Moderators - A question for David BASC

[mick miller]

Given the good work with expanding ammunition recently, by good work I mean addressing an inconsistency in law that created an unnecessary legislative burden on all parties, I wonder whether attention could now be turned toward another issue. The buying and selling of moderators for full bore rifles and the requirement to have a variation made to allow for the acquisition and sale of them.

 

I find it a strange bit of legislation. A moderator cannot be used on its own as a weapon (maybe as a club but a pretty ineffectual one), does not come as part of a rifle, so no more a firearm part than a rifle scope is.

You can buy one off ticket anyway, so there is little benefit toward public safety (in terms of them finding their way into the hands of criminals, not that armed criminals seem terribly bothered by the amount of noise their illegally obtained firearms produce) and it's well known that you can make one yourself if you're that way inclined.

For the shooter and the public there is a very real benefit in terms of health and safety (hearing loss prevention) and a reduction in public nuisance (noise), so to put barriers in place that limit the availability of moderators appears counterproductive.

It just seems like an exercise in work creation for already overstretched firearms licensing teams up and down the country. If anyone can give me a valid reason behind the legislation I'd be grateful as I've thought long and hard about it and cannot find a good reason why the licensing of a sound moderator is necessary when so many other component parts of a rifle isn't (think muzzle breaks, triggers, bolt handles, magazines)?

Edited August 10, 2017 by mick miller

[steve d]

Hmmm,common sense, that'll never catch on

[39TDS]

It has always struck me as odd that they have to go on your ticket.

[Cranfield]

I am not sure why you address your question to DavidBASC , I would think that the only people who can answer your question definitively , is the Firearms Licencing Authorities, your question might be better sent to them.

I would be interested in their response.

[hodge911]

very good point to make .

[243deer]

Almost certainly an idea dreamed up by Sir Humphrey of the department for administrative affairs fame (just showing my age)

[Scully]

Logic and firearms legislation have very little in common I'm afraid.

There are quite a few examples out there.

[mick miller]

Addressed to David BASC as they helped lobby to take expanding off section.5 and get it reverted back to section.1.

 

Now, given the success of those efforts, perhaps BASC focus could be turned toward other bits of seemingly senseless legislation, freeing up licensing staff to do more important stuff?

Edited August 10, 2017 by mick miller

[BrowningB525]

I am not sure why you address your question to DavidBASC , I would think that the only people who can answer your question definitively , is the Firearms Licencing Authorities, your question might be better sent to them.

I would be interested in their response.

I think it's based on the successful lobbying around expanding ammunition.

 

I think the OP is saying "after the success of the law being altered around expanding ammunition, please can we look at doing the same with moderators?"

[mick miller]

I was. I am. Correctamundo!

[Benthejockey]

Common sense would be to treat rifles and shotguns and all their respective components, accessories and bits and pieces all the same. Why should a rifle be more difficult to obtain than a shotgun? Yet in theory once you have a firearms license you can with good reason get an elephant gun and use it in this country for deer - that might be a stretch but you get the point I'm trying to make. Unless I've missed something there generally isn't a lot in the news about people being shot or sniped with a rifle in this country and I'm fairly certain the tool of choice for a bank robber isn't a sawn off 22 but more likely a sawn off 12g shot gun. Why? Because they make a big mess at close range! Even not sawn off a shot gun is going to put a substantial hole in you compared to a rifle. If the powers that be actually used a fraction of their brains and decided to treat all firearms the same and derestrict moderator sales and possession then they would surely save their firearms teams millions of pounds by reducing work loads. The number of licensed people that go out and commit firearms offences is nearly insignificant to the point where I would guess it's probably less than a percent of all firearms offences carried out in this country. I think that despite its flaws the licensing system on the whole works but by simplifying the system life would be easier for everyone. And mr armed robber really doesn't give a monkeys if it's illegal to buy a sound moderator or not when he's waving around a handgun in the post office.

[mick miller]

Small steps. One at a time.