Blackbart Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 Why does a shotgun need re proofing as a shotgun ? It seems daft that something that is proofed to fire certain ammunition needs re proofing to fire the exact same ammunition because the ammo holder is a bit shorter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grahamch Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 The law is clear enough, must be restricted to 3 shots no matter what sort of licence the gun is on. If you cant hit them with three.............................. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE GRIFF Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 The law is clear enough, must be restricted to 3 shots no matter what sort of licence the gun is on. If you cant hit them with three.............................. The law isn't clear. Even if its restricted to 3 shots it is still classed as a firearm on his licence therefor he has to use it under the condition of his fac which doesn't allow him to shoot wildfowl, unless the firearms dep will put the condition on his licence then he can't shoot wildfowl at all with it unless he transfers it to a shotgun certificate and makes it a perminant 3 shot semi auto. A gun on a firearms certificate has alot more restrictions than a shotgun certificate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
e2000e2000e Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 The proof house will issue a certifacte that the gun has a restricted magazine. Why not just buy a cheap fowling gun, Hatsan escort Magnum S/H £200! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pole Star Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 So that clearly means its illegal to shoot game or wildfowl with any thing more than a 3 shot ? so those who do including those coming from abroad are breaking the law ? . Has anyone ever been prosecuted for this offense ?? . Pole Star Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vermincinerator Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 So that clearly means its illegal to shoot game or wildfowl with any thing more than a 3 shot ? so those who do including those coming from abroad are breaking the law ? . Has anyone ever been prosecuted for this offense ?? . Pole Star Correct Pole Star, no one has ever been prosecuted because most likely they have not been caught in the act, by that i mean having their collar felt while they are letting off a shot at a goose or duck with a FAC rated semi auto with more then 3 in the tube. Ian. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m3vert Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 Yes mate take a look ! lots of other things on here . Atb Pole Star Ooops sorry Polestar I must have missed one of your threads Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 the issue with foreigners Polestar is if they have a restrictor fitted they may be legal the only stumbling block here is the FAC conditions unless its Any legal quarry when I would put on the shorter tune and consider it ok. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE GRIFF Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 So that clearly means its illegal to shoot game or wildfowl with any thing more than a 3 shot ? so those who do including those coming from abroad are breaking the law ? . Has anyone ever been prosecuted for this offense ?? . Pole Star The law/issues regarding restricting it to 3 shots seems simple enough to overcome by simply restricting it to 3 shots, the main problem is the fact it would still be a firearm and would still be subject the the conditions on his licence which doesn't include shooting wildfowl. For anyone that doesn't know about firearms certificates they are a lot more complex than a shogun certificate and each firearms department makes the rules up as they go along. My .223 is conditioned for fox but only whilst out shooting fox's can I shoot other vermin and ground game, so in theory I can't knowingly with my .223 go out to shoot hares on land I haven't got permission to shoot fox's, but am allowed to shoot hares if the opportunity arises whilst out foxing. If I want to go out shooting hares and rabbits I am supposed to use my .22 rimfire, but are not allowed to shoot fox's with this rifle. To complicate things even more it does say I can shoot vermin with my 22lr but Cleveland firearms department say this doesn't include fox, if you look up vermin in a dictionary - fox is classed as vermin so in theory I could shoot under the vermin condition although my firearms department say I can't. I have got basc involved in this in past and they would stand up in court and argue my case under the vermin condition, they would also argue my case if I was found to be shooting hares on land with my .223 I wasn't allowed to shoot fox's on because there is no reason why they shouldn't condition the .223 for any other lawfull quarry, my firearms department simply say they don't use that wording even though its in the ACPO recomendations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 I would suggest that as no mention of restrictive plugs is made in the act one must assume that the wording of the act (“automatic weapon” and “semi-automatic weapon” do not include any weapon the magazine of which is incapable of holding more than two rounds) must be accepted as a definitive No. We must also remember that "plugs" are not available in the UK as we have no need for them and therefore I guess they would not have been considered for inclusion in the act when the legislation was drafted. Also as no firearms manager is going to condition wildfowl for a firearm that is prohibited under the act I feel your only way forward is to convert your's back to a 2 shot mag or buy a another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul T Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 I don't have a FAC so I'm guessing, but couldn't you ask for a condition to include "wildfowl; only when fitted with restricted magazine"? Then the only issue would be if a wildfowl club would accept what would be a 'firearm', but it is at least compliant with the Act. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE GRIFF Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 I don't have a FAC so I'm guessing, but couldn't you ask for a condition to include "wildfowl; only when fitted with restricted magazine"? Then the only issue would be if a wildfowl club would accept what would be a 'firearm', but it is at least compliant with the Act. I already suggested this earlier in the thread, it may be possible to get this condition added, even if by law you could get this condition added to overcome the situation it also depends on the local firearms department dealing with it as to wether they would be willing to do it, if just because they were allowed to doesn't mean they would. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.