New firearms Laws: Standard pellets to be used in power checks?

[morose]

Is there any scope for petitioning towarda a 15ft/lb limit. I don't expect many of us would at present be happy to shoot/hunt a few ft/lbs under the current legal limit. However if the limit were higher then I for one would be happy sticking at the current levels without need to worry if I marginally exceed the 12ft/lb limit.

The industry could continue to produce rifles at the 12ft/lb level and could charge a premium for those wishing to go towards the 15ft/lb mark in an effort to disuade the hooligan minority from getting their filthy mitts on them.

I can see some swiss cheese size holes in this argument and it's probably unrealistic but thought it was food for thought (if you'll pardon the pun).

[DJP]

While the standard projectile idea is a good one it ain't gonna happen, the government simply will not go to those efforts for us. Remember, they're trying to get rid of us.

Realistically, the best we can hope for is that they publish a standard list of pellets to be used in testing by all forces. And that if a pellet on the list becomes unavailable they publish an updated list showing what will be used instead.

British Standard Balls? Load of balls more like!

[Beer Hunter]

Originally posted by DJP
While the standard projectile idea is a good one it ain't gonna happen, the government simply will not go to those efforts for us. Remember, they're trying to get rid of us.

Realistically, the best we can hope for is that they publish a standard list of pellets to be used in testing by all forces. And that if a pellet on the list becomes unavailable they publish an updated list showing what will be used instead.

British Standard Balls? Load of balls more like!

DJP,

If the government were to define a standard list of pellets, this would no doubt involve further consultation above and beyond naming a solid lead ball. Furthermore that marketplace would require regular review to ensure product availability.
As all this would involve greater effort on the part of the authorities, I think your argument fails to hold water.

TER...

[Ray J]

I must have missed something.

Part 2 Relates to - Unlicenced Guns, guns that do not meet the legal definition of Fire Arm.
"Low powered Air Guns, that are used for target shooting and vermin control" That's us, isn't it?

I didn't read Air Weapon.

I didn't read anything relating to mandatory sentences for being a .5 lb/ft over 12 lb/ft.

Can some one point me to the sections that do?

Ray

[Geordie]

Originally posted by Ray J
I must have missed something.
<snip>
I didn't read anything relating to mandatory sentences for being a .5 lb/ft over 12 lb/ft.

Can some one point me to the sections that do?

Ray

Yup, Annex B - Firearms Offences and Penalties:

Possessing etc. Firearm or Ammunition without Firearm Certificate - 5years or an unlimited fine or both

[hwtyger]

I don't know, what if they test a gun for legal limit with, let's say, Gamo pellets
with THOSE they're within limit
but who shoots Gamo pellets?
might be very possible that it's above the limit with your favourite pellet:AA/Daystate, FTT...
about the word weapon:it really shows how the general public feels about guns, it's stigmatising(is that the correct word?)

[Rob M]

Quote: "about the word weapon:it really shows how the general public feels about guns, it's stigmatising(is that the correct word?)"

I am glad that someone else feels the same way about this that I do!!

This isn't the general public's term though, it was applied (incorrectly) to airguns the last time that major new laws involving airguns were created, back in 1968. It really is time that we stopped calling these things weapons, they don't deserve it, and we don't deserve the violent connotations of the word weapon creating entirely the wrong impression with the public.

[Ray J]

The way I read these "proposals" they are targeted at bullet guns, not pellet guns.
I appreciate that a pellet gun stepping over the 12lb/ft limit is classed as an unlicenced fierarm.

This is just one of the instances that the law society insists on maintaining their discretion in sentencing.
A pellet gun 2-3 lb/ft over the limit is not the same as a pellt gun 10/20lb/ft over, nor is it the same as an UZZI.

Mandatory sentencing removes the magistrate's/judge's brain!

I feel this will be resisted again even in the case of fire arms.

There is an email addy' so I'll be putting my piece in.

