Obsolete calibers

[HDAV]

There is a little known law that exempts you from needing a licence to own a .22 rifle if you are a member of a club. Strange but true. Try getting that past your FEO, I wish you luck.

 

I think my grandfather used this in the 50's and 60's to shoot targets at a club after being demobbed..... Could take the gun home but not the rounds which had to stay at the club it was part of his works social club

[Vince Green]

I had a Webley Mk6 once, sigh...... :( I think Fiocchi still produce .455 ammo, they certainly did a few years back. I think the whole antique firearm rules are under a bit of Home Office scrutiny at the moment. There have been quite a few old revolvers chambered for .44 S&W Russian (a long obsolete calibre not commercially loaded) sold as antiques. Some of these have been used in crime as the case dimensions are almost identical to either .44 mag or special (forget which) so can easily be reloaded

 

Yes but the price of S&W Russians was so ridiculously high that you had to suspect something was amiss. Yet other calibres (not in pistols) attract no attention. I am not so silly as to mention which ones but the vintage rifle shooters are still able to keep their rifles shooting legally with very little effort.

[Vince Green]

I think my grandfather used this in the 50's and 60's to shoot targets at a club after being demobbed..... Could take the gun home but not the rounds which had to stay at the club it was part of his works social club

 

I can remember people taking club rifles home from our club for the weekend because they were shooting in a competion at another club on the Sunday. This went on until about the 80s. Maybe even later than that.

I know of a works club in Hemel that had a 7.62 rifle stored in a locker in an industrial unit and ordinary members used to go and get it (they all had a key) and take it down to Bisley. This went on until the late 90s. The only reason it stopped was they lost the industrial unit. You couldn't make it up, but was there ever a problem?

[JonathanL]

I wondered the same thing as that, and when I enquired with the firearms dept they said it is still considered a common calibre and its also easy to fire other .45 rounds through it, so no, its still a section 5 pistol.

 

The licensing department staff only say what they are told to say. They aren't there to interpret the law and it isn't fair to expect them to.

 

You can fire commonly available ammo through lots of stuff which the HO consider benefiting from the antique exemption; I have a Hollis Snider action rifle in .380 long and you can fire modern .38 Special in it. It is well known that the two are essentially interchangable. The .380 has a larger bore diameter so you wouldn't get much poke out of it but it still works. I have had it on FAC and off FAC (which it currently is) as it is on the HO 'list' of obsolete chamberings.

 

The 1904 War Office taringing rifle which was the subject of Thompson in the early 1990's was a .22rf yet the HO say that no .22rf firearm can ever benefit from the exemption. How did Thompson have his conviction overturned if that is the case?

 

The whole 'obsolete' thing is wholy unsustainable in any event because it takes no account of a chambering becoming un-obsolete. Lots of chamberings which are on the list have ammunition readily available for them. .577 Snider, .577/.450 Martini Henry, .310 Cadet and .405 Winchester are all readily available. Also, lots of the old British dangerous game chamberings are available. The .44 S&W Russian is on the list and whilst it is true that there are probably none of the big makers making ammo for it there are some small ones here and there. Also, it is hardly difficult to make the ammo from .44 Special brass.

 

Don't get me wrong, I think the basic idea is a very good foundation for controlling antique guns but it needs a lot more thought to make it actually work properly.

 

J.

[JonathanL]

any .410 needs to be on a ticket unless it has a ticket to say it's been de-activated. So the scenario could be armed police bashing down the door and a six year stretch in prison.

 

It doesn't though.

 

Is it an antique? If yes you then ask; is it possessed as a curiosity or ornament? If yes then it needs no certificate.

 

The HO may tell you differently (they tell you differently in relation to .22rf's but Thompson proves them wrong) and the police may still kick down your door and nick you but I fail to see how you can be convicted.

 

J.

[JonathanL]

There is a little known law that exempts you from needing a licence to own a .22 rifle if you are a member of a club. Strange but true. Try getting that past your FEO, I wish you luck.

 

Anyone can 'own' any firearm with a cert if they aren't actually in possession of it. Anyone (who is not a prohibited person) can possess and shoot a firearm at an HO approved club without a cert.

 

I think you are referring to the exemption for 'Miniature Rifle Ramnges'? You are correct that if you are shooting at, or run, a miniature rifle range you do not need a certificate for the rifles or ammo. There are several miniature ranges operating under this condition. It's on my 'to do' list when I get round to it.

 

http://22rifles.djpc.net/

 

J.

[JonathanL]

Yes but the price of S&W Russians was so ridiculously high that you had to suspect something was amiss. Yet other calibres (not in pistols) attract no attention. I am not so silly as to mention which ones but the vintage rifle shooters are still able to keep their rifles shooting legally with very little effort.

 

I think that the high prices of S&W Russian revolvers is more to do with the fact that more people want to collect them because they look about as close as you can get to a modern revolver without needing any authorisation for them. Also, they are quite collectable in places outside the UK where can actually shoot them so have a good re-sale potential abroad.

