New Deactivation of weapons regulations

[healdav]

On 31/03/2017 at 19:57, Gunner Bailey said:

 

No this started in Brussels after the Charlie Hebdo shootings. It's Brussels and Brussels alone.

Have you actually read the original directive? The British are notorious for taking a perfectly reasonable EU directive and then putting it into British law, taking it to the most extreme and bureaucratic extent possible. They even have a word for it; 'gold plating'.

I know nothing about deactivation, but my betting is that this is yet another example of the British going to extremes and then blaming 'Brussels'.

 

[Gunner Bailey]

No the British do try to enact EU law correctly whilst rest of the EU ignores it. 

 

The British are very law abiding. Shame the rest aren't. 

[Joolz]

No need for jingoistic xenophobia. The French have also enacted the European Weapons Directive, and now have exactly the same stringent deactivation rules we do, and believe me, their gun enthusiasts also feel the same way about these new rules. However, they have faced an equally eyewatering set of further restrictions on self-loading rifles and magazine capacities, under the new European categorisation rules, which we, the British, have not enacted as part of our laws (no need, we're perfectly capable of destroying firearms ownership in this country without any help from Europe). We have not 'gold plated' this directive, by a long way.....

[Joolz]

As for disposal of 'legacy' (pre 2018 spec) deacts, my local police have made it clear that they cannot be 'given' to anyone, not even museums or dealers (RFDs). They must be either submitted for re-deactivation by their current owner, or handed in to the police (to be destroyed). I'm waiting on clarification about inheriting them, but I suspect they will either have to be re-deactivated before they can be transferred to next of kin, or handed in for destruction.

 

It's beyond me why someone would want to own a post-2018 (new spec) deactivate of a WW1 firearm (unless it was a machine gun or artillery piece). There is plenty of scope within current firearms law to legally own and use real WW1 rifles and handguns, without having to resort to paying someone silly money to destroy a piece of firearms heritage.

[healdav]

13 hours ago, Gunner Bailey said:

No the British do try to enact EU law correctly whilst rest of the EU ignores it. 

 

The British are very law abiding. Shame the rest aren't. 

Sorry. You're wrong. Britain is notorious for taking everything to its bureaucratic limits of craziness. The governments and civil service even have a name for it, 'gold plating'.

And they are very proud of it.

If it was ever decided to have a maximum speed on the roads, you can bet money that Britain would bring back a man with a red flag walking in front of each car. And all in strit accordance with the maximum speed limit.

Believe me, in the Commission it brings screams of rage every time that something comes in. I've seen it so many times I have long lost count.

What is worse, they do it, eve n when it is against Britain's interests to do so.

That is why I say, look at the original directive (which Britain will have agreed to, anyway), not on what is in British law.

 

 

[peregrinvs]

10 hours ago, Joolz said:

As for disposal of 'legacy' (pre 2018 spec) deacts, my local police have made it clear that they cannot be 'given' to anyone, not even museums...

My reading of the Act is that they can be transferred to a museum if it holds a museums firearms license:

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2017/3/section/128/enacted?view=plain

[peregrinvs]

On 15/06/2019 at 17:50, T8HANTS said:

Should be grounds for a law suit here, the weapons were deactivated to Home Office specification after apparently forensic testing as to the practicality of reactivation.

Now we are told that these weapons were defectively deactivated, so it is the Home Office at fault not the owner, who could only go by the regulations as given from on high.

Forgetting the fact these are ex-weapons, if you buy a washing machine in good faith having been assured that it will wash all, only to be told several years later it can't, you would feel cause for redress, I see no difference.  The Home Office assured me my ex weapon was deactivated, now they say despite being done to their spec it is not.  I believe that all deact owners affected should go for a class action against the Goverment.

I suspect the Home Office response would be along the lines of 'defectively deactivated is just a form of words to mean not deactivated to the current specification and the actual physical deactivation status is legally a moot point'.

 

BUT, it wouldn't be difficult for a good defence lawyer to make this proposition look rather foolish in court. (E.g. It's no more logical than a law making it illegal to sell a blunt knife if the blade hasn't been blunted in a certain state-defined way) Hence my interest in whether the law has actually been tested in court yet?

