New laws coming?

[dromia]

When it comes to firearms legislation we as shooters need a bit more than support, we need proactive and aggressive leadership and action not the limp wristed supplication that seems to be their modus operandi to date.

[BamBam]

This 10,000ft/lb ceiling is concerning, what about people with magnum hunting calibres that want them for overseas trips?
Going to be a lot more people affected than first thought, not just target shooters and no response other than asking questions and capitulating to demands.
The thin end of the wedge comes to mind.

[shugie]

When it comes to firearms legislation we as shooters need a bit more than support, we need proactive and aggressive leadership and action not the limp wristed supplication that seems to be their modus operandi to date.

Well, if they aren't doing what you think they should be doing, why not see if you can establish an organisation that can? It could be all encompassing in terms of shooting, and have a very narrow remit, that of acting as a Parliamentary lobby group. You'd probably need to engage the services of a professional lobbying group, and a quick conversation with one of them will give you an idea of the budget. You might be able to persuade the existing shooting organisations to provide some support, both resources and financial, add some members on a modest subscription and you could do great things.

[Gazza]

When it comes to firearms legislation we as shooters need a bit more than support, we need proactive and aggressive leadership and action not the limp wristed supplication that seems to be their modus operandi to date.

Well, if they aren't doing what you think they should be doing, why not see if you can establish an organisation that can? It could be all encompassing in terms of shooting, and have a very narrow remit, that of acting as a Parliamentary lobby group. You'd probably need to engage the services of a professional lobbying group, and a quick conversation with one of them will give you an idea of the budget. You might be able to persuade the existing shooting organisations to provide some support, both resources and financial, add some members on a modest subscription and you could do great things.

I like the idea of that Shugie

[joe]

If there is ban, maby the NRA could fund a high court action against the government under the bill of rights act ! The bill of rights only allows for regulation not for bans

[Daryll]

If there is ban, maby the NRA could fund a high court action against the government under the bill of rights act ! The bill of rights only allows for regulation not for bans

They will say they're not "banning" them, just changing their classification... to Section 5..

[Mikaveli]

Here we are chaps - consultation open:

The Government is proposing to prohibit the ownership of .50 calibre ‘materiel destruction’
rifles of a type developed for use by the military to allow for shooting over long distances,
for example, to enable sniping at long ranges and in a manner capable of damaging
vehicles and other equipment (referred to in military terms as 'materiel'). They are also
designed to penetrate armour worn by soldiers. These rifles are currently used by a small
number of civilian target shooters to test their shooting over very long ranges using large
calibre firearms, but we consider that the potential range and penetration of these
weapons are such that they are a significant risk if they were to fall into the wrong hands.
For this reason, we propose that they no longer be allowed for civilian use.

We are also proposing to prohibit ownership of rapid firing rifles, such as the VZ 58
Manually Actuated Release System (MARS) rifle, which can currently be purchased by
anyone who has a firearms certificate authorising them to possess a centre-fire rifle in one
of the relevant calibres. While a rifle of this nature is capable of a rapid rate of fire, there is
uncertainty about whether they can or should be defined as a self-loading rifle of a kind
already prohibited under section 5 of the Firearms Act 1968 because a second pull of the
trigger is required to discharge a round. Nevertheless, the rate of fire is significantly
greater than a conventional bolt-action rifle and recognising the intention of the Firearms
Act to prohibit civilian ownership of semi-automatic firearms and the risk that they would
pose if they were to get into the wrong hands, we consider it appropriate to subject rifles of
this type to the controls of section 5 of the Firearms Act 1968.

Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultat ... egislation

Note that the consultation refers specifically to .50 calibre anti-material rifles and MARS (VZ-58) rifles - using two pulls of the trigger.

The impact assessment adds:

18. The police have records of 64 .50 calibre rifles registered to private
individuals in the UK in 2017. Industry experts have advised that the value of these
is likely to range from £3000 - £5000 depending on their age and specification.
Assuming every owner is compensated for the retail value of their rifle, the
estimated cost to the government will be between £0.19 million and £0.32 million.

19. It is not known how many Manually Actuated Release System rapid fire rifles
there are in the UK, however after discussions with the manufacturer the NCA has
estimated that there are around 400 owned by private individuals. There is only one
importer of these rifles, who sells them at a cost of around £2,000. Assuming rifles
hold their value over time; this would result in a cost to the government of £0.8
million.

Also, the consultation is only effectively considering two options - do nothing or prohibit them (and obviously it suggests doing nothing is not acceptable...)!

[Dark Skies]

Here we are chaps - consultation open: ...

Note that the consultation refers specifically to .50 calibre anti-material rifles and MARS (VZ-58) rifles - using two pulls of the trigger.

Certainly it refers to the MARS design but this is what ought to be appreciated:

"We are also proposing to prohibit ownership of rapid firing rifles, such as ..."

That still leaves the gate wide open for them to raise lever release rifles with the general all-encompassing term "rapid firing rifles, such as ..."

I've not shot either but I'm guessing they are capable of similar rates of fire - sufficiently so for them to both be caught within 'rapid firing'. If you're going to proscribe one under the catch all excuse of 'national security' why wouldn't you take the opportunity of using it for the other? Especially as it's just a flimsy excuse for a gun grab.

[Mikaveli]

Here we are chaps - consultation open: ...

Note that the consultation refers specifically to .50 calibre anti-material rifles and MARS (VZ-58) rifles - using two pulls of the trigger.

Certainly it refers to the MARS design but this is what ought to be appreciated:

"We are also proposing to prohibit ownership of rapid firing rifles, such as ..."

That still leaves the gate wide open for them to raise lever release rifles with the general all-encompassing term "rapid firing rifles, such as ..."

I've not shot either but I'm guessing they are capable of similar rates of fire - sufficiently so for them to both be caught within 'rapid firing'. If you're going to proscribe one under the catch all excuse of 'national security' why wouldn't you take the opportunity of using it for the other? Especially as it's just a flimsy excuse for a gun grab.

I think the consultation quite clearly equates the use of the term "rapid fire rifle" to MARS actions exclusively - the whole IA refers to one specific importer (presumably CCA), sets out the typical model (VZ-58), and describes the function (two trigger pulls). This reinforces what BASC has already told us - no other rifle types affected.

I wouldn't get too hung up on the Home Office nomenclature for such rifles - they aren't considering other actions based on rate of fire alone (otherwise LBR, S1 shotguns, .22LR semis etc. would be right along side it).

[Countryman]

Who cares?

An attack on one form of our sport is an attack on all.


Sent from my boing using "An application"