 

I doubt that too many professional criminals and gang members are spending a couple of grand a-piece on them when there is a lot of more modern ex-Eastern Block stuff around for far less.

 

J.

[JonathanL]

I can remember people taking club rifles home from our club for the weekend because they were shooting in a competion at another club on the Sunday. This went on until about the 80s. Maybe even later than that.

I know of a works club in Hemel that had a 7.62 rifle stored in a locker in an industrial unit and ordinary members used to go and get it (they all had a key) and take it down to Bisley. This went on until the late 90s. The only reason it stopped was they lost the industrial unit. You couldn't make it up, but was there ever a problem?

 

I don't see that there is a problem, legally speaking, although the police won't like it.

 

If you are in an approved club then you can be in possession of the type of firearms for which the club is approved without a certificate for purposes 'in connection with target shooting'. If you are taking a rifle to a range to shoot it in a competition then that is in connection with target shooting, is it not?

 

J.

[Vince Green]

I don't see that there is a problem, legally speaking, although the police won't like it.

 

If you are in an approved club then you can be in possession of the type of firearms for which the club is approved without a certificate for purposes 'in connection with target shooting'. If you are taking a rifle to a range to shoot it in a competition then that is in connection with target shooting, is it not?

 

J.

 

Yes you are right it just demonstrates how the interpretation of the law "creeps" over time, but it only creeps in one direction. Things that were considered normal even a few years ago would not be now. If somebody who was a member of a club was pulled over for something and the police found a club 7.62 and ammo in the back of his car and he didn't even have a FAC I don't think they would let it go today.

[manton]

This thread appears to have split in two and it is vital to understand things clearly, so I hope the following may shed some light on the topic

The N Ireland control order and I think most others states" A member other than the firearms certificate holder may if the activity is clearly in connection with target shooting transport firearms to an authorised range for a competition or to a dealer for repair if HE HAS THE CHIEF CONSTABLES AUTHORISATION TO DO SO.

In regard to obsolete calibres the order also states under

Old firearms which should not benefit from exception as antiques

shotguns chambered for standard shotgun cartridges including .22, 23, 6mm or 9mm rimfire cartridges

Rifles or pistols chambered for 4mm 5mm .22, .23 6mm or 9mm

Revolvers etc. chambered for .25, .30, 32, .38, .44 .45, .475 or their metric equivalents- this is also taken to include .455.

Most of these orders include a statement that it is ultimately up to a court to decide if an item is considered to be a firearm or not.

[manton]

On reading my last post I noted that I had forgotten to say that other calibres accepted as obsolete were listed in an appendix added to the document.

[fieldwanderer]

So, in the case of this guy's .410

 

It's knackered to the point where you'd be a fool to fire it.

 

He doesn't wish to involve the police and pay £50 every 5 years for a shotgun certificate

 

It's most likely over 100 years old

 

I'd say it's kept for "curiosity" and is an antique (or at least would be if it was in better condition).

 

Would that not fall into the "no license required" category?

[manton]

I have a friend who had a 12 bore hammer gun which had been his fathers and had enormous sentimental value to him, although it was unsafe to use , at one stage he had even fired a charge of steel ball bearings out of it which left it looking like it was straight rifled ! Despite his pleas to the police he was given two options - keep it on his certificate or have it deactivated .

[Wharf Rat]

Are 24 or 32 bore considered obsolete? Fiocci still make cartridges for them, but no one that I i know of imports them into the UK.

[bedwards1966]

So, in the case of this guy's .410

 

It's knackered to the point where you'd be a fool to fire it.

 

He doesn't wish to involve the police and pay £50 every 5 years for a shotgun certificate

 

It's most likely over 100 years old

 

I'd say it's kept for "curiosity" and is an antique (or at least would be if it was in better condition).

 

Would that not fall into the "no license required" category?

 

Reading what JonathanL has posted, I'd say yes he could do this - it would seem to be the most sensible approach.

[JonathanL]

So, in the case of this guy's .410

 

It's knackered to the point where you'd be a fool to fire it.

 

He doesn't wish to involve the police and pay £50 every 5 years for a shotgun certificate

 

It's most likely over 100 years old

 

I'd say it's kept for "curiosity" and is an antique (or at least would be if it was in better condition).

 

Would that not fall into the "no license required" category?

 

I can't see why it wouldn't and I don't even think it needs to be over 100 years old to be an 'antique', the .22 Rifle in Thomson wasn't.

 

Having said that there is a significant chance that the police would try to do him anyway.

 

J.

[HDAV]

So, in the case of this guy's .410

 

It's knackered to the point where you'd be a fool to fire it.

 

He doesn't wish to involve the police and pay £50 every 5 years for a shotgun certificate

 

It's most likely over 100 years old

 

I'd say it's kept for "curiosity" and is an antique (or at least would be if it was in better condition).

 

Would that not fall into the "no license required" category?