[Gunner Bailey]

I don't think it has. It would be possible to demonstrate in court that a pre 2018  British deact could not be reactivated so is not defectively deactivated. I. E. The new EU law is totally unessessary. 

 

The old British standard was superior to that in EU countries, especially Germany and the old communist block countries. 

[healdav]

1 hour ago, Gunner Bailey said:

I don't think it has. It would be possible to demonstrate in court that a pre 2018  British deact could not be reactivated so is not defectively deactivated. I. E. The new EU law is totally unessessary. 

 

The old British standard was superior to that in EU countries, especially Germany and the old communist block countries. 

Then why did the British agree to it?

[peregrinvs]

1 hour ago, Gunner Bailey said:

I don't think it has. It would be possible to demonstrate in court that a pre 2018  British deact could not be reactivated so is not defectively deactivated.

Which raises an interesting question. Have there been no prosecutions yet because nobody has been caught red handed? (It's very difficult to police private sales) Or is there a quiet policy of only prosecuting in instances where a gun has been literally 'defectively deactivated'? 

[pierssc]

Seems quite clear to me - F(A)A 1988, s.8A(4)(c) (as inserted by P&CA 2017, s.128) is the crucial bit .  A de-act has to meet current deactivation specifications if it is to be sold or given away (unless it is to a museum holding a Museums Firearms Licence) EDIT: Ooops I was wrong there - it seems that it is only sales or gifts BY museums with a Museum Firearm Licence TO another museum with a Museum Firearm Licence.

 

"For the purpose of this section, something is a “defectively deactivated weapon” if—

(a)it was at any time a firearm,

(b)it has been rendered incapable of discharging any shot, bullet or other missile (and, accordingly, has either ceased to be a firearm or is a firearm only by virtue of the Firearms Act 1982), but

(c)it has not been rendered so incapable in a way that meets the technical specifications for the deactivation of the weapon that apply at the time when the weapon is made available for sale or as a gift or (as the case may be) when it is sold or given as a gift."

 

s.128 Policing and Crime Act 2017, inserting a new s.8A into the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988, subsection (4).

 

Subsection (8):  In the case of a weapon rendered incapable as mentioned in subsection (4)(b) before 8 April 2016, subsection (1)(a) or (b) does not apply if the weapon is made available for sale or as a gift, or (as the case may be) sold or given, by or on behalf of a museum in respect of which a museum firearms licence is in force to another museum in respect of which such a licence is in force. (my emphasis)

Edited 17 June , 2019 by pierssc
Change of mind re gifts/sales to museums

[peregrinvs]

BTW. If anyone was hoping that we would revert to the pre-2016 situation post-Brexit, the following legislation would suggest not:

 

The Law Enforcement and Security (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2019/742/part/15/made

 

See section 61(2).

[Gunner Bailey]

2 hours ago, healdav said:

Then why did the British agree to it?

Because they always try to be good Europeans when it comes to the law. Something other nations should take note of. 

[T8HANTS]

I'm sure I read somewhere that if we all submitted our deacts for reproofing it would clog up the proof houses for the next fifteen years solid,  they don't want to see them and they weren't consulted when the legislation was drafted in a panic and passed by T. May.

I suspect the guiding underhand of ACPO was heavily involved in this.

 

Edited 17 June , 2019 by T8HANTS

[peregrinvs]

6 minutes ago, T8HANTS said:

I'm sure I read somewhere that if we all submitted our deacts for reproofing it would clog up the proof houses for the next fifteen years solid,  they don't want to see them and they weren't consulted when the legislation was drafted in a panic and passed by T. May.

I suspect the guiding underhand of ACPO was heavily involved in this.

 

You're probably thinking of this:

 

Clause NC29 of the Offensive Weapons Bill - September 2018

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmpublic/OffensiveWeapons/memo/OWB197.pdf

 

It was dropped after it was pointed out that it was totally unrealistic.

[Joolz]

It's also worth noting that the 'new spec' deactivation process is a two-part one, which requires the gun to be submitted to proof twice, once for approval of the preparatory work, and again for final proof, so double the time at the proof house (and double the cost to dealers).

