bradders Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 1 minute ago, chaz said: Why doesn't the seller then have to send his FAC to the buyer to complete the sale. As in if you did it face to face. Why would he have to do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 I'm going on the basis of a face to face sale. The buyers details on my ticket and the sellers details on the buyers ticket. At least that's what West Mercia Police tell me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vortex Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 The whole system needs an overhaul. Can’t see why section 1 is any different to section 2 in regards to sales. Mods need to be taken off ticket as it’s just a tube that if I wasn’t going to put on a firearm I wouldn’t need an FAC for. At least expanding ammo shouldn’t be restricted for too much longer and lending firearms as like you can section 2 shouldn’t be too far away. At least a bit of common sense has got to the policy makers in that regards. just have to keep jumping through the hoops until common sense kicks On the issue of sales. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradders Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 10 minutes ago, chaz said: The buyers details on my ticket That's not necessary, you only record items onto a licernse, not off of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrCetrizine Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 20 minutes ago, Vortex said: At least expanding ammo shouldn’t be restricted for too much longer It's not restricted now, hasn't been since about March. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vortex Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 Yer I know but also the lending of firearms was supposed to be in with all that legislation change but they are waiting for guidance or something. So are they actually selling expanding ammo over the internet now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrCetrizine Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 There's no provision for lending firearms like shotguns (in that you can loan one for 72 hours) in the policing and crime act that has the expanding ammo change. There are changes to the laws about borrowing firearms for hunting while in the presence of the owner and on land they have authority to shoot over. "Authorised lending and possession of firearms for hunting etc. This amendment is the result of an attempt to simplify the shotgun and rifle exemptions within the 1968 and 1988 Firearms Acts for the purpose of lending a shotgun or rifle on land. They used terms not defined in law, especially “occupier”. The new exemption is drafted in quite broad terms so as to refer to the lender as “A person who has a right to allow others to enter the premises (it means land) for the purpose of hunting animals, shooting game or vermin”. That person may authorise another in writing to lend a rifle or shotgun on those ‘premises’. The following conditions have to be met for this to be lawful; · The borrower of a rifle must be over 17. · The borrower of a shotgun may be any age. · The lender must be aged 18 or older (rifle and shotgun). · The borrower must be in the presence of the lender i.e. in sight and earshot. · The lender and borrower must comply with any conditions of the lender’s certificate. · The purpose of the loan is only for hunting animals, shooting game or vermin or shooting artificial targets. · Written permission is required for the borrower where they do not have a right to allow others onto the land to shoot. Verbal permission is no longer permitted. The current s11(6) exemption for shooting artificial targets with shotguns remains untouched. " This came into law on 2nd of May as did the expanding ammo change. The only thing outstanding is the automatic extension of a FAC by six months if they don't get the renewal done in time. This is delayed because the computer system needs changing to send out automatic extension notification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vortex Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 Yes that is what I meant. Not lending for 72h but the lending /borrowing while I’m there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrCetrizine Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 OK then yes that became law in May. Here is the commencement order which activated the law... http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2017/399/made Provision 4f Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
243ack Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 In Law, anyone can 'own' anything - even firearms. They may not be able to 'hold' them, but ownership does not necessitate possession. I have personally 'brokered' the disposal of firearms, S1, S2 and S5 held by police after confiscating them from the 'owners' father. The 'owner' was disbarred from holding a FAC for life, but it could not preclude him from owning the property, merely 'holding' his property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJW7088 Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 Hello, The reason the question of the seller needing to enter the firearm details directly onto the purchaser’s FAC arises is because of the wording of s3(2) Firearms Act 1968 (as amended); 2)It is an offence for a person to sell or transfer to any other person in the United Kingdom, other than a registered firearms dealer, any firearm or ammunition to which section 1 of this Act applies, or a shot gun, unless that other produces a firearm certificate authorising him to purchase or acquire it or, as the case may be, his shot gun certificate, or shows that he is by virtue of this Act entitled to purchase or acquire it without holding a certificate. The requirement refers to “produces”. This has been interpreted by police and CPS as meaning the purchaser must produce their FAC to the seller, i.e the seller must see it (and infers the seller would therefore enter the transaction onto it). The practice of transfer from one RFD to another, who then enters the details, may be judged by a court as meaning the original requirement was not fulfilled, however there does not seem to have been any public interest in a prosecution to find out, when nothing adverse has happened. As with many of these situations, it seems likely that the only time the public interest test would be met is if something went wrong. I expect the Met. Police are giving their advice so that RFDs and others know how the law is being interpreted by the enforcement agencies, just in case something went amiss. I hope that helps. Adrian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradders Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 Thanks, that's pretty clear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artiglio Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 Thanks for the thoughts/clarification in the above posts. Seems to be a very badly worded piece of legislation, from the parts quoted so far, - most certainly an offence to take payment in full or transfer a firearm or licensable component without sight of an authority to buy / acquire said item - in respect of accepting a deposit for an item, from the section Bradders posted , to me and my understanding of the English language allows the acceptance of a deposit to either hold an item or commission a build. From the posts above it seems as though police forces are choosing to interpret this as severely as possible. As pointed out this would need to go to court for clarification and would likely lead to much debate on the definitions of deposit, purchase , ownership, etc. Surely if the legislation was meant to make the taking of a deposit without an authority to purchase it would have been clearly written as such. However in the meantime it would be foolhardy to go against advice received. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artiglio Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 Going back to the original post and some of the concerns raised in later replies. Would it not be prudent / possible to. _ send your fac to the vendors rfd _vendor arrives at said rfd inspects and fills in your fac, transfers firearm to rfd _rfd returns fac to purchaser and forwards firearm to purchasers rfd -purchaser turns up at his rfd with fac and collects firearm this if viable would address some of the concerns voiced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradders Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 18 minutes ago, Artiglio said: Going back to the original post and some of the concerns raised in later replies. Would it not be prudent / possible to. _ send your fac to the vendors rfd _vendor arrives at said rfd inspects and fills in your fac, transfers firearm to rfd _rfd returns fac to purchaser and forwards firearm to purchasers rfd -purchaser turns up at his rfd with fac and collects firearm this if viable would address some of the concerns voiced. I don't think so, because that causes a gap in the audit trail Example: I sell a gun to you, but Joe my local dealer enters it onto the license you sent to him.... Who notifies the police, me or him? It's supposed to be me. And if it came from me, then how did it get from me to him? coz I just told the police I sold it to you, but FLMS records the transfer as coming from Joe the RFD to you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 6 hours ago, bradders said: That's not necessary, you only record items onto a licernse, not off of it Anyone I've had any dealing with, including a few on here have required it. Made no odds to me, so it didn't matter..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(200x135).jpg.0fd0a94f065c6cb243fdff1b40e0819a.jpg)
.jpg.0972b4e2bdf0b5a4109eb96f2b1b62ad.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.