Ray

[CL]

Fellow Shooters,

Interesting thread this, I was talking to my mate about this issue last week in fact.
I think eventually it will come to having a register of some kind or a licence for an airgun, whatever its power. I wouldnt have a problem being on a register to say I have airguns, indeed having a register just to say you own an airgun would help reduce crime as it would make it a bit more difficult for young tw@ts to get hold of them.
Its a very fine line on the power issue, with pellet weights, air temp and all the rest of it. As I said to my mate I would find it shocking if a judge sentenced somebody to five years in prison who had a rifle that was, say, 1.5ftlbs over the limit and had never had a criminal record, never been in trouble with the law in any way and just shot at the local club or the odd rabbit shoot.
Its the law thats wrong in this country, people are charged with manslaughter who have a string of criminal offences already and get less than five years, paedo's get mere wrist slaps for their crimes and the list goes on. I know the law is the law but all this fuss and panic about doing five years bird for 0.2 ftlbs over the limit needs to be sorted by the home office otherwise its just gonna depend on if the police or judge are in good moods on the day they catch someone with an over the limit gun.
I mean, imagine if your old man bought an old springer for a bit of rabbiting at the weekends and went down the club to zero it and the police turned up to do random testing and found it to be 12.14 ftlbs. He's never broke the law ever, in his 50's and gets five years bird!!. I know you have to break the law for a airgun to be taken off of you and tested (or do you?) perhaps someone could confirm that. I'd be interested to know if anybody has had their rifle tested or knows anyone else who had it done and what the result was and what action was taken against them.
If I was in charge of the issue for this country I would keep the limit at 12fps and if anybody was found to be in pocession of an airgun over the limit I would give them two weeks to reduce it or they would have to apply for a ticket. If both were not complied with then I'd throw the book at them plain and simple. If the power limit is bought down anymore hunting wouldnt be worth doing, its hard enough as it is to get clean kills with 11.8ftlbs. No matter how good a shot someone is if the power aint there it aint gonna stop them and they will crawl away for a slow death. We all say we have mostly clean kills but we all know they doesnt always happen. Anti's will have a field day and they will become even more enraged by peeps hunting with lower power guns than before!. Its also wrong for the term "air weapons" to be used. Gentleman above was quite right on that, air is something that powers the rifle or pistol, I mean you wouldnt called a kitchen knife "a kitchen weapon" even though it has the potential to kill somebody, and I might add, knives are used more in crime than "" in this country!!.

CL

[Nigel S]

Originally posted by Terry D
They don't need that proof, mate. The law uses the phrase 'capable of exceeding the legal limit' - and it refers to the gun, not its user.

THAT'S what all the fuss is about.

OK, now you've got me worried.

I knew that if my gun was running over the legal limit when tested I could get done. Now I'm reading "capable of exceeding", and reading that different pellets could be used when assessing that capability.

So how far does "capable" extend? Surely any PCP can be tweaked to go over the limit -- so it's "capable". Any springer can have a beefier spring fitted -- so it's "capable".

What does capable cover?

And from the previously mentioned consultation document:

"Trespassing with an air gun and firing one within 50 feet of a public road are both offences."

WHAT!?! I thought (and I'm sure it was covered in a thread here a while back) that you had to be causing a nusiance/distraction/whatever within 50 feet of the road -- not just firing the thing! Has this changed, or are they just paraphrasing for the consultation document?

Starting to panic...

Nigel

[Rob M]

Quote: "I thought (and I'm sure it was covered in a thread here a while back) that you had to be causing a nusiance/distraction/whatever within 50 feet of the road -- not just firing the thing!"

This hasn't changed, I think that they are just paraphrasing.

It's a stinker of a law though, even if someone just claims to have been bothered by the noise, (rather than having any genuine safety problem), they can object, and if someone objects then the offence is deemed to have been committed.

We all need to write in with our views and get some fairness and common sense into these laws. I suggest replying to the document, also writing to your MP, the Home Secretary, Tony Blair and also BASC... The more letters that the government receives on this subject the better, the more people that write in, the better.

[Cam]

Is illegal to fire 50 ft from the CENTER of a road so in reality if you are by a fast A road you can be right on the edge!!!

++

It has always struck me as an interesting comparison - you cant be done for speeding if you are within 10% of the speed limit but if you are 0.1% over with an air rifle wham!

So i think the easiest change is that police can test as many pellets as they like but only if the average is above 12ft lbs can they prosecute.

My force allow (or did?) 10% leeway before they got excited.
when my scg came up for renewal I asked my FLO (who is also a keen airgunner) under what circumstances would an air rifle be tested and his answer was to the effect only if you were caught using it in an illegal manner, but thats on his patch which has very low air rifle crime. unfort different forces have different rules

I know the law sounds draconian but does anyone know or have proof of someone jailed or being given a massive fine for owning a 12.2 ft lb air rifle?