Home Secretary to consult on new laws on offensive weapons - Page 2 - General Discussion - UK Varminting

Jump to content


UKV Topic Header Banner (sys)
Photo

Home Secretary to consult on new laws on offensive weapons


  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

#21 gbal

gbal

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 5,529 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:northumberland
  • Interests:accuracy

Posted 13 October 2017 - 07:51 AM

FCSA are working directly with NRA and BASC........there has been direct contact with home office and they are to be applauded for taking up the 'fight'........this integrated effort is the approach most likely to succeed and should be supported.

The issue is being profesionally addressed.

So subscribe.BASC are reasoned,informed and effective (as in recent 'expanding missiles' relaxation).

gbal

UKV Topic First Post Banner (sys)

#22 DaveT

DaveT

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 1,277 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Cerney, Glos
  • Interests:Stalking , Tactical Rifles (most any sort of rifle really!)
    Long range shooting and all the technical stuff you have to learn. Reloading nutter.

Posted 13 October 2017 - 04:38 PM

I am already in all 3 orgs.

#23 gbal

gbal

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 5,529 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:northumberland
  • Interests:accuracy

Posted 13 October 2017 - 05:03 PM

Dave,it was meant as agreement with your assessment of effective action-support the named organisations,and an exhortation to others to do so too.Knee jerk, inaccurate and wildly speculative comments don't help ( as you also implied).Actual support eg for BASC does (as in the very recent tidy up on expanding ammo).

g

#24 Markg

Markg

    Newbie or Infrequent Poster

  • Members
  • 8 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cumbria

Posted 13 October 2017 - 05:17 PM

Latest news posted on Gallery Rifle



Last Friday Andrew Mercer (NRA), and Paul Dale (BASC) met with the home office regarding such matters as the club license fees. However they also took the opportunity to raise the issue of the proposed ban on .50 and rapid firing firearms, in an attempt to establish what exactly is the background to this consultation.

Apparently .50 and lever release firearms have been on the agenda for a while now, the Home Office have taken the opportunity to include these additional firearm controls in the latest raft of prohibitions on acids and the mail order of bladed weapons.

The following points are not set in stone, and until the consultation is open we cannot assume that these are 100% accurate, they may be subject to change.

1. The consultation process will open very soon, possibly next week.
2. The consultation will be short, and the outcome (if this results in changes or a ban) will be enacted as primary legislation (law) in JANUARY 2018.
3. The restriction will apply to anything that is capable of generating a muzzle energy that exceeds 10,000ft/lbs
4. The concern over civilians having access to .50 rifles has been elevated following the theft of a .50 rifle from an RFD, however the Home Office believed that the theft was from a regular shooter. They will be corrected on this matter. The stolen firearm was completely functional, in that it was taken with its bolt.
5. The other primary concern is that of the potential material destructive capabilities.

The following observations and comments were raised at the meeting.

· Andrew pointed out that the FCSA is a very well run club, with an excellent safety record. No criminal use in the UK.
· If these rifles are banned, then the compensation payments bill will be very high due to the extraordinary cost of such rifles and associated equipment.
· We do not use section 5 ammunition, we use target ammunition that is not designed to have any destructive capabilities.
· BASC are most upset that this consultation has been announced without any prior warning, as this in contrary to an agreement previously put in place to eliminate any unexpected surprises.
· The Home Office REALLY doesnt like lever release firearms.

I spoke with Andrew at length after his meeting. We discussed the above, in particular points 4 and 5.

If the Home Office is concerned that these rifles might fall into the hands of criminals (point 4 above) then we need to provide a solution. The solutions discussed (between the Home Office and the NRA) were as follows:

· Complete ban
· Grandfather rights i.e. you can keep and use your .50, you can never sell it to another shooter, when you die it gets destroyed.
· Make .50 rifles section 7.3, this was deemed impractical as we travel vast distances between ranges, we have no armoury to store the rifles in at a range.
· Improve home security, separate the bolt and keep this in a separate safe in a separate room. Possibly require a monitored alarm system for the premises. I prefer this option.

