7.3 Heritage?

[Jim McArthur]

That makes just about as much sense as any of the rest of the application form.

tac

I'd guess that .450 and others are probably listed as obsolete: so they get questions about
.455 so often that they're letting you know up front that no, this one isn't lumped in with the others.

Jim

[Smokeless Coal]

I know someone with eight webleys, they are a collection. Go visit some places of herritage, museums and the like, they may have hundreds of the same gun.

What you have to realise is that the people who have them often built up an encylopedic knowledge of them, you may have one with a serial number x but also a later one just because it shows a difference in the machining marks or change of proof house or even because they dont show a difference. I keep trying to emphasise they are not held for the purpose of shooting thats just a sub topic of their appreciation and study.

[markH]

It's quite simple, if you look at the home office Obsolete calibers list they give a list of the calibers which are treated as antiques, they also give a list of old guns "Which should not benefit from exemption as antiques". The .455 is on the second list.... thereby they are "on the list that is not on the list"

http://www.david-squires.org.uk/Antiques.htm

[tacfoley]

It's quite simple, if you look at the home office Obsolete calibers list they give a list of the calibers which are treated as antiques, they also give a list of old guns "Which should not benefit from exemption as antiques". The .455 is on the second list.... thereby they are "on the list that is not on the list"

http://www.david-squires.org.uk/Antiques.htm

Pardon me for sounding like a complete plork, but wouldn't it have been easier not to mention them at all in the document? The very omission of this calibre from the Obsolete Calibre list should tell you all you need to know, rather than the yesnoyesitisn't attempt at even more issue-clouding.

Sigh....

tac

[Jim McArthur]

OK, now: to clarify or confuse even further:

Section 7.3, you can shoot, but only at certain clubs designated as permissible for the purpose, and under a lot of restrictions. 7.3 pistols, and ammo suitable for same, must be stored at such a club. Correct?

Whereas 7.1, you're not allowed to shoot, but they can be kept at your home. Correct?

But then, I've also heard that 7.3 is for pistols for which ammo is commercially available, and 7.1 is for those for which ammo is not commercially available. (?)

This makes sense. But then, there's also Section 58, for obsolete calibers.

So my question is: what's the difference between Section 58, obsolete caliber, vs. Section 7.1, ammo is not commercially available?

Jim

[markH]

Jim, have a read through the obsolete calibers list. They are not simply saying that any caliber which is no longer in commercial production is antique. They do actually stress that the ammunition should be "Long obsolete" and go as far as to say:-

"The chances of the survival of more than a tiny number of most of these cartridges - or of the arms which they fit - are very low indeed."

If you look at the list which is NOT classed as antique (e.g. .455 webley), then, although the ammo is no longer in current production there is probably still quite a lot around. I can't quite see the logic behind it because if the pistol is held on 7(1), even if you could find ammo for it, you wouldn't have the authority to buy it as the certificate doesn't cover ammo. But there it is, I don't write the rules.

The list is revised from time to time and as the "Obsolete calibers" become "Long obsolete" then they get added to the list.

[Jim McArthur]

So then, 7.1 is for guns who's ammo is out of production: and 58 is for guns who's ammo is way-long-time-ago out of production. This makes sense.

I suppose the legal distinction then, and the reason for the more stringent 7.1 controls, is that, even though a 7.1 license doesn't allow you to buy ammo for the gun, nevertheless