Illegal or Legal?

[Pheasant Plucker]

Recent extract from the SACS (Scottish Association for Country Sports) newsletter.

 

"All parts of a firearm are themselves firearms. This includes the bolt of a rifle, any detachable magazine and a sound moderator, but would not include a scope.

 

A detachable magazine which contains bullets is not only a firearm it is a loaded firearm!

 

Never pre-load a detachable magazine or any firearm until you are on land where you have permission to shoot - or you will be in possession of a loaded firearm in a Public place! This also applies to airguns, which are classed as firearms even if low-powered and not held on a FAC."

 

We can debate this until the cows come home but I suggest that the SACS powers that be have researched this and I for one believe that this is the case.

Edited April 15, 2014 by Pheasant Plucker

[Breastman]

That might be the case in Scotland (although i'm 99.9% sure its not), but its certainly not the case in England and Wales, otherwise i've got about 30 firearms that aren't on my FAC!! . If you or SACS can provide the relevant legislation that contradicts the legislation which has already been posted on this thread i'll put the retrospective variation in this afternoon

Edited April 15, 2014 by Breastman

[welsh1]

Recent extract from the SACS (Scottish Association for Country Sports) newsletter.

 

"All parts of a firearm are themselves firearms. This includes the bolt of a rifle, any detachable magazine and a sound moderator, but would not include a scope.

 

A detachable magazine which contains bullets is not only a firearm it is a loaded firearm!

 

Never pre-load a detachable magazine or any firearm until you are on land where you have permission to shoot - or you will be in possession of a loaded firearm in a Public place! This also applies to airguns, which are classed as firearms even if low-powered and not held on a FAC."

 

We can debate this until the cows come home but I suggest that the SACS powers that be have researched this and I for one believe that this is the case.

The following is from the cps,i have highlighted what i believe is the relevant bits.

 

Definitions of Firearms and Air Weapons

A firearm is "a lethal barrelled weapon of any description from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged" (section 57 (1) Firearms Act 1968), it includes:

• any prohibited weapon (see below in this guidance section 5 Firearms Act 1968), whether it is such a lethal weapon as aforesaid or not; and
• any component part of such a lethal or prohibited weapon; and
• any accessory to any such weapon designed or adapted to diminish the noise or flash caused by firing the weapon.

Lethality is a complex issue and although case law exists (Moore v Gooderham [1960] 3 All E.R. 575), only a court can decide whether any particular weapon is capable of causing "more than trifling and trivial" injury and is therefore is a "firearm" for the purposes of the Acts. The Forensic Science Provider (FSP) will be able to advise in any case where "lethality" is likely to be an issue. See also: R v Thorpe 85 Cr. App. R 107 CA.

"barrelled" is a question of mixed law and fact - R v Singh (1989) Crim. L.R. 724, CA, involved an evidential dispute as to whether a flare launcher was barrelled.

"from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged" has to be capable of discharging a missile either in its present state or with adaptation. To prove that a weapon is a firearm, it is essential to call evidence as to whether a bullet or missile can be discharged from the weapon or which can be adapted to discharge any missile: Grace v DPP (1989) Crim L.R.365 where the conviction was quashed as there was no evidence that the air rifle could have been fired.

"component parts". R v Clarke (F), 82 Cr App R 308, CA states that the component part of a prohibited weapon is itself a prohibited weapon. Although there is no statutory definition, the Home Office Guidance to the Police at paragraph 13.70 states the following:

The term "component part" may be held to include (i) the barrel, chamber, cylinder, (ii) frame, body or receiver, (iii) breech, block, bolt or other mechanism for containing the charge at the rear of the chamber (iv), any other part of the firearm upon which the pressure caused by firing the weapon impinges directly.

Magazines, sights and furniture are not considered component parts

.

R v Ashton, CA, 1 February 2007 seems to suggest that any part that stops the weapon functioning as it was designed would be a component part:

"Whether in fact this particular gas plug is a component part of a prohibited weapon, is a matter of fact for the court to decide the words have their ordinary natural meaning. as a matter of reasonable interpretation it means a part that is manufactured to the purpose screw or washer, would not be a component part for present purposes. Similarly, a component part must be a part that if it were removed, the Gun could not function without it."