The Home Office believe that these are material destruction devices (point 5). This is clearly rubbish when using section 1 ammunition. Andrew advised that to counter this argument we need to state the exact properties of a target projectile, or mil spec ball, impacting on a variety of targets. I have witnessed Amax turning to dust on the surface of a sand backstop, ball ammunition has similar properties. However rather than rely solely on a statement from us, we are calling in an independent ballistic expert, a non-member, and using a private range facility will conduct a series of tests. The evidence gathered will be used to prove our point.

BASC is on our side. However not all shooters are, yet. One worrying development that I leaned of today is that one police force are now reluctant to issue a variation for anything over .300 win mag, even to FCSA members. Hopefully this is just one police force and not a new national trend. Unless the entire shooting community backs this opposition campaign then expect to continue to see a never ending wave of consultations, resulting in the eventual ban of everything we enjoy.

Social media continues to be a huge problem, some outrageous comments being posted, along with photographs of military looking weapons that would scare the hell out of the average Guardian reader. So please dont get involved in any such online discussions, please dont post photographs and whatever you do dont get angry. Everything we do online is being watched, angry folks with guns can expect an unwelcome visit from the law, especially in the current political environment.

As soon as the consultation goes live Ill send out another email, with advice on how to respond.

Many thanks,

Chris Stevenson
Chairman, FCSA (UK)

#25 DaveT

DaveT

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 1,277 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Cerney, Glos
  • Interests:Stalking , Tactical Rifles (most any sort of rifle really!)
    Long range shooting and all the technical stuff you have to learn. Reloading nutter.

Posted 13 October 2017 - 06:26 PM

Dave,it was meant as agreement with your assessment of effective action-support the named organisations,and an exhortation to others to do so too.Knee jerk, inaccurate and wildly speculative comments don't help ( as you also implied).Actual support eg for BASC does (as in the very recent tidy up on expanding ammo).
g


Sorry Gbal.....misunderstood!

#26 Brushy

Brushy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 110 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bath, Somerset
  • Interests:Long range shooting & load development

Posted 14 October 2017 - 07:57 AM

The consultation is now open ....

#27 bradders

bradders

    Advanced Member

  • Yellow Riband
  • 3,308 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NE London/Essex
  • Interests:The art of the Black Rifle

Posted 14 October 2017 - 08:09 AM

https://www.gov.uk/g...new-legislation



#28 bradders

bradders

    Advanced Member

  • Yellow Riband
  • 3,308 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NE London/Essex
  • Interests:The art of the Black Rifle

Posted 14 October 2017 - 08:20 AM

https://www.gov.uk/g...nsultation-.pdf

Proposal on firearms H.

 

Prohibit .50 calibre ‘materiel destruction’ rifles and rapid firing rifles under section 5 of the Firearms Act 1968 England, Wales and Scotland These two types of firearms are currently subject to general licensing arrangements but we consider that there are good grounds to subject them to the stricter controls provided by section 5 of the Firearms Act 1968. This provision prohibits the ownership, other than as authorised by the Secretary of State or the Scottish Ministers (as appropriate), of more dangerous, non-civilian firearms such as handguns and automatic rifles. The Government is proposing to prohibit the ownership of .50 calibre ‘materiel destruction’ rifles of a type developed for use by the military to allow for shooting over long distances, for example, to enable sniping at long ranges and in a manner capable of damaging vehicles and other equipment (referred to in military terms as 'materiel'). They are also designed to penetrate armour worn by soldiers. These rifles are currently used by a small number of civilian target shooters to test their shooting over very long ranges using large calibre firearms, but we consider that the potential range and penetration of these weapons are such that they are a significant risk if they were to fall into the wrong hands. For this reason, we propose that they no longer be allowed for civilian use. We are also proposing to prohibit ownership of rapid firing rifles, such as the VZ 58 Manually Actuated Release System (MARS) rifle, which can currently be purchased by anyone who has a firearms certificate authorising them to possess a centre-fire rifle in one of the relevant calibres. While a rifle of this nature is capable of a rapid rate of fire, there is uncertainty about whether they can or should be defined as a self-loading rifle of a kind already prohibited under section 5 of the Firearms Act 1968 because a second pull of the trigger is required to discharge a round. Nevertheless, the rate of fire is significantly greater than a conventional bolt-action rifle and recognising the intention of the Firearms Act to prohibit civilian ownership of semi-automatic firearms and the risk that they would pose if they were to get into the wrong hands, we consider it appropriate to subject rifles of this type to the controls of section 5 of the Firearms Act 1968. 



