Page 1 of 1
Am I reading this correctly ....
Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 5:35 am
by X2001xr
So I was recently looking at putting in for a variation and noticed this on the Essex police website
The publication of the Policing and Crime Act 2017 has resulted in changes in the way that expanding ammunition is recorded on Firearms Certificates issued from May 2, 2017 as follows:
There will no longer be an expanding ammunition condition on any Firearm Certificate.
You will now only have one authority for each calibre of ammunition, up to the maximum in the guidelines below.
If you have existing authorities for solid and expanding ammunition of the same calibre, you will receive a temporary permit. This permit will be valid for one year to allow for the reduction of any holding you may have in excess of the revised limit detailed on the Firearm Certificate.
There is no longer any requirement to have authorities to acquire or possess expanding bullet heads or missiles.
Home Office guidelines for amunition authorities
.22 RF .17 HMR 750 Vermin and ground game 1200 Target
.22 WMR (.22RF MAG will be listed as .22 WMR) 750 Fox, vermin and ground game 1200 Target
22 HORNET .222 .223 REM 250 Ground game, fox and vermin 1200 Target
.243 WIN .270 WIN .303 7.62/.308 250 Deer and fox 1200 Target
Solid slug (Practical shot gun only) 300
https://www.essex.police.uk/contact-us/ ... plication/
Am I reading this correctly that as a target shooter the limit is 1200 rounds of .22rf?
Re: Am I reading this correctly ....
Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 5:54 am
by dromia
They are guidelines, good reason to hold more means greater amounts can be allowed.
Re: Am I reading this correctly ....
Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 6:07 am
by X2001xr
but then why is this line included
You will now only have one authority for each calibre of ammunition, up to the maximum in the guidelines below.
seems they are imposing the guideline as the maximum limit ?
Re: Am I reading this correctly ....
Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 6:15 am
by dromia
If you have good reason and adequate security for more then I would challenge that.
Best to speak direct with them to find out what they actually mean.
Re: Am I reading this correctly ....
Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 6:37 am
by ovenpaa
For the first time ever my FEO questioned me closely on my holdings at my last renewal visit and suggested 1500 rounds of rimfire should be adequate although he did point out I should not have any issues obtaining more when my stocks were diminishing :)
Re: Am I reading this correctly ....
Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 7:02 am
by Blackstuff
It seems to be saying (although it may just be a formatting problem) that 1200rds of 243 for target use is 'the norm'. I would think that would be a significant increase in most peoples holdings, especially for .243!
Re: Am I reading this correctly ....
Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 7:23 am
by kennyc
Blackstuff wrote:It seems to be saying (although it may just be a formatting problem) that 1200rds of 243 for target use is 'the norm'. I would think that would be a significant increase in most peoples holdings, especially for .243!
thats about a barrels worth on a .243!
whereas my FEO tried (unsuccesfully) to reduce my .308 holding to the minimum rather than the medium level I am currently at.......
Re: Am I reading this correctly ....
Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 7:33 am
by ovenpaa
Yes, same here. I can hold 1200 rounds of .308/7,62x51. he asked if I needed that much I said yes and we moved on. I was happy to drop my 22-250 holding from 1200 to 600
Re: Am I reading this correctly ....
Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 6:58 pm
by daman
I and others of my acquaintance have asked the Met to have our holdings of 1200 .22 increased and we have always been knocked back.
Reasons we've given have been batch consistency, different guns liking different ammo (e.g. a 10-22 and an LBP), ability to bulk buy etc.