Jump to content

Screw cutting and the law.


Mr Majyk
 Share

Recommended Posts

Ask an FEO is of limited use in most cases they generally are not very knowledgable about firearms.

I have just been told I can't have a 22WMR for vermin as magnum calibres are not allowed in this area, but they will give a free variation for a 22-250 if I need more power!!!! He was upset when I laughed at him I then showed him the 2 cases to say a light came on is an understatement. Both had shortened barrels

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 115
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Ask an FEO is of limited use in most cases they generally are not very knowledgable about firearms.

I have just been told I can't have a 22WMR for vermin as magnum calibres are not allowed in this area, but they will give a free variation for a 22-250 if I need more power!!!! He was upset when I laughed at him I then showed him the 2 cases to say a light came on is an understatement. Both had shortened barrels

 

Unfortunately there can be little argument with that in many instances!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not have to produce evidence, ask your firearms officer next time he visits, tell him you will be cutting your RIFLED Barrel off by 2" and then tell him you are going to KEEP It: you will find without a shadow of Doubt you will have to put it down as a variation or Scrap it Legally:

As for the comments on Silencers or sound moderators, attach one to your rifle and let the FEO see it without a ticket, you will soon find the answer to that too: Hmmm. :rolleyes:

You are still wrong, the chopped off piece of barrel is mearly a tube with some grooves in it. It is not chambered nor have the abilty to be attatched onto another gun. There is no variation required for a piece of tube!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm right, your wrong seems to be whats happening here, can someone past a specific section of the Firearms Act to support their case and stop the debate! :yes::good:

You won't get an answer because the answer doesn't exist. Its in the misty grey areas that plague so much firearms law. It will remain unclarified because nobody wants to be the mug who goes to court to challenge it. So by default the goalposts get moved.

 

Lets be honest, if you wanted to construct an illegal lethal weapon any old bit of tube would do. It doesn't have to be rifled, that's a red herring.

Edited by Vince Green
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not have to produce evidence, ask your firearms officer next time he visits, tell him you will be cutting your RIFLED Barrel off by 2" and then tell him you are going to KEEP It: you will find without a shadow of Doubt you will have to put it down as a variation or Scrap it Legally:

As for the comments on Silencers or sound moderators, attach one to your rifle and let the FEO see it without a ticket, you will soon find the answer to that too: Hmmm. :rolleyes:

 

Well, actually, you do if you want to have a credible argument. Anyone can say anything about anything if they don't have to produce evidence. If you don't have to back up your position with facts, or aren't prepared to, then what's the point of entering the discussion in the first place?

 

You are completely and utterly wrong on this. A piece of rifled tube cut from a barrel is not a part which is subject to licensing. It cannot be as it does not meet the definition of a firearm nor of a component part of one. I wouldn't dream of asking my licensing manager such an obviously trivial question as I would suspect that he would think I were some sort of fool for having to query such a thing.

 

I'll tell you what. I'm having a barrel cut down for a customer in a week or so. I'll keep the part and not put it on my register or my FAC and I'll even post a pic of it here. You can report me if you like but I fear you would be looking at a charge of wasting police time, to be honest.

 

I don't think I've mentioned anything about moderators so I don't see your point on that issue.

 

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe, and of course there are specific exemptions in the Firearms Acts, but we are talking about pieces of rifled barrel that have been cut off tools listed on your FAC!

What about the screws that hold your scope mount? They come off your gun as well. They can push these things to ever sillier extremes if they want to, and they will probably try because that's the way these things go. But really, why are we wasting our lives talking about it? Lets all go shooting and forget all about it.

Edited by Vince Green
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Maybe, and of course there are specific exemptions in the Firearms Acts, but we are talking about pieces of rifled barrel that have been cut off tools listed on your FAC!

 

The key point being "cut off". They are no longer part of the firearm (or the barrel) and a piece of tube does not meet the definition of "firearm" in the Act. It cannot be a component part either as it cannot be used as part of a firearm.

 

J.

 

I'm right, your wrong seems to be whats happening here, can someone past a specific section of the Firearms Act to support their case and stop the debate! :yes::good:

 

Just look at the definition of "firearm", it's in section 57. If something isn't a firearm then it is not subject to control. A chopped off piece of barrel is not a firearm.

