New Deactivation of weapons regulations

[trenchtrotter]

No the mag will be pinned to prevent loading. And welded.

[Gunner Bailey]

Utter waste of time.

This will not stop a single terrorist. They just go to Serbia, Albania , Turkey and buy the real thing.

John

[Stevie]

Reading the new specifications, it would appear that magazine housings can be modified with the insertion of a pin, to stop un-modified magazines being inserted. I would assume ( I know that is dangerous) that this means that an unloaded magazine can be slotted to bypass the pin in the magazine housing.

As for LMG's being welded solid, I would think that this would have come about (eventually) in the UK no matter what. Not very nice I know, but certainly better than not being able to own the larger MG's at all - although this could still possibly happen. But then you would have to question the wisdom of forcing these new changes on collectors and dealers when the intention is to ban them anyway!

[Gunner Bailey]

As for LMG's being welded solid, I would think that this would have come about (eventually) in the UK no matter what.

There are currently 100s of thousands of LMGs out there which have been deactivated to UK specs over the years.

The vast majority can never be converted back to live firing status without complete replacement of all the key parts i.e you need a live gun to make a deact live.

It is a pointless piece of legislation that only serves to make the Home Office look like fools and will not stop a single terrorist from getting an AK47 from Eastern Europe.

It also makes genuine collectors feel criminalised.

I was talking to one today who has a very extensive collection of WW1 and WW2 deacts. He said he will never buy another one. He has been a very regular buyer at the Chelmsford fair so that's one customer and a few dealers affected in one go. I'm sure many feel like him. Could be the end of the deact trade.

John

[trenchtrotter]

John, I think so. Which is what they wanted eight years or so ago when Labours Jackie Smith proposed a ban. If not the end a serious reduction.

TT

[Gunner Bailey]

Interesting side effect:

http://www.thelocal.de/20160517/number-of-small-weapons-licences-in-bavaria-skyrockets

Didn't know that in Germany they had graded licenses.

John

[Grovetown]

What is slightly confusing is the requirement to de-activate the de-activated, so to speak.

Here's the current (April 2016) guidance on firearms licencing:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/518193/Guidance_on_Firearms_Licensing_Law_April_2016_v20.pdf

It says at 2.16:

a ‘de-activated firearm’ means an imitation that consists of something which was a firearm but has been rendered incapable of discharging a shot, bullet, or other missile. Section 8 of the 1988 Act provides that, unless it can be shown otherwise, a firearm which has been de-activated to a standard approved by the Secretary of State, so that it is incapable of discharging any shot, bullet or other missile, is presumed not to be a firearm within the meaning of the 1968 Act and therefore is not subject to control if it bears a mark approved by the Secretary of State for denoting that fact.

So a de-activated firearm "is presumed not to be a firearm".

At 2.17:

De-activation specifications were first set by the Home Office in 1989, and revised in 1995. The most recent came into force in 2010. The new specifications which came into force on the 1st October 1995 and 17th December 2010, are not retrospective. Therefore, a gun de-activated to the old specifications prior to revisions, remains de-activated for legal purposes.

Then it addresses the EU regulation at 2.21:

The new standards shall not apply to firearms deactivated prior to 8 April 2016 (when the Regulation comes into effect) unless those firearms are transferred to another Member State or placed on the market.

So seemingly something that ""is presumed not to be a firearm" or "remains de-activated for legal purposes", suddenly becomes a firearm and/ or not de-activated for legal purposes again at the moment of export or being placed on the market.

Really doesn't tally.

The "placed on the market" is open to interpretation too.

If I and a fellow collector who have known each other for years come to a private arrangement, is that being "placed on the market"?

Is accepting an unsolicited offer from a friend being "placed on the market"?

Cheers,

GT.

[Gunner Bailey]

What makes a firearm?

A rifled barrel

A firing pin

A bolt or similar

A receiver.

All in complete and operable condition.

No UK Deact has any of these so is not a firearm. The Deact certificate states 'no firearms certificate is required to own this gun'

Therefore a deact is not a firearm. It might even be considered an ornament.

Stupid, unenforceable and typical of the poor quality politicians we have to endure.

John

[trenchtrotter]

Latest draft states that deacs will be subject of Cat C classification and therefore require declaration.

Also gifting is defined as placing on market somewhere in blurb.

First comment please note this is the fifth draft and still only draft.

TT

[Grovetown]

In any and all events, the UK has always been disinclined to retrospective legislation; so one presumes the export/ transfer element is a way round this - by way of creating a new contravention at that moment, rather in to relation of what's gone before.

Interestingly, retrospective criminal laws are prohibited within the ECHR - and while there is no criminal dimension (yet), it would get complicated as a result come the day.

It is stupid because to ban, say, ownership of the previously automatic, you are having to treat it as an automatic; rather than something which "is presumed not to be a firearm" in the current realm. Which is plainly illogical.

In some European countries, they'll probably just ignore it as being in the too hard box - or be so consumed by stemming the movement of real weapons that they won't have the time.

Trouble is: the UK official has a tendency to be super-officious these days (including some forces, with respect TT) and you can foresee jobsworthy implementation regardless of the realities/ practicalities.

Cheers,

GT.

[henryww1]

In Memoriam to common sense and understanding, last seen hiding from foreign and domestic policies which have no affect on the real issues.

Rest In Peace the collector, you have no place in the modern age of usage and wastage.

[trenchtrotter]

Latest draft states that deacs will be subject of Cat C classification and therefore require declaration.

Also gifting is defined as placing on market somewhere in blurb.

First comment please note this is the fifth draft and still only draft.

TT

this draft has been agreed now and will go before the Euro Parliament for a vote to accept / reject in Nov. Deacs are in cat c. Subject to declaration. Not sure if you would need a FAC and then a secure cabinet if this becomes accepted?

