Tim Birch Posted 22 June , 2003 Share Posted 22 June , 2003 On the Antiques Roadshow this evening was a small Browning Automatic with Sassoon's name marked on it. Apparently he had a normal service issue Webley .45 revolver, but also carried the Browning, which he had purchased privately, in his tunic pocket. The reason given for this was that he had a fear of being seriously wounded and being left in great pain, so he kept the Browning to shoot himself if the need arose. This seems rather a shallow explanation for his having the Browning because the Webley would have been equaly as efficent should he had needed such a way out. In the event when he was wounded he didn't resort to either. Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianw Posted 22 June , 2003 Share Posted 22 June , 2003 Tim, I suppose it is always good to have some back up. I think the Browning would have given him another 9 shots or so - perhaps it was offensive in nature when he acquired it and changed its purpose as Sassoon changed his attitude to the war. I presume it is de-activated otherwise it would probably be an offence to own it. Having missed the programme , what was it valued at and was its provenance certain ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Birch Posted 23 June , 2003 Author Share Posted 23 June , 2003 Ian The pistol belonged to a local museum and dissappointingly when it came to the question of value the curator rather pompously stated that as it belonged to a museum and would not be coming onto the market the question of value was irrelevant!! ( Insurance value wasn't discussed as the program moved onto the next item at that stage) I am not certain if it had been deactivated. Are museum pieces exempt under the law? Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ian Bowbrick Posted 23 June , 2003 Share Posted 23 June , 2003 Museums holding firearms must prove that the weapon is no longer capable of fulfiling its purpose, ie it has been deactivated and certified as such by a qualified gunsmith, otherwise they must hold a firearms certificate, and it must be stored according to the wishes of the local Police. Our local museum had this problem a few years ago. Even though several of the weapons they had on display were relics of Waterloo, they were still capable of functioning. Bizarre I know - who would rob a bank with a flintlock, but hey the law is the law, and as Dickens said the law is an a**! Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Reed Posted 25 June , 2003 Share Posted 25 June , 2003 Weapons such as this were in 'vogue' amongst British officers in 1915/16, and since Sassoon was a man of money he could easily afford them. They were found impractical on the battlefield; some of them were such a small calibre, that they proved useless when used i.e. they had little effect on those being shot! The army eventually banned them because there were cases of officers firing a whole magazine into a 'Big Bavarian' and he still came running, killing the officer. If he had used a Webley or a Colt, then the man would have been killed or badly wounded with the first shot. I suspect this explanation of SS weapon has been 'dressed up' for the cameras... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CROONAERT Posted 25 June , 2003 Share Posted 25 June , 2003 Museums holding firearms must prove that the weapon is no longer capable of fulfiling its purpose, ie it has been deactivated and certified as such by a qualified gunsmith, otherwise they must hold a firearms certificate, and it must be stored according to the wishes of the local Police. Our local museum had this problem a few years ago. Even though several of the weapons they had on display were relics of Waterloo, they were still capable of functioning. This also goes for private individuals. "Obsolete calibres" (certified) are exempt and don't need licences or de-activation. Waterloo era weaponry and the like can be held on a "Black-powder" (or sometimes, a shotgun) licence. By the way, I didn't see the pistol being referred to. From the discriptions , I get the impression that it was a 1900 FN Browning? If this is so, wasn't this one of the standard issue SLP's in the Belgian Army 1914-18? Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CROONAERT Posted 25 June , 2003 Share Posted 25 June , 2003 By the way, I didn't see the pistol being referred to. From the discriptions , I get the impression that it was a 1900 FN Browning? If this is so, wasn't this one of the standard issue SLP's in the Belgian Army 1914-18? Just to illustrate my above..... the 1900 Browning. This particular weapon (a "bring home" souvenir from 1918), I had the pleasure of firing on many occasions (on a range!!!) before Dunblane when I had to either deactivate it or lose it. I chose the former. I agree with Paul about the effectiveness.It's basically a "spud - gun", but I could see it as quite lethal at very close range.Pocket sized and lightweight, it would be perfect as a "last resort" weapon. Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CROONAERT Posted 26 June , 2003 Share Posted 26 June , 2003 I forgot to mention.... ....this is also the type of pistol used by a certain Gavrilo Princip in June 1914 to assasinate Franz Ferdinand. Not a bad claim to fame for what I referred to yesterday ,as a "spud-gun"!!!! (I bet Mr Henry Browning never envisaged that his company would develop a small calibre pistol that could kill millions worldwide with a couple of shots!!!!) Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now