Scully Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 https://ukshootingnews.wordpress.com/2016/06/09/police-force-is-warning-shooters-not-to-buy-mars-actions/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keg Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 Is this the same as a self loading rifle or semi automatic? that's the way i'm reading it. My FEO had no problem when i asked for a variation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbiep Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 So, a un-named police force, an un-named FLM, according to an un-named 'source', are 'pushing' for these to be banned. In spite of the fact that the 'warnings' the police force would be issuing would be impossible to make, because you don't apply for a variation for MARS or lever-release. You just apply for a variation for a rifle in (say) 223. The variation then comes back, and then YOU choose whether you want a bolt-action, straight pull, or whatever legal action you decide. So it's all un-named and unverifiable. And it would be impossible for the police to make those 'warnings' because they've no idea if your variation is for one of those, or not. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- In other news, tin-foil hats stop MI6 reading your mind. I know it's true, because a reliable source told me. But it can't be verified. But trust me on it, it's all correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 There is always some sort of horror tale re firearms, just more speculation here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phaedra1106 Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 So, a un-named police force, an un-named FLM, according to an un-named 'source', are 'pushing' for these to be banned. In spite of the fact that the 'warnings' the police force would be issuing would be impossible to make, because you don't apply for a variation for MARS or lever-release. You just apply for a variation for a rifle in (say) 223. The variation then comes back, and then YOU choose whether you want a bolt-action, straight pull, or whatever legal action you decide. So it's all un-named and unverifiable. And it would be impossible for the police to make those 'warnings' because they've no idea if your variation is for one of those, or not. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- In other news, tin-foil hats stop MI6 reading your mind. I know it's true, because a reliable source told me. But it can't be verified. But trust me on it, it's all correct. Unfortunately not all FLD's work to the HO guidance, Durham (for example) insist on actual chambering and action type being specified on application or variation for a slot. Durham sent two of us up here a nice note in with our FACs (after getting a variation for a MARS rifle) that they thought they were about to be banned by other firearms departments (which they can't do) and that was over two years ago so this has been going round for quite a while. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r1steele Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 Unfortunately not all FLD's work to the HO guidance, Durham (for example) insist on actual chambering and action type being specified on application or variation for a slot. Durham sent two of us up here a nice note in with our FACs (after getting a variation for a MARS rifle) that they thought they were about to be banned by other firearms departments (which they can't do) and that was over two years ago so this has been going round for quite a while. True but according to the email I (and one or two others on here) received yesterday, FLD's will be legally bound by the HO guidance and will have to follow it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phaedra1106 Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 (edited) They already are but some still just make it up as they go with impunity it seems :( Edited June 9, 2016 by phaedra1106 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted June 9, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 So, a un-named police force, an un-named FLM, according to an un-named 'source', are 'pushing' for these to be banned. In spite of the fact that the 'warnings' the police force would be issuing would be impossible to make, because you don't apply for a variation for MARS or lever-release. You just apply for a variation for a rifle in (say) 223. The variation then comes back, and then YOU choose whether you want a bolt-action, straight pull, or whatever legal action you decide. So it's all un-named and unverifiable. And it would be impossible for the police to make those 'warnings' because they've no idea if your variation is for one of those, or not. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- In other news, tin-foil hats stop MI6 reading your mind. I know it's true, because a reliable source told me. But it can't be verified. But trust me on it, it's all correct. Fair enough. I wasn't stating any of it as fact and neither was the source. I was simply asking if anyone can verify the information, hence the title. It would seem no one can either verify nor dismiss the information, but the post of Phaedra1106 proves such statements from the police aren't beyond the realms of fantasy. Many of us have experience of FEO's and police staff telling us this, that and the other is perfectly legal/illegal, when it plainly isn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r1steele Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 They already are but some still just make it up as they go with impunity it seems :( Until recently it was what it says 'guidance' but they will be legally bound to actually stick to it from now on as it will be classed as statutory guidance. If you PM me your email address I can forward the email as I'm unable to post a link or copy and paste for some reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted June 9, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 A read of post No 7 on 'AR15 type straight-pull' rifles in the Guns and Equipment section may be worth reading, though it doesn't explain why a shooter would willingly make such a video with knowledge of the intent of its use. Anyhow, make of it what you will: I was merely giving a heads up of yet more potential hassle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katash Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 (edited) A read of post No 7 on 'AR15 type straight-pull' rifles in the Guns and Equipment section may be worth reading, though it doesn't explain why a shooter would willingly make such a video with knowledge of the intent of its use. My understanding is that the person in question was a firearms officer and was requested to do so by a firearms licensing manager (although it also states he is a shooter) I seem to recall lever release mechanisms coming dangerously close to being banned not long ago but was stopped - I recall watching a video where a guy had his "unicorn" confiscated then later returned Edit: - after researching this it seems Mk1 "Unicorns" were only affected, not all lever release guns Edited June 9, 2016 by Katash Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted June 10, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 10, 2016 Thanks for the info'. 👍 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.