 

Thanks, pierssc, for your correction, saved me the trouble of pointing out that Museum-to-Museum transfer of legacy deacts is the only transfer allowed. So, as a private individual, you have to pay a further £120 per gun to have it turned into a housebrick, or have it destroyed by the police.

 

I'm still awaiting clarification on whether RFDs can have legacy deacts transferred on to their Section 5 (if they have that authority), as that would be a way of preventing their further destruction, in the same way that legacy prohibited firearms can be.

 

Once again, why bother wasting your money on a 'new spec' deac when you can own a real, live, working SMLE rifle or WW1 Webley revolver on a Firearms Certificate. You don't even need to be a member of a shooting club.

 

This whole debate is only really an issue for those with a wall full of legacy deacts which are now, effectively, unsaleable without further major investment. It's a crappy situation, but it is still 'under debate' with lots of collectors out there across Europe who are pushing for clarity and less stringency.

[Dave66]

It's a mess, I only have one Webley revolver that is an expensive paperweight so will not be buying any more...as much as I want to.

At the last militaria fair i went to in March, I saw two rifles that ticked every box for me. A very nice Long Lee Enfield with matching numbers and an early S.M.L.E., all matching....neither one deactivated to current E.U. spec,  and at two thousand for the two, well, not for me but I was most surprised to see them there in the first place!!

I feel extremeley sorry for any collector that has a large collection...soul destroying.

 

 

[Doug504]

1 hour ago, Dave66 said:

It's a mess, I only have one Webley revolver that is an expensive paperweight so will not be buying any more...as much as I want to.

At the last militaria fair i went to in March, I saw two rifles that ticked every box for me. A very nice Long Lee Enfield with matching numbers and an early S.M.L.E., all matching....neither one deactivated to current E.U. spec,  and at two thousand for the two, well, not for me but I was most surprised to see them there in the first place!!

I feel extremeley sorry for any collector that has a large collection...soul destroying.

 

 

 

£2000 for the two!!!!!

 

My thought are exactly as a couple of the previous posts. Why bother with a deactivated example at these crazy prices. This hobby merely encourages the destruction and price inflation of perfectly serviceable rifles / pistols. 

 

Obtain your F.A.C. and your costs will certainly be more realistic. My last purchased 1916 S.M.L.E. was bought from Brancepeth armoury for £250, ( approx 6 years ago). Prices of functioning SMLE’s and No. 4’s have increased of late since so many serviceable rifles were deactivated as they bring in a higher price.Even after adding on costs of gun cabinet etc your overall outlay will still be well below costs of deactivated rifles.

 

Page 53 onwards of the following document details collecting “historical” firearms. Many members of my local club have collections of historical weapons which are still regularly used and enjoyed as they were intended. 

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/518193/Guidance_on_Firearms_Licensing_Law_April_2016_v20.pdf

 

Quite a a funny story along these lines happened at our club one evening a couple of years ago. Just prior to closing there’s a knock at the door. Old lady comes in with black bin bag under her arm. She says to club manager behind the counter      “here son you might as well have this, my husband died recently and left this in the attic” Opens the bin bag and deposits German MP40 on the counter. Fully functional and in excellent condition. Became quite upset when informed she could not leave premises and police had to be informed. However, cups of tea worked their magic, and understanding police calmed things down. I believe that weapon, thanks to a knowledgeable firearms officer, was recognised as “of historical interest” and ended up at Royal Armouries rather than going through the bandsaw. Makes you think how many others are still out there.

Edited 17 June , 2019 by Doug504
Forgot to add link to document!

[Dave66]

Certainly seems like owning a live weapon would be cheaper and easier, what a mad world we live in!

As to the pair for two thousand, I suppose there will always be chancers, they're just not getting my cash.

 

Dave.

[Joolz]

Doug504, prices have gone up a bit since then. A top end, shootable, live SMLE can be easily had for £400-£500 retail depending on date/matching numbers etc.. Less, of course, for more tatty versions, but doing up SMLEs is part of the fun of owning them. Likewise, a top end Webley revolver can be had for £500-£600, although tatty ones can be had from £350 on up, but still shootable.