#29 maximus otter

maximus otter

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 285 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cambs.
  • Interests:Knocking small holes in small objects *waaaaaay* over there.

Posted 14 October 2017 - 08:44 AM

...we consider that the potential range and penetration of these weapons are such that they are a significant risk if they were to fall into the wrong hands. For this reason, we propose that they no longer be allowed for civilian use.

 

We are also proposing to prohibit ownership of rapid firing rifles, such as the VZ 58 Manually Actuated Release System (MARS) rifle...

 

They are so disdainful of our "rights" that they aren't even bothering with their usual "policy-based evidence making" any more.

 

Their entire platform is "We think it looks icky, so we're banning it to suck up to Daily Mail readers."

 

The shooting sports have been so vilified and marginalised for so long now that the media and politicians can utter any cobblers they like, and mouth-breathing tabloid readers will lap it up.

 

I despair.

 

maximus otter


"Formerly we suffered from crimes; now we suffer from laws."

Publius Cornelius Tacitus

#30 old_n07

old_n07

    Newbie or Infrequent Poster

  • Members
  • 17 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stoke-on-Trent
  • Interests:URC \ FCSA

Posted 14 October 2017 - 10:04 AM

Looking at the consultation papers it's all or nothing

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/651758/IA_Firearms.pdf 

 

 

Option 1 - Do nothing.

 

Option2 - Prohibit the purchase, ownership or possession of .50 calibre rifles and the specified type of rapid fire rifles through the exercise of the Secretary of State’s powers under the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988.

 

Option 3 - Prohibit the purchase, ownership or possession of .50 calibre rifles and the specified type of rapid fire rifles through a new statutory provision to prohibit these weapon types, if the power provided by the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988 cannot be used for this purpose.



#31 CliveWard

CliveWard

    Advanced Member

  • Yellow Riband
  • 300 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kent

Posted 14 October 2017 - 01:45 PM

Hi All,

 

I've responded in detail on all points.

 

Personally, I'd rather they spend the millions it will cost on actively tackling crime, rather than criminalising members of the public through poorly written legislation.

 

If it's a simple equation of saving maximum lives for the money, then spend it on soap and cleaning in hospitals.

 

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

Clive


http://www.nightvisionstore.co.uk
High end night vision digital, tubed and thermal monoculars, rifle scopes, clip ons, add ons, IR Illuminators and accessories.

Digital, thermal and tubed night vision rifle scopes - Handheld thermal imagers


#32 Xtrema

Xtrema

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 120 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Guildford, Surrey.
  • Interests:Shooting. Fishing. Engineering. Reloading
    Getting on a bit now and cranky with it.

Posted 14 October 2017 - 03:40 PM

The government could ignore all groups opposed to their view and ban them overnight. No new legislation or discussion in parliament required, just a home office official's signature.

The government clearly want to ban 50 cal rifles and they probably will as they have forgotten about evidence based policy making.

For the fist time in 40 years this won't affect me, however i'll still oppose a ban tooth and nail as I opposed all the previous ones. 

 



#33 geek

geek

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 249 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North West
  • Interests:Shooting, Cars, Watches, PC gaming, Motorbikes

Posted 16 October 2017 - 09:23 PM

​I would also contact your MP. This can be done here https://www.theyworkforyou.com/
 


Regards,

 

Geek

 

If you make everything idiot proof, evolution will just make a better idiot!