 

I would say it needs de-activating as although one would be stupid to fire it one could easily. Much cheaper and simpler to have it on SGC or deactivated than take it to court. The previous ruling isn't a statute and it would take along time to get to court various appeals etc. If he wants a wall hanger get it deactivated.

Edited September 13, 2012 by HDAV

[manton]

I am beginning to think that the dangerous approach to this subject is to assume that things will be o. k.It should be remembered that Mick Shepherd in the operation Trident case spent a considerable time in prison and only secured his release with the assistance of a very specialised barrister. How many of the rest of us could afford to do this? Would most people consider it worth the risk for an old .410 shotgun ?. When dealing with anything of this nature, my view is that it is always wise to seek advise from the Police at firearms administration level and if possible get this in writing , not a call to a local F.E.O. and to play safe. Remember the possible results if the police were to recommend a prosecution, a cert holder would lose his ticket and his guns and could face prison. a non cert holder could be imprisoned and would face considerable problems if at sometime in the future he decided to apply for a shotgun or F.A.C.

[JonathanL]

I would say it needs de-activating as although one would be stupid to fire it one could easily. Much cheaper and simpler to have it on SGC or deactivated than take it to court. The previous ruling isn't a statute and it would take along time to get to court various appeals etc. If he wants a wall hanger get it deactivated.

 

Correct, if you are talking about Thomson. It is precident and pre-dates the HO guidance by almost a decade. The Home Office say that no .22rf can ever benefit from the exemption in sec.58(2) - in Thomson one did.

 

Don't get me wrong - I would fully expect them to try and prosecute a case involving a .410 shotgun but I think it would either be dropped or you would be acquitted.

 

J.

 

J.

[JonathanL]

I am beginning to think that the dangerous approach to this subject is to assume that things will be o. k.It should be remembered that Mick Shepherd in the operation Trident case spent a considerable time in prison and only secured his release with the assistance of a very specialised barrister. How many of the rest of us could afford to do this? Would most people consider it worth the risk for an old .410 shotgun ?. When dealing with anything of this nature, my view is that it is always wise to seek advise from the Police at firearms administration level and if possible get this in writing , not a call to a local F.E.O. and to play safe. Remember the possible results if the police were to recommend a prosecution, a cert holder would lose his ticket and his guns and could face prison. a non cert holder could be imprisoned and would face considerable problems if at sometime in the future he decided to apply for a shotgun or F.A.C.

 

I agree with evrything you say here. However, the police and HO are not entitled to make the law up as they go along. Parliament makes the law and no one else.

 

It's very easy to say that a scruffy old .410 isn't worth fighting over (it isn't IMV) but what about when it's a rare Best Quality English gun chambered for something which isn't in the holy HO list of 'obsolete' chamberings? The state should not be forcing people into getting rid or vandalising their property (deactivation) so they don't get locked up. This is especially true given that the list its self results in an utterly irrational and capricious operation of law.

 

You can not (according to the list) have a 12ga shotgun off ticket as an antique yet an essentially identical one, made on the same day, in the same workshop, by the same man in 10ga is fine! Both types of cartridges are readily available so why is one on the list yet the other isn't? It is ludicrous in the extreme to say that one is an antique yet the other isn't.

 

j.

[Vince Green]

I have found that its never a good idea to ask the police anything because they always will only give the default *** covering answer, as I would in their position. My view on any matter where guns are concerned is absolutely don't risk it. Nothing is ever worth having the sky fall on your head from a great height

[HDAV]

I have found that its never a good idea to ask the police anything because they always will only give the default *** covering answer, as I would in their position. My view on any matter where guns are concerned is absolutely don't risk it. Nothing is ever worth having the sky fall on your head from a great height

Wise words indeed.......

[nabbers]

OK I might put this to the test, I have an old .410 cogswell and Harrison which i never shoot and only keep for sentimental reasons, it's 100 years old and on my shotgun certificate.

 

If I write to the Police and tell them I want it taking off certificate, they should oblige given the logic on here.

[JonathanL]

OK I might put this to the test, I have an old .410 cogswell and Harrison which i never shoot and only keep for sentimental reasons, it's 100 years old and on my shotgun certificate.

 

If I write to the Police and tell them I want it taking off certificate, they should oblige given the logic on here.

 

They won't though.

 

J.

[manton]

Someone commented on the Police refusal to consider a Webley .455 revolver as an obsolete calibre. I think this is an Interesting one and shows that there is some logic in the police approach to obsolete calibres. Many .455s in the U.S.A.have their cylinders shortened to accept .45 auto ammunition in clips to avoid the need for the harder to source rimmed .455 ammo. While I agree that some aspects of the Section 58 laws are are rather stupid overall I feel that they serve a purpose and believe that no gun for which ammunition is readily available should ever be considered as an obsolete calibre. In fact I consider that any attempt to apply pressure to have it otherwise will only harm collectors .

Edited September 19, 2012 by manton