The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

Has he given you that in writing?

No however I have asked for confirmation in writing.

The advice I received from the HO was simply, if the LBR was disassembled and this included cutting the brace off, as long as when it was reassembled the overall length exceeded 24". So that is what I did. Took the grips off and removed the cylinder and crane, then cut off the rod. The new rod was reattached before the grips and cylinder replaced. And yes, I have it written somewhere.

Likewise, there is absolutely nothing in legislation that says a barrel has to be a minimum of 12 inches long "as a sole entity". To qualify as a s1 firearm, it has to have a 12" barrel when a "firearm". It is a sum of its parts. You can take off a barrel, cut it and crown it legally. When you reinstall it however, it must comply with the 12" minimum. Adivice dictates that a device, be a muzzle break, moderator or whatever, if "permanently" attached, is regarded as an integral part of the barrel and considered as such for measuring purposes.

Sim G wrote:The advice I received from the HO was simply, if the LBR was disassembled and this included cutting the brace off, as long as when it was reassembled the overall length exceeded 24". So that is what I did. Took the grips off and removed the cylinder and crane, then cut off the rod. The new rod was reattached before the grips and cylinder replaced. And yes, I have it written somewhere.

Likewise, there is absolutely nothing in legislation that says a barrel has to be a minimum of 12 inches long "as a sole entity". To qualify as a s1 firearm, it has to have a 12" barrel when a "firearm". It is a sum of its parts. You can take off a barrel, cut it and crown it legally. When you reinstall it however, it must comply with the 12" minimum. Adivice dictates that a device, be a muzzle break, moderator or whatever, if "permanently" attached, is regarded as an integral part of the barrel and considered as such for measuring purposes.

Thank you

Sent from my mobile using "An application"

I have written to my FLD - in case they have doubts......I would appreciate a comp Sim - if you can dig it out ?

Sim G wrote:The advice I received from the HO was simply, if the LBR was disassembled and this included cutting the brace off, as long as when it was reassembled the overall length exceeded 24". So that is what I did. Took the grips off and removed the cylinder and crane, then cut off the rod. The new rod was reattached before the grips and cylinder replaced. And yes, I have it written somewhere.

Likewise, there is absolutely nothing in legislation that says a barrel has to be a minimum of 12 inches long "as a sole entity". To qualify as a s1 firearm, it has to have a 12" barrel when a "firearm". It is a sum of its parts. You can take off a barrel, cut it and crown it legally. When you reinstall it however, it must comply with the 12" minimum. Adivice dictates that a device, be a muzzle break, moderator or whatever, if "permanently" attached, is regarded as an integral part of the barrel and considered as such for measuring purposes.

You do have a lot more history and experience with the law than I. But it could be construed that the barrel is considered a firearm based on the subsection of "Interpretation".

57.
(1)In this Act, the expression “firearm” means a lethal barrelled weapon of any description from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged and includes—

(a)any prohibited weapon, whether it is such a lethal weapon as aforesaid or not; and

(b)any component part of such a lethal or prohibited weapon; and

(c)any accessory to any such weapon designed or adapted to diminish the noise or flash caused by firing the weapon;

and so much of section 1 of this Act as excludes any description of firearm from the category of firearms to which that section applies shall be construed as also excluding component parts of, and accessories to, firearms of that description.

The part about barrels does in-fact read:

Section 5
(1) (aba) Any firearm which either has a barrel less than 30 centimetres in length or is less than 60 centimetres in length overall, other than an air weapon

So whilst you are correct that it is considered a firearm when complete, the barrel is also considered a firearm by it's own merit as a component part.

It is a contentious issue, and always has been whenever it is brought up. So I wouldn't like to say that I or anyone else "right". It is murky at best, and I'd always advise people on an internet forum to err on the side of caution, which is why for the most part I play devils advocate.

As has been mentioned previously - I believe a degree of common sense has to be applied.

The "stock removal" scenario is a good example. One "interpretation" would mean that when you remove the stock on your carbine, it becomes section 5 while the stock is off.

From experience, the intention of the legislation is what matters.

Example - sec 139 makes it an offence to have a pointed article in public. It was INTENDED to stop louts carrying knives etc.
Which it is why it would never be used to prosecute a lady with a pair of knitting needles in her bag. Or a man with pencil !

Despite both those being pointed articles !

This legislation was drafted to prohibit pistols. So, common sense dictates that as long as you are not trying to shorten your firearm to under 12" you are not in breach.

Common sense as was demonstrated by Ovenpaas FEO.

I'm not at all doubting that it takes some common sense. But it is always worth keeping in mind that FEO's do not make the laws and all you are getting is their interpretation. If you get it in writing that your specific case would be considered legal, then fantastic and you at least have something to argue your corner with, should anything go south for any reason (as I've mentioned before, I find it highly unlikely it would ever become an issue, but for any reason if some prosecutor was out to get you for any reason, would you want to be walking a blurry line...?). Ideally, what you want is permission from the Home Office, because they actually write the laws, their interpretation case-by-case would be rock solid. I've found that they don't tend to put into writing things that they themselves would be unsure about.

Similarly, whilst removing the coat hangar for repair is a good observation of a similar legislative short sight, it is not the same case, and personally I wouldn't use someones "permission" to replace a coat hangar, as justification for thinking that cutting a barrel down for attaching a mod is in the same spirit of "common sense".

But that's just me. It's not me that's potentially on the chopping block, or not, depending on your interpretation. If you think you or a lawyer you can afford could possibly argue your corner on it, then that's down to you.

Case law on this very item would clear things up, but since it's never come up, it's still one of those murky cases of everyones free to interpret it how they like.

It's worth remembering in discussions such as these, I have a healthy distrust for politicians and law-makers when it comes to firearms and firearms legislation.

My take on this is if the barrel has been removed, the sleeve machined and the barrel is in the lathe being faced off or welded and someone calls in you can genuinely demonstrate your intention, especially if I like me you have working drawings then crack on.

I'm attempting a similar build to Breacher and have an appointment with my FEO Monday to discuss cutting a removed barrel to under 12" in order to thread and permanently affix a suppressor bringing it over 12". I'll get the resulting advice in writing before anyone spins up a lathe....