Air Weapons

An air weapon is defined, under section 1(3)( B) and 57(4) of the Firearms Act 1968 as:

"an air rifle, air gun or air pistol which does not fall within section 5 (1) (a) and which is not of a type declared by rules made by the Secretary of State under section 53 of the Firearms Act to be specially dangerous".

Any air rifle, air gun or air pistol which uses or is designed or adapted for use with, a self contained gas cartridge system is a prohibited weapon: section 5(1)(af) Firearms Act 1968 e.g. a Brocock

An air rifle is "specially dangerous" if it is capable of discharging a missile so that the missile has, on being discharged from the muzzle of the weapon, kinetic energy in excess in the case of a pistol of 6 ft lbs or, in the case of an air weapon other than an air pistol, 12 ft lbs: Firearms (Dangerous Air Weapons) Rules 1969 rr. 2, 3 (Archbold 24-8a.)

Paintball guns are a type of air weapon. The Home Office regard self-loading or pump action rifled airguns (including paintball guns) as outside the scope of the Firearms Act, unless they are sufficiently powerful to fall within the category of a "specially dangerous" air weapon (Archbold 24.8a). Paintball guns could be considered imitation firearms.

Unless an air weapon falls within one of the above exceptions, it is not subject to section 1 Firearms Act 1968.

[CharlieT]

Recent extract from the SACS (Scottish Association for Country Sports) newsletter.

 

"All parts of a firearm are themselves firearms. This includes the bolt of a rifle, any detachable magazine and a sound moderator, but would not include a scope.

 

A detachable magazine which contains bullets is not only a firearm it is a loaded firearm!

 

Never pre-load a detachable magazine or any firearm until you are on land where you have permission to shoot - or you will be in possession of a loaded firearm in a Public place! This also applies to airguns, which are classed as firearms even if low-powered and not held on a FAC."

 

We can debate this until the cows come home but I suggest that the SACS powers that be have researched this and I for one believe that this is the case.

And some people join SACS for their knowledgeable legal representation.....................little wonder I stay with BASC

[r1steele]

Recent extract from the SACS (Scottish Association for Country Sports) newsletter.

 

"All parts of a firearm are themselves firearms. This includes the bolt of a rifle, any detachable magazine and a sound moderator, but would not include a scope.

 

A detachable magazine which contains bullets is not only a firearm it is a loaded firearm!

 

Never pre-load a detachable magazine or any firearm until you are on land where you have permission to shoot - or you will be in possession of a loaded firearm in a Public place! This also applies to airguns, which are classed as firearms even if low-powered and not held on a FAC."

 

We can debate this until the cows come home but I suggest that the SACS powers that be have researched this and I for one believe that this is the case.

How come a detachable magazine can be sent through normal post as opposed to RFD-RFD?

[station]

How come a detachable magazine can be sent through normal post as opposed to RFD-RFD?

That's a good question - answers on a post card !

[Breastman]

That's a good question - answers on a post card !

 

[Pheasant Plucker]

And some people join SACS for their knowledgeable legal representation.....................little wonder I stay with BASC

That is your choice ... SACS has the same legal resource and representation as anyone else plus they employ the services of Council on these matters and take Legal Opinion (Levy & McRae, Solicitors, Glasgow) whenever there is doubt (albeit Scots Law) and I am pretty sure that they will have researched this thoroughly before publishing it in their recent newsletter. However, I am sure they will drift towards playing it safe and warn that any material part of a firearm is indeed a firearm but you would think that an arresting officer would use a fair bit of discretion when considering whether or not to confiscate your firearms! I for one wouldn't take the risk.

Edited April 15, 2014 by Pheasant Plucker

[r1steele]

That is your choice ... SACS has the same legal resource and representation as anyone else plus they employ the services of Council on these matters and take Legal Opinion whenever there is doubt (albeit Scots Law) and I am pretty sure that they will have researched this thoroughly before publishing it in their recent newsletter. However, I am sure they will drift towards playing it safe and warn that any material part of a firearm is indeed a firearm but you would think that an arresting officer would use a fair bit of discretion when considering whether or not to confiscate your firearms! I for one wouldn't take the risk.

