tabs Posted November 16, 2007 Report Share Posted November 16, 2007 I have just been told by a local RFD that my Norica 1 +2 .410 should be classed as section 1 and not SGC (as mine currently is). Whilst I was at the premises he kindly offered to speak with our new FLO and ask advice on what steps anyone owning said gun should take. It was suggested that either i get the apparently extendable mag' brased closed and send for reproofing or apply for the firearm to be held as a section 1. I will of course be contacting my Fairearms dept early next week, but would like any advice you guys can offer, eg costs of work required to keep the gun as sgc, and or what should happen to the gun whilst a section 1 was applied for, also would any land restrictions apply. Maybe a good time to put in for FAC air I have been promising myself to do also. Tabs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRDS Posted November 16, 2007 Report Share Posted November 16, 2007 He is talking ****. The Norica has an inbuilt magazine that cannot be detached and is therefore legal to own on a SGC, that is where mine is!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floating Chamber Posted November 16, 2007 Report Share Posted November 16, 2007 He is talking ****. The Norica has an inbuilt magazine that cannot be detached and is therefore legal to own on a SGC, that is where mine is!! Absolutely! Sack the ****! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tabs Posted November 17, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 ..OK. im getting the feeling you both may disagree with him. I will call FLO to confirm in the week. Tabs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webber Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 If the magazine will only hold 2 cartridges, + 1 up the spout, then this gun is SGC not FAC, and it would suggest that your gun dealer would be better engaged in another job, as this really is basic stuff. webber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tabs Posted November 17, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 If the magazine will only hold 2 cartridges, + 1 up the spout, then this gun is SGC not FAC, and it would suggest that your gun dealer would be better engaged in another job, as this really is basic stuff. webber That is indeed as the law states and my response to him was the same, however he was quite adamant that the Noricas mag is not fixed and as such is a grey area. He also showed me reproofing certification he had been through for his own personal Norica after the mag had been brased closed (at the bottom apparently) as instructed by Firearms dept. I will speak with FLO on Monday and clarify. Tabs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRDS Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 How is the mag not fixed, the underside of the stock is solid you can't even tell from looking externally it has a magazine and you load from the top. There is nothing that detaches from the gun? It may be detachable if you strip the whole gun down to its component parts, I haven't tried but for the purpose of the law it is not detachable and to say otherwise is pedantic drivel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floating Chamber Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 FC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRDS Posted November 18, 2007 Report Share Posted November 18, 2007 How is the mag not fixed, the underside of the stock is solid you can't even tell from looking externally it has a magazine and you load from the top. There is nothing that detaches from the gun? It may be detachable if you strip the whole gun down to its component parts, I haven't tried but for the purpose of the law it is not detachable and to say otherwise is pedantic drivel. Might I suggest that the 'other fellow's' Norica had been modified in the past when such an alteration would not have been an issue? To bring the gun up to 'Hungerford' (spit) standard, it would then need to be 're-modified' and stand out as such. An inexperienced firearms officer would then think all Noricas were the same! Not sure how you could modify a fixed 2 shot mag in a solid bottomed stock? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floating Chamber Posted November 18, 2007 Report Share Posted November 18, 2007 FC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_colt Posted November 18, 2007 Report Share Posted November 18, 2007 Perhaps they are in the thinking that the Norica is "capable" of having a magazine tube extender fitted. As it has not had the tubed braised at the end. Likely a load of rubbish and they just want to further mutilate a pre-1988 shotgun. Why not submit it to the proof house yourself and get it certified as section 2 if you think it will pass? The buck stops with them regarding "proof of proof." If they say it meets section 2 and issue a cert to that respect; the Police will have to accept that. mr_colt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floating Chamber Posted November 18, 2007 Report Share Posted November 18, 2007 The Norica has a 'fixed' box mag. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_colt Posted November 19, 2007 Report Share Posted November 19, 2007 Which is why I think it might have a chance of passing proof as section 2. I don't think the proof standard has ever required that it be absolutely impossible to modify: Just that it would take extensive effort and knowledge of gunsmithing to increase the capacity. Why not give the Birmingham proof house a ring? mr_colt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gonna Shoot a Wabbit Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 Only sold my norica .410 a couple of years ago and had no problem holding it on my SGC. I think he is talking rubbish too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tabs Posted November 21, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 21, 2007 Which is why I think it might have a chance of passing proof as section 2. I don't think the proof standard has ever required that it be absolutely impossible to modify: Just that it would take extensive effort and knowledge of gunsmithing to increase the capacity. Why not give the Birmingham proof house a ring? mr_colt I agree. However the RFD in question has already possibly set a precident. I spoke with my FLO who stated that "... in the prior instance (after being approached by said RFD)... interpretation of the letter of the law lead us to require the mag to be braised and the weapon reproofed". FLO also said not to worry to much as they would not be persuing the issue, but suggest that if I was in the BASC local roadshow (tomorrow) to bring it along so he could see the weapon and be in a better position to comment. The pic below is of the bottom of the mag'. Possible to alter? I suppose it could be but any mag, even one brased closed would be wouldnt it? Anyone help with what I should be pointing out to FLO tomorrow. Forgot- who has the last say proof house or FLO? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floating Chamber Posted November 21, 2007 Report Share Posted November 21, 2007 FC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tabs Posted November 23, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 23, 2007 Ok gents, the official line I have been given is that the weapon is section 1 (along with Stevens B/As and a number of other models). This is apparently being pointed out to holders on cert' renewal. i dont know if this is national, but I would asume so. The options given were either reproofing (with proof mark required on the mag' including any remedial work required ie brasing the mag in place) or transfer to a section 1 slot. As I understand it this is due to the mag not being permanantly fixed. Not what I wanted to hear but thats how it is. Tabs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floating Chamber Posted November 23, 2007 Report Share Posted November 23, 2007 FC 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.