete rifle and shotgun calibres. The .577 Snider, the .450/577 Martini Henry and such as the 2 5/8" 10 bore shotgun. The problem was that in fact although not readily available components either existed or could be made from another cartridge. The most obvious being the .44 S & W Russian that begat the .44 S & W Special that begat the .44 S & W Magnum. So in fact you simply trimmed off the extra length of case that the .44 Russian had acquired to make it a .44 Magnum. And you now had viable re-created .44 Russian cases.

Nobody at the Home Office had really though this through. Things like case trimmers obviously are mystery! So we now have handguns that were once s1 that are now no longer s1 and anybody with the money can buy one. In fact...shock of horrors...we are back into the UK before the Firearms Act of 1920 that classified them, then, as s1. But society has developed and, more importantly, disposable income has increased. So whilst prior to 1920 the "screps" and the "scrotes" couldn't afford the price of them they now can.

And that's basically why the problem has arisen. In 1920 few criminals except such as well funded anarchists could afford the price of a handgun. Churchill owned both a Mauser C96 Broomhandle and a Colt 1911. My grandfather owned a Webley. So, like the Ritz hotel, before 1920, the right to own a handgun was open to everyone. Except, like the Ritz hotel, the right to own a handgun was in reality only open to everyone that had the money to afford the price. But in 2018 people are paid decent wages..or make lots of money from crime...so now that "everyone", today in 2018, includes those with criminal or irresponsible intentions.

Yet, as I've again going to have to point out, primers now cannot be legally sold to a person walking in to a gunshop unless they produce their SGC or FAC. So the problem is wholly down to primers being sold to customers where the required checks aren't being carried out. How will this resolve itself? Not by restrictions on handloading. The Home Office is well aware of handloading and in fact as we know de-classified expanding bullets. So they do NOT want controls on handloading. So my thoughts are that there will be a size restriction...over twelve inches barrel, over twenty-four inches length for any weapon to be classed as s58.

So what then will be the fate of those under that length? Of handguns? I don't know. Maybe they will go back to being s1 and held as are s7.1 handguns under the permitted exemption created for historic handguns in Michael Howard's legislation that banned, elsewise, handguns. So they will go back to requiring an FAC where they'll be held under the s7.1 exemption on s1. And if after a certain date you have one and haven't licensed it you'll be prosecuted.

In effect a variation on the Brocock issue and how that was solved. That would be the easiest to enact from the Home Office point of view. So I think that will be the response (if there is to be one as this s58 "problem" is a problem of s58 handguns and not s58 Snider rifles, s58 Martini-Henry carbines or old s58 10 bore shotguns) of putting these weapons back into the remit of requiring an FAC and not by controls on handloading. Along with prosecutions if primers are sold without sight of an FAC.
 
Last edited:

Roro

Well-Known Member
My point of view is that, as i am someone into older firearms and older designs, the collecting of these firearms is a hobby i would certainly like to pursue. To be able to handle and study a firearm that has not been butchered or welded up as deacts now are. I see why people are into this passtime, and of course yet again, a tiny minority of scrotes will commit crimes with these old guns, leading to the usual media hysteria, asking mp's what should be done.

Of course the politicians will be embarrassed, and will want to be see to be doing something. Banning is the usual blunt instrument they bring to bear. I would suggest a collectors licence, where people who want to collect obsolete calibre firearms, would get police clearance. But of course this would not satisfy the likes of the "All guns are bad" BBC and C4.

Enfieldspares, do you remember the American "Saturday night specials" of the 70's and 80's ? They were cheap German revolvers, usually made by Rohm. Appalling junk, made of pot metal. They were the weapon of choice for bumping off your enemies, but being both underpowered and unreliable, the victim often survived or escaped. When they were banned by Reagan (i think) a different type of pistol took over, the extremely reliable Glock.

My point is, if something is banned or made illegal, the scrotes simply move on to something else.
 

enfieldspares

Well-Known Member
Enfieldspares, do you remember the American "Saturday night specials" of the 70's and 80's ?

Yes. Also called in the 1920s and later "suicide specials", Iver Johnson and similar at that time, usually break open, no safety block on the hammer, Using the SNS ban points system revealed that Britain had defended itself against the Nazis in WWII using an SNS. The Enfield No2 MkI** as it had a barrel under six inches, no safety block on the hammer, fixed sights, was double action and some other features was under those rules a SNS apparently.
 

Laurie

Well-Known Member
I can see what they are going for next is home reloading
just wait and see?

We've been through this before in the David Bieber case, an American criminal living under a false identity in Leeds who shot a police traffic officer Ian Broadhurst and attempted to murder two others on Boxing Day 2003.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bieber


Mrs Broadhurst and her MP were appalled that Bieber had handloaded the ammunition he used to murder her husband and wanted handloading banned. The HO seriously considered making dies as well as all components restricted items. Bill Harriman and his team from BASC (and NRA people?) gave a demonstration on how ammunition can be made in a shed using a hammer, vice and simple tools made with home workshop tools - no need for handloading tools etc. The HO took the lesson on board and that was when the need to show an FAC or RFD certificate to buy (or own) primers was made a legal requirement.