 

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about the screws that hold your scope mount? They come off your gun as well. They can push these things to ever sillier extremes if they want to, and they will probably try because that's the way these things go. But really, why are we wasting our lives talking about it? Lets all go shooting and forget all about it.

 

The screws aren't firearms and neither are they component parts of one. As far as I am aware there is no definition of a component part but the application of normal English would lead you to conclude that they aren't component parts. The phrase is narrower than simply a "part" of a firearm which could be any part, including a screw. The word "firearm" is a lethal baralled weapon capable of discharging, etc...". The word "component" suggests something which is integral to a firearm, ie: something which enables it lethally discharge things. The Home Office suggest that unless something is directly involved in directing the projectile or containing the stressess of firing then it is not a component part. A perfectly reasonable interpretation, I think.

 

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You won't get an answer because the answer doesn't exist. Its in the misty grey areas that plague so much firearms law. It will remain unclarified because nobody wants to be the mug who goes to court to challenge it. So by default the goalposts get moved.

 

Lets be honest, if you wanted to construct an illegal lethal weapon any old bit of tube would do. It doesn't have to be rifled, that's a red herring.

 

3D printing comes readily to mind, don't need any offcuts for that! :yes::good:

 

But I wonder if they ever got Proof?

 

Anyone remember what this thread was about? :/:hmm::good::hmm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm right, your wrong seems to be whats happening here, can someone past a specific section of the Firearms Act to support their case and stop the debate! :yes::good:

I did.

 

I think it was in post 67.

 

Just checked, yes it was post 67.

 

Look this up and have a read.......9th Report of the Firearms Consultative Committee, particularly annex C.

Edited by CharlieT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No. It's because the definition of 'firearm' in the Act includes 'any accessory to a firearm designed or adapted to reduce the noise or flah upon firing'. Hence, such an accessory is a firearm in its own right, rather than being a component part of a firearm. A baffle from a moderator would be a component part.

 

J.

 

 

Beat me to it.

 

J.

 

 

Then that letter is wrong.

 

J.

 

 

Yes, because an accessory to a firearm which is designed to reduce the noise or flash is a firearm in its own right.

 

J.

 

As they did my variation in three days i don't think i will bother writing to them and telling them they do not know the firearms law.

 

What ever they class it as, even though a mod is just a piece of pipe like a barrel off cut.. it needs to be licensed like a firearm......

 

So there we have it........a pipe is just a pipe UNLESS it's a PIPE and then it's a gun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

right, can anyone give me a solid answer to this question? if you have a barrel shortened and screw cut does it become illegal until its sent to a proof house? ive had an ask around and the most common thing ive heard apart from "i dont know" is that the gun only NEEDS to be reproofed if its going to be sold? and ive heard this from shooters who know there stuff and i have a lot of respect for but i just wanted to throw this out to a wider audience, is this true, i.e. if i were to shorten and screw cut my .22 would i HAVE to have it reproofed or does it only need to be reproofed if i wanted to sell it? and what about if a barrel is only screw cut i.e. the length is not adjusted in any way, its only screw cut for a mod? HELP ME!!! lol :lol:

 

I'm just quoting myself here just to give you all a gentle kick in the balls and remind you what the thread was about, incase any of you had forgotten................... it seems to have grown legs and wondered a tad out the way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've bought a Winchester that has been screw cut but can't find any marks on it ,were would and wot would I look for ,bought it from a dealer cheers

 

Ok

 

Proof marks will commonly appear on a rifle near the base of the barrel close to the chamber, these will be the normal proof marks.

 

If a barrel is chopped/threaded and has been re-proofed because of this a mark will also appear at the business end of the barrel just below the thread usually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

As they did my variation in three days i don't think i will bother writing to them and telling them they do not know the firearms law

 

What ever they class it as, even though a mod is just a piece of pipe like a barrel off cut.. it needs to be licensed like a firearm......

 

So there we have it........a pipe is just a pipe UNLESS it's a PIPE and then it's a gun.

 

A moderator is subject to FAC control because the Firearms Act says it is and not simply because it is a piece of tubing intended to be attached to a gun. Anything which is designed to reduce the noise of a firearm is a firearm in its own right and, hence, must be on your cert.

 

J.

Edited by JonathanL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...