A detachable magazine is not a firearm no matter how you look at it. Anyone can buy one, it doesn't need to be entered onto your FAC so I think SACS has got that one wrong. Any material part would also include the stock presumably so again, it doesn't need to be entered onto your FAC and anyone can buy one.

[station]

Even my wife doesn't get my humour sometimes - can't think why?

[CharlieT]

That is your choice ... SACS has the same legal resource and representation as anyone else plus they employ the services of Council on these matters and take Legal Opinion (Levy & McRae, Solicitors, Glasgow) whenever there is doubt (albeit Scots Law) and I am pretty sure that they will have researched this thoroughly before publishing it in their recent newsletter. However, I am sure they will drift towards playing it safe and warn that any material part of a firearm is indeed a firearm but you would think that an arresting officer would use a fair bit of discretion when considering whether or not to confiscate your firearms! I for one wouldn't take the risk.

 

Obviously not thoroughly enough.

 

As has been said previously, the firearms act is quite specific as to what constitutes a firearm and other restricted parts under the act. Police officers, SACS or anyone else for that matter have no say in the matter, magazines are not a controlled part. To suggest one may be arrested for carrying a charged magazine whilst going about ones lawful buisness is just plain daft.

[scotslad]

I noramlly reccommend folk check out any legal issuess with their Org but sorry that is nonsense from SACS and to think most of their members only join for the legal cover (which Basc is now doing anyway). Do Sacs have english lawyers too?

 

Wether or not a magzine is part of ur firearm or not is irrelevant or wether it is loaded or not too, for a FAC ur gun is considered loaded if u have ur ammo on ur person, doesn't have to be in chambered or in magazine (makes no sense to me but it is a legal thing) so u are just as much in charge of a loaded weapon with ur rounds in ur loose pocket as u are with them up the spout.

 

It is all about having 'good reason', if u have a good reason being in a public place doesn't matter

 

Depending on the situation u could be arrested for having a full mag if u have no good reason to have it, but by the same token would be the same offence just carrying loose rounds about in ur pocket without good reason

[Pheasant Plucker]

I noramlly reccommend folk check out any legal issuess with their Org but sorry that is nonsense from SACS and to think most of their members only join for the legal cover (which Basc is now doing anyway). Do Sacs have english lawyers too?

 

Wether or not a magzine is part of ur firearm or not is irrelevant or wether it is loaded or not too, for a FAC ur gun is considered loaded if u have ur ammo on ur person, doesn't have to be in chambered or in magazine (makes no sense to me but it is a legal thing) so u are just as much in charge of a loaded weapon with ur rounds in ur loose pocket as u are with them up the spout.

 

It is all about having 'good reason', if u have a good reason being in a public place doesn't matter

 

Depending on the situation u could be arrested for having a full mag if u have no good reason to have it, but by the same token would be the same offence just carrying loose rounds about in ur pocket without good reason

 

 

I agree, their comments appear farcical and make little sense. However I cannot believe that SACS would stick their neck out on matters such as this and all legal opinion published by them is first vetted by their legal advisors. If SACS get things like this wrong - they will loose members.

 

Also not everyone joins just for the insurance!

 

I have forwarded an email to them and await their comment

[Therealchucknorris]

I agree, their comments appear farcical and make little sense. However I cannot believe that SACS would stick their neck out on matters such as this and all legal opinion published by them is first vetted by their legal advisors. If SACS get things like this wrong - they will loose members.

 

Also not everyone joins just for the insurance!

 

I have forwarded an email to them and await their comment

 

Being a member of SACS I'm keen to see their reply, please post up what you can when you receive a reply.

 

Cheers.

[Gimlet]

When I have to drive on the road between shoots rifles are propped against passenger seat, bolts opened, mags withdrawn but not emptied and put on the dashboard. Floor plate rifles are emptied, bolts opened. Anyone stopping me can see that the rifles are cleared and made safe.

I never carry a loaded rifle on the highway even for a few yards. But I don't feel the need to hide away firearms or ammunition to spare the feelings of bunny-huggers. And the law does not require me to.