 

AI AT (.308), Ruger Precision Rifle (6.5CM), 10/22 (modified), American Rimfire, Steyr Aug (.223/5.56), Marlin underlever .38/.357, Fabarm Lion (s.1 - 10+1), Fabarm Axis O/U, Baikal S/S


#34 Vortex

Vortex

    Newbie or Infrequent Poster

  • Members
  • 38 posts

Posted 17 October 2017 - 12:42 PM

Just emailed local MP,see what she has to say if I get a response.

#35 CliveWard

CliveWard

    Advanced Member

  • Yellow Riband
  • 300 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kent

Posted 17 October 2017 - 05:28 PM

Hi All,

 

I've just been having a peruse of this:

 

https://www.ons.gov....theuseofweapons

 

Scrolling down you can drill down to injuries caused during crime by type of firearm. Rifles are bundled into a section with a lot of other things such as stun guns, cs guns, starting pisols, prohibited guns (Skorpions and AKs I would guess) or 'unknown'.

 

Interestingly in this category there were zero deaths caused. Now if you look at the huge number of rifles held on FAC in the UK and the absolutely tiny proportion of those being manual release and the even tinier proportion being .50; I just can't see any real statistical evidence that they pose any kind of measurable threat to public safety.

 

Even if it was 1 death per year from stolen rifles I would imagine the statistics would be that someone would be murdered with a stolen .50 every 7,800 years.

 

Back to my earlier point, the estimates are infection in hospitals is a major contributor in 15,000 deaths annually and is in fact the primary cause in 5,000 more deaths.

 

Again...do some good and spend the money on soap and cleaning.

 

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

Clive


http://www.nightvisionstore.co.uk
High end night vision digital, tubed and thermal monoculars, rifle scopes, clip ons, add ons, IR Illuminators and accessories.

Digital, thermal and tubed night vision rifle scopes - Handheld thermal imagers


#36 LukeSoutherner

LukeSoutherner

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 147 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Halifax, West Yorkshire

Posted 18 October 2017 - 07:09 AM

Latest news posted on Gallery Rifle



Last Friday Andrew Mercer (NRA), and Paul Dale (BASC) met with the home office regarding such matters as the club license fees. However they also took the opportunity to raise the issue of the proposed ban on .50 and rapid firing firearms, in an attempt to establish what exactly is the background to this consultation.

Apparently .50 and lever release firearms have been on the agenda for a while now, the Home Office have taken the opportunity to include these additional firearm controls in the latest raft of prohibitions on acids and the mail order of bladed weapons.

The following points are not set in stone, and until the consultation is open we cannot assume that these are 100% accurate, they may be subject to change.

1. The consultation process will open very soon, possibly next week.
2. The consultation will be short, and the outcome (if this results in changes or a ban) will be enacted as primary legislation (law) in JANUARY 2018.
3. The restriction will apply to anything that is capable of generating a muzzle energy that exceeds 10,000ft/lbs
4. The concern over civilians having access to .50 rifles has been elevated following the theft of a .50 rifle from an RFD, however the Home Office believed that the theft was from a regular shooter. They will be corrected on this matter. The stolen firearm was completely functional, in that it was taken with its bolt.
5. The other primary concern is that of the potential material destructive capabilities.

The following observations and comments were raised at the meeting.

· Andrew pointed out that the FCSA is a very well run club, with an excellent safety record. No criminal use in the UK.
· If these rifles are banned, then the compensation payments bill will be very high due to the extraordinary cost of such rifles and associated equipment.
· We do not use section 5 ammunition, we use target ammunition that is not designed to have any destructive capabilities.
· BASC are most upset that this consultation has been announced without any prior warning, as this in contrary to an agreement previously put in place to eliminate any unexpected surprises.
· The Home Office REALLY doesnt like lever release firearms.

I spoke with Andrew at length after his meeting. We discussed the above, in particular points 4 and 5.

