saddler Posted March 27, 2017 Report Share Posted March 27, 2017 Once the but is removed unless the whole thing is 600 mm long it's illegal I can measure, as can Alan Westlake...and very aware of the min length rules for Section 1 & Section 2, etc. Neither his design or my carbine is below 600mm with the butt removed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mighty Prawn Posted March 28, 2017 Report Share Posted March 28, 2017 The thing with LBP/LBR is (and at the risk of infuriating some people) it is blatantly gaming the system, anyone who denies that is either being naive or deliberately obtuse - the rear facing arm is for no reason other than to extend it past the minimum legal length, in fact they actually make the gun a pain in the rear as doing any holster drills for example becomes a right saga. That said I can see no reason of logic why they and S1 shotguns cannot be club guns or loaned in the same way, I see no greater risk with them than a CF rifle which could have a 30 round magazine for example and much greater range and possibility for harm. Although while typing I did come to question whether does an LBR fulfill the criteria for a self loading centre fire and if so how were they not hoovered by the ban? Or was their an exemption for a revolver action over magazine fed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breastman Posted March 28, 2017 Report Share Posted March 28, 2017 The thing with LBP/LBR is (and at the risk of infuriating some people) it is blatantly gaming the system, anyone who denies that is either being naive or deliberately obtuse - the rear facing arm is for no reason other than to extend it past the minimum legal length, in fact they actually make the gun a pain in the rear as doing any holster drills for example becomes a right saga. That said I can see no reason of logic why they and S1 shotguns cannot be club guns or loaned in the same way, I see no greater risk with them than a CF rifle which could have a 30 round magazine for example and much greater range and possibility for harm. Although while typing I did come to question whether does an LBR fulfill the criteria for a self loading centre fire and if so how were they not hoovered by the ban? Or was their an exemption for a revolver action over magazine fed? Whether you view LBPs as 'gaming the system' or an engineering solution to comply with legislation I suppose is subjective and largely down to the opinion of the observer. Using the gaming the system logic you could say that a semi-auto shotgun is gaming the system by not being fully automatic, or a 30" barrelled SbS is gaming the system by not being a sawn off post office job? It's simply the wording of the legislation that causes the problems with LBP/LBR's and S1 shotguns. A minor alteration would resolve the problem instantly if the words "rifle and muzzle loading pistol" where replaced by "firearms". Not changing it, now THATS being obtuse! Revolvers don't self-load, that's why LBR's remain outside of the prohibited/Sextion 5 part of the Firearms Act 1968. FYI I don't know if you actually own/have shot an LBP but the longer barrel is actually more disruptive to shooting them, rather than the 'coat hanger' (due to an increased pendulum and oscillation effect), they don't really present any greater challenge in drawing them though and once you get used to them it's just the same as shooting any other firearm imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mighty Prawn Posted March 28, 2017 Report Share Posted March 28, 2017 Whether you view LBPs as 'gaming the system' or an engineering solution to comply with legislation I suppose is subjective and largely down to the opinion of the observer. Using the gaming the system logic you could say that a semi-auto shotgun is gaming the system by not being fully automatic, or a 30" barrelled SbS is gaming the system by not being a sawn off post office job? It's simply the wording of the legislation that causes the problems with LBP/LBR's and S1 shotguns. A minor alteration would resolve the problem instantly if the words "rifle and muzzle loading pistol" where replaced by "firearms". Not changing it, now THATS being obtuse! Revolvers don't self-load, that's why LBR's remain outside of the prohibited/Sextion 5 part of the Firearms Act 1968. FYI I don't know if you actually own/have shot an LBP but the longer barrel is actually more disruptive to shooting them, rather than the 'coat hanger' (due to an increased pendulum and oscillation effect), they don't really present any greater challenge in drawing them though and once you get used to them it's just the same as shooting any other firearm imo. I don't disagree with nearly everything you said, I don't think the semi auto or sbs part holds up but I'm sure we can agree to disagree with that part. I completely support your simple wording change, sadly such an obvious and straightforward thing is so often overlooked by the lawmakers. Never shot LBR but have fired a few black powder pistols, I'm spectacularly awful with them! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breastman Posted March 29, 2017 Report Share Posted March 29, 2017 (edited) When LBR's first came out the Police held the 'gaming the system', or to use their turn of phrase; 'not in the spirit of the legislation' view as well and almost every force used to issue a little note to anyone who applied for a variation for one saying something along the lines of "the classification of this type of firearm is still under review, should the view be taken that the long barreled firearm is does not meet the requirements of Section 1 of the 1968 act, then the firearm will be removed and financial compensation will not be paid". Thankfully after years of legitimate use and taking a more pragmatic view, or rather being GIVEN one from the Home Office, they're now accepted as legitimate S1 firearms that aren't 'especially dangerous' Pistols of any variety, imo, are by far the hardest type of firearm to shoot well! Edited March 29, 2017 by Breastman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sco77w Posted April 20, 2017 Report Share Posted April 20, 2017 Just out of interest, does the rear extension/balance get in the way of the magazine at all, and how is it actually attached, can you remove it easily for cleaning or if you want to change pistol grips. I'm thinking of getting the base model and a couple of third party tweeks. Cheers The frame for the rod is screwed to the pistol frame under the grip then anti tamper pegs are knocked into the screws to stop you from removing it. I have filed away some of mine to allow the mag base to be exposed when a mag is inserted to allow a firm and precise insertion. I also have several other mods planned to try and get the best out of this *** pretend pistol. I'll try and post a pic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted April 20, 2017 Report Share Posted April 20, 2017 I don't disagree with nearly everything you said, I don't think the semi auto or sbs part holds up but I'm sure we can agree to disagree with that part. I completely support your simple wording change, sadly such an obvious and straightforward thing is so often overlooked by the lawmakers. Never shot LBR but have fired a few black powder pistols, I'm spectacularly awful with them! A revolver has never been self loading, by the simple fact (in double action mode) the trigger cycles the round before the hammer falls. The semi auto (self loading) LBPs like the K22 ,GSG 1911 ect are rimfire only, so making them conform to the S1 rules. Ive yet to see anyone shoot a decent group at 25 yards with a black powder pistol, so I would nt worry too much there! 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.