[GingerCat]

A magazine (detachable) Is not a firearm or component part. It cannot considered such as the law is quite clear. Loading one and carrying it on the way to shoot some bunnies is not an offence.

The cps are the ones who interpret the case law and the red bits above should be it clear enough if anyone is in doubt.

Loading an internal mag on a rifle is a different matter.

Airguns bizarrely get the toughest rules for some reason.

[HW682]

 

No, well yes, it might be. But I fear you're wasting your time. These type of threads come up on PW regularly, it's usually theoretical scenarios involving being stopped by the police at night, the old chestnut of whether or not to phone plod before you go out shooting (as if), or being stopped with something that you shouldn't have with you. But people don't usually report these things actually happening, or at least not to my knowledge.

 

As always, common sense in the eyes of a reasonable person, and knowledge of safe handling and transport of firearms, almost always comes up trumps.

 

I understand what you are saying, but I don't think it is a waste of time to have a reasoned debate. There are always some who are too stubborn to admit they are wrong even in the face of overwhelming evidence. But the forum is about more than one or two people. If the discussion helps just one person to learn something new, surely it is worth it?

 

And I am glad I am not relying on SACS for their advice. It's that sort of thing that keeps these urban legends bubbling along.

[ordnance]

 

Read in the Sporting Gun magazine that carrying a loaded Rifle magazine in your car is Legal not Illegal.

Is this right??

As I have already said check your certificate conditions . My conditions state that the firearm must be unloaded (that includes the magazine )going to the range and back. So I assume if I ignored that and was caught I would be in trouble. That is on a range firearm having a loaded mag going from one shoot to another could be different. I had another look at my certificate the condition only applies to the handguns not my .22 rifle. So probably different to the rest of the UK.

Edited April 20, 2014 by ordnance

[simon1979]

I load mine before I leave the house ,cant see a problem

 

 

load mine before I leave the house to, saves a bit of time when I get there, plus if im stalking the mag loaded is enough ammo for me,

[Scully]

 

 

load mine before I leave the house to, saves a bit of time when I get there, plus if im stalking the mag loaded is enough ammo for me,

Ditto.

[Thunderbird]

 

I understand what you are saying, but I don't think it is a waste of time to have a reasoned debate. There are always some who are too stubborn to admit they are wrong even in the face of overwhelming evidence. But the forum is about more than one or two people. If the discussion helps just one person to learn something new, surely it is worth it?

 

And I am glad I am not relying on SACS for their advice. It's that sort of thing that keeps these urban legends bubbling along.

 

I don't disagree. Only these debates have a habit of rumbling on with not a lot added to the sum of knowledge.

[Steveg01]

22.16 Section 57(6) of the 1968 Act includes a definition of “loaded” in relation to shotguns and air weapons. An air weapon is to be treated as loaded if there is ammunition in the chamber or barrel or in any magazine or other device which is in such a position that the ammunition can be fed into the chamber or barrel by the manual or automatic operation of some part of the gun or weapon

[scotslad]

Aye but the above is for an airgun.

 

A FAC rifle is considered loaded if u have the ammo on u, so having loose rounds in ur jacket pocket/gloove box (ie nowhere near rifle) and ur rifle in the car would be considered 'loaded' in eyes of law.

Makes no odds wether up spout or in pocket

 

Bottom line is as long as u have 'good reason' ie going/returning from shooting there shouldn't be a problem really.

[Breastman]

Aaaarrrggghhh!!! No a FIREARM is not loaded if you have the ammo with you out of the gun, it's simply an offence to have both with you in a public place without a good reason!! Read the smegging legislation!!

[bicykillgaz]

Surely it's easier to just ring your FEO or firearms office to settle the debate rather than everyone going off hearsay and wives tales or selective reading or misreading of legislation to suit their argument.

I'd certainly not be bragging about what you do or don't do without knowing the facts. I know that all my FEO's past and present look on forums. I also know of one guy getting his licence revoked for breaking the conditions of his licence and only got caught as his FEO read what he written and recognised him from his profile picture. Surely it's less hassle to ring up on Tuesday and get it from the horses mouth then we know for definite.