If the Home Office is concerned that these rifles might fall into the hands of criminals (point 4 above) then we need to provide a solution. The solutions discussed (between the Home Office and the NRA) were as follows:

· Complete ban
· Grandfather rights i.e. you can keep and use your .50, you can never sell it to another shooter, when you die it gets destroyed.
· Make .50 rifles section 7.3, this was deemed impractical as we travel vast distances between ranges, we have no armoury to store the rifles in at a range.
· Improve home security, separate the bolt and keep this in a separate safe in a separate room. Possibly require a monitored alarm system for the premises. I prefer this option.

The Home Office believe that these are material destruction devices (point 5). This is clearly rubbish when using section 1 ammunition. Andrew advised that to counter this argument we need to state the exact properties of a target projectile, or mil spec ball, impacting on a variety of targets. I have witnessed Amax turning to dust on the surface of a sand backstop, ball ammunition has similar properties. However rather than rely solely on a statement from us, we are calling in an independent ballistic expert, a non-member, and using a private range facility will conduct a series of tests. The evidence gathered will be used to prove our point.

BASC is on our side. However not all shooters are, yet. One worrying development that I leaned of today is that one police force are now reluctant to issue a variation for anything over .300 win mag, even to FCSA members. Hopefully this is just one police force and not a new national trend. Unless the entire shooting community backs this opposition campaign then expect to continue to see a never ending wave of consultations, resulting in the eventual ban of everything we enjoy.

Social media continues to be a huge problem, some outrageous comments being posted, along with photographs of military looking weapons that would scare the hell out of the average Guardian reader. So please dont get involved in any such online discussions, please dont post photographs and whatever you do dont get angry. Everything we do online is being watched, angry folks with guns can expect an unwelcome visit from the law, especially in the current political environment.

As soon as the consultation goes live Ill send out another email, with advice on how to respond.

Many thanks,

Chris Stevenson
Chairman, FCSA (UK)

 

 

Thanks for posting that Mark.

 

I suggest that we need to stand together on this one, as opposed to the apathy that might come from "well, I've not got a .50 cal so it won't affect me". My thinking, as above, is that similar fallacious reasons could be used to ban any firearm.

 

I will be putting my views across in this consultation, and would urge others to do the same, albeit not in an angry/bitter way.



#37 MrCetirizine

MrCetirizine

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Alford, Lincolnshire
  • Interests:Target shooting, photography, gadgets.

Posted 18 October 2017 - 07:43 AM

For anyone who's filling in the consultation form, there's a question at the end regarding the equalities act. Remember that MARS and other lever release rifles offer an opportunity for physically disabled people to shoot that other rifle actions may not.

#38 maximus otter

maximus otter

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 285 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cambs.
  • Interests:Knocking small holes in small objects *waaaaaay* over there.

Posted 18 October 2017 - 07:56 AM

​I would also contact your MP. This can be done here https://www.theyworkforyou.com/
 

 

Done.

 

I have asked my MP for the evidence on which they base this proposed change in law; I have also pointed out that FAC holders live disproportionately in rural, Conservative constituencies.

 

After May's disastrous snap election, they don't have voters to spare...

 

maximus otter


"Formerly we suffered from crimes; now we suffer from laws."

Publius Cornelius Tacitus

#39 geek

geek

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 249 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North West
  • Interests:Shooting, Cars, Watches, PC gaming, Motorbikes

Posted 20 October 2017 - 12:00 AM

Just emailed local MP,see what she has to say if I get a response.

 

I have not received a response from my local MP (unfortunately Labour, whom I wouldn't trust to run a bath) 


Regards,

 

Geek

 

If you make everything idiot proof, evolution will just make a better idiot!

 

AI AT (.308), Ruger Precision Rifle (6.5CM), 10/22 (modified), American Rimfire, Steyr Aug (.223/5.56), Marlin underlever .38/.357, Fabarm Lion (s.1 - 10+1), Fabarm Axis O/U, Baikal S/S


#40 Vortex

Vortex

    Newbie or Infrequent Poster

  • Members
  • 38 posts

Posted 20 October 2017 - 11:55 AM

Geek who’s your MP, my MP is labour but no response as of yet.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users