TT

[Grovetown]

this draft has been agreed now and will go before the Euro Parliament for a vote to accept / reject in Nov. Deacs are in cat c. Subject to declaration. Not sure if you would need a FAC and then a secure cabinet if this becomes accepted?

TT

Any sense, if this is passed, whether it would apply retrospectively - that you would need to register de-acts that are currently legally held, or whether it would just be newly created ones and/ or those that were sold or gifted?

Cheers,

GT.

[trenchtrotter]

I don't know for sure. I suspect for all? If successful countries would have up to 36 months to create the systems to administer etc.

TT

Will be up to EP.

[593jones]

I hope someone can clear up my confusion here; now that the specifications for de-acts have been published, is this now effectively part of UK law or does it have to go through Parliament before it can be implemented. I notice that World Wide Arms are having all their stock de-activated to the new specs, but I wonder if this is a legal requirement as yet. From previous posts I have the impression that, until it has been ratified by Parliament, the new specs would not be legally required.

[martin_sole]

I hope someone can clear up my confusion here; now that the specifications for de-acts have been published, is this now effectively part of UK law or does it have to go through Parliament before it can be implemented. I notice that World Wide Arms are having all their stock de-activated to the new specs, but I wonder if this is a legal requirement as yet. From previous posts I have the impression that, until it has been ratified by Parliament, the new specs would not be legally required.

Yes and no.

An EU directive doesn't need to be approved or written into English law for it to be a legal requirement.

However in this country, for the police to charge you and a court to convict you, there needs to be a law "on the books', which there currently isn't.

Worldwide arms will have taken legal advice on this. They will have been told that their trade is illegal but nobody will take action against them at the moment.

Once the Firarms Act (or whatever) is amended, that will change and we'll see people handed custodial sentences for selling de-acts.

Salvation doesn't lie in signing petition 129834. Government has no power to overturn an EU rule.

Getting the EU to write in certain exemptions is the way forward.

The MEP Vicky Ford is currently working to get a more sensible set of regs.

[593jones]

Thanks for that, Martin, it clears it up for me. Something is illegal, but they can't charge you because there isn't (yet) a law against it.

I did sign the petition, for what it's worth (apparently nothing), so more power to Vicky Ford in her endeavours!

[healdav]

Yes and no.

An EU directive doesn't need to be approved or written into English law for it to be a legal requirement.

Yes, it does. A Regulation does not need any British law for it to apply.

[trenchtrotter]

Healdav Martin said as much.

The whole thing is bizarre. New EU compliant deacs will be the only ones allowed to be sold / traded etc and as time passes all will end up complying. The current sale of old spec is simply exploiting a loop hole.

If the Directive goes through in its current form as submitted on Friday ( this is seperate to the April change) deacs will be classified in Cat C subject to declaration. I know not if the will have to be held on a FAC or stored securely.

Final fly in ointment is that mags with a capacity exceeding 20 rounds could be banned. How would this effect Lewis Mags / Bren mags etc if spot welded to the gun?

This is my interpretation of the document from Friday? Happy to be corrected.

TT

[Gunner Bailey]

"Once the Firarms Act (or whatever) is amended, that will change and we'll see people handed custodial sentences for selling de-acts."

Whilst nobody in Sainsbury's get a custodial sentence for selling a kitchen knife that is used in a murder.

Madness rules......

John

[healdav]

I might as well clear up the difference in general between a regulation and a directive.

Normally speaking a directive tries to harmonise the laws in different states. The difficulty which arises is that very often the subject covered by the directive is already covered in some states, but not in other, and very often one clause is in a law in some countries, but not in others who have another clause in other laws - if you follow me.

Thus, the directive can be put into law into all states leaving much of their previous law in place - so, say. clause 4 in France may be much the same as clause 3 in Britain, and clause 10 in Germany, etc. whilst none of them has clause 9. Italy might well have clause 6 in one law and clause 7 in another. So, they can amend their current law by bringing in clause 9 and leave the rest as it is.

This is a very difficult thing to regulate, and is much more complicated than anyone envisaged at the beginning. The Commission expected every country to implement each directive in full by a new law, and to repeal whatever they had previously, but this, it turned out, brought up all sorts of legal and political problems. The database trying to keep a track of all this has to be seen to be believed. I could never make head nor tail of it, and thankfully I never had to work with it.

A regulation, on the other hand - and there aren't that many of them - needs no input from the countries legal system. Mostly they are for things which have to be done by all countries at the same time and in precisely the same way for their to be any sense in it. For example, the declaration of stocks and movement of nuclear materials has to be reported each month using a common form and set of codes, etc. If everyone sent in what they liked and when they liked it would be impossible for EURATOM and the IAEA to audit their accounts.

I hope this clarifies things in general a bit and not just for this discussion.

[bif]

I'd say Mr Trump was a greater threat to our safety and security than WW1 weaponry!!

Mr Trump won't be the one asking for your legally purchased, deactivated, antique firearm, will he ? Blessing our 1st and amendments every day, Bif

Ps

sorry for the delay re the time diff, again

[healdav]

I forgot to add that every member state has six months to put the directive into national law (but that does tend to elongate as the states try to work out just what they have to put where - and there's no need for funny! comments).

[trenchtrotter]

They've allowed 36 mtgs if it goes ahead.

TT

Months even

[593jones]

I see that World Wide Arms are now selling de-acts with the new spec.  The ad for an SMLE reads 'DEACTIVATED to New EU/UK Specification with fully moving parts, detachable modified magazine and EU/UK Proof House Certificate.'  Presumably this will be a slotted magazine which has been mentioned elsewhere.