There may be people who would like to ban or restrict handloading but you always come back to the practicalities. Dies and presses are simple tools and in an age of online ordering and a global marketplace with millions of tools of all shapes and sizes being legitimately ordered and supplied internationally each year, you'd never have a cat in Hell's chance of affecting the illicit manufacture of ammunition. Simple moulds make bullets and round balls from scrap lead - that's how you fed your musket or even Winchester 1873 in the American Old West out in the sticks.

enfieldspares has it absolutely right in his analysis in post #5. The Home Office people might not have understood the implications of moving say 44 S&W Russian revolvers off-ticket, but others did immediately at the time. I'm sorry to say that I have suspicions that some certificate holders who deeply felt the loss of their pistols went down this route well before the criminals did. The logical thing is to do as enfieldspares suggests and put length restrictions on S58 exempted historical pieces if they aren't permanently deactivated. I don't want to see historical pieces chopped and welded, but in practical terms they are former S1 firearms (what would now be S5) in full working order and capable of being used / misused by anybody with some knowledge of handloading.
 

aris

Well-Known Member
Practicalities often don't come into the legislative decision making process - it is often the government wanting to be seen to be doing something. That is the risk. A ban of something to please the ignorant masses.
 

Wapinschaw

Well-Known Member
Practicalities often don't come into the legislative decision making process - it is often the government wanting to be seen to be doing something. That is the risk. A ban of something to please the ignorant masses.

My concern as well. I don't think we need to see Panorama to know what line the programme will take, it's the BBC and entirely predictable.
 

enfieldspares

Well-Known Member
Bill Harriman and his team from BASC (and NRA people?) gave a demonstration on how ammunition can be made in a shed using a hammer, vice and simple tools made with home workshop tools - no need for handloading tools etc.

I think as shooters and reloaders that we lose sight of the fact that the reloading tools we use are quite sophisticated. That and that most don't have a knowledge of what "went before". Lyman for example once sold a simple re-sizing die for bottleneck cases that had no external threads. it was called a "Case Saver". The instructions did, indeed, advise to use it using a workshop vice. The more recent Lee dies where you hammer the case in are a modern interpretation of it.

But many obsolete s58 handguns use straight wall cases. How will they ban bullet moulds and lead melters without banning the making of Ardsley bombs and similar? A fisherman's drilled bullet mould is a round ball mould! Will they ban round ball moulds then in certain diameters? And of course muzzleloaders use such moulds and lead melters anyway.

They don't even require a die to resize. Just a simple correct diameter hole drilled though a bar of metal of about 3/8" thick. It works the same as the old brass double handle shotgun cartridge re-sizers that were used to re-size paper cartridges that had swollen. So if you only want a half a dozen or a dozen cartridges for your revolver you've no need of a press or sophisticated dies. You make one of these and hammer it down over the case. Then use a drift to drive the case out.

So there will be no ban on reloading tools as it won't solve the problem.

There will be an amendment to s58. As an aside years ago when s58 came in I was told another fascinating fact. Look at the list of rifle cartridges on it. Where's such as the high powered proprietory .280 Ross, the .280 Jeffery or the even rarer .26 BSA and .33 BSA? Or even the .246 Purdey and etc.? They are not on it. Why? Because the Home Office were aware that 'scoped (as well as iron sighted) stalking rifles existed in these calibres and had no desire to see those weapons on free sale. Fearing then their purchase and use by IRA terrorists as urban sniper rifles to be used against politicians.
 
Last edited:

reloader54

Well-Known Member
We've been through this before in the David Bieber case, an American criminal living under a false identity in Leeds who shot a police traffic officer Ian Broadhurst and attempted to murder two others on Boxing Day 2003.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bieber


Mrs Broadhurst and her MP were appalled that Bieber had handloaded the ammunition he used to murder her husband and wanted handloading banned. The HO seriously considered making dies as well as all components restricted items. Bill Harriman and his team from BASC (and NRA people?) gave a demonstration on how ammunition can be made in a shed using a hammer, vice and simple tools made with home workshop tools - no need for handloading tools etc. The HO took the lesson on board and that was when the need to show an FAC or RFD certificate to buy (or own) primers was made a legal requirement.

There may be people who would like to ban or restrict handloading but you always come back to the practicalities. Dies and presses are simple tools and in an age of online ordering and a global marketplace with millions of tools of all shapes and sizes being legitimately ordered and supplied internationally each year, you'd never have a cat in Hell's chance of affecting the illicit manufacture of ammunition. Simple moulds make bullets and round balls from scrap lead - that's how you fed your musket or even Winchester 1873 in the American Old West out in the sticks.

enfieldspares has it absolutely right in his analysis in post #5. The Home Office people might not have understood the implications of moving say 44 S&W Russian revolvers off-ticket, but others did immediately at the time. I'm sorry to say that I have suspicions that some certificate holders who deeply felt the loss of their pistols went down this route well before the criminals did. The logical thing is to do as enfieldspares suggests and put length restrictions on S58 exempted historical pieces if they aren't permanently deactivated. I don't want to see historical pieces chopped and welded, but in practical terms they are former S1 firearms (what would now be S5) in full working order and capable of being used / misused by anybody with some knowledge of handloading.


I know I speak for many more than just I say , I hope you are correct Laurie, and thank you for your as always extensive knowledge in all things firearm related.

that said there are two issues at stake here, the concerns of collectors for their legal antiques,de-acts, obsolete arms, and lawful reloading.

and secondly the unlawful manufacture of live ammunition and conversion of non lethal ornaments into weapons of crime.

as stated NOTHING will stem the latter, criminal element will find a way.

as an example the good old english sporting cricket bat, been around forever perfectly harmless millions of people own and play with them, after a criminal bludgeons a rival to death with one and government passes new laws , now that nice mr smith from #22 acacia gardens, normalvill is in possession of a lethal weapon as he forgot to remove it from the boot after a trip to the park with his nine year old. criminalising law abiding folks will never stop crime.
 
Last edited:
Top