 

Factor in around £120 for the licence and a second-hand cabinet. No need to be a member of a shooting club (indeed, for 7.1 handguns, not being a shooter may even be better). If you are already an established collector, or have PLI for such as re-enactment or displaying/demonstrating your collection to the public, there's your good reason for owning a live gun, so long as you don't mind not being able to shoot live rounds in it.

 

Why buy an over-priced, welded up, pinned together, non-functioning, chopped to bits new spec deactivate?

[healdav]

18 hours ago, Gunner Bailey said:

Because they always try to be good Europeans when it comes to the law. Something other nations should take note of. 

The British can turn down, block, veto all legislation, just like any other country. Unfortunately, successive British governments have shown themselves to be utterly incompetent when it come to consulting the people affected by whatever. In the early 1990s the government very nearly killed the British boatbuilding (yacht) industry by declaring to the Council of Ministers that they had consulted everyone about a draft directive and they were all in agreement with it. This rather surprised the other countries as they had been advised by their boatbuilding industries that the British would block the proposal, and quite rightly (too difficult to go into the technicalities here).

Anyway, the whole thing went through on the nod. It was only when it was published that the British industry found out about it and went ballistic. It turned out that the government had consulted no one at all.

At vast expense the whole thing had to be redone. This was, naturally, the fault of everyone else.

As I have said before, the British have a long track record of this. Don't talk to the experts, then blame everyone else. The other countries do consult, then get things modified, then put into national law what the directive says. The British put into national law the bureaucratic limit of whatever, then blame the EU. NOthing to do with being good Europeans; everything to do with wilful stupidity, and heaven knows what else.

[David Filsell]

Let me stick my neck out again 

While I have sympathy with collectors - my son has a deactivated Thompson - sadly I think that many misunderstand the passion which people have for weapons. I have recently disposed of my shotguns - old, unusable, but of family interest  - to a dealer.   

I may be quite wrong, but suspect ,however,that the vast majority of people, including those on the form, if asked, would fully support the revised deactivation measures  and, indeed, would probably prefer all deactivated weapons to be removed from private hands.

Its a hard row you collectors have to hoe..

Regards

David 

 

 

[Gunner Bailey]

On 16/06/2019 at 22:19, Joolz said:

No need for jingoistic xenophobia.

 

I agree entirely.

 

It's a shame others can't stop.

 

3 hours ago, healdav said:

The British put into national law the bureaucratic limit of whatever, then blame the EU. NOthing to do with being good Europeans; everything to do with wilful stupidity, and heaven knows what else.

 

 

[593jones]

On ‎17‎/‎06‎/‎2019 at 22:10, Joolz said:

Doug504, prices have gone up a bit since then. A top end, shootable, live SMLE can be easily had for £400-£500 retail depending on date/matching numbers etc.. Less, of course, for more tatty versions, but doing up SMLEs is part of the fun of owning them. Likewise, a top end Webley revolver can be had for £500-£600, although tatty ones can be had from £350 on up, but still shootable.

 

Factor in around £120 for the licence and a second-hand cabinet. No need to be a member of a shooting club (indeed, for 7.1 handguns, not being a shooter may even be better). If you are already an established collector, or have PLI for such as re-enactment or displaying/demonstrating your collection to the public, there's your good reason for owning a live gun, so long as you don't mind not being able to shoot live rounds in it.

 

Why buy an over-priced, welded up, pinned together, non-functioning, chopped to bits new spec deactivate?

 

I wonder how being a former collector would go down these days.  I did collect military small arms many years ago, held a FAC from 1969 to 1984, before I was obliged to sell my collection owing to financial constraints.  I had a nice collection of Lee Enfields, from a CLLE to a No. 5.  There would be no chance of recreating the collection, it would cost far too much, but I would like to own a really nice SMLE and perhaps another CLLE.  I do remember, from the old days, the police were never entirely enthusiastic about my collection, I still have a file of correspondence with them, so I wonder how they would view it now.  I do own a number of deactivated rifles, all now 'defectively deactivated', but that is a problem for the future as I have no intention of disposing of them.

[healdav]

On 18/06/2019 at 14:40, Gunner Bailey said:

 

I agree entirely.

 

It's a shame others can't stop.

 

 

 

I'm just telling it like it is. I saw it all from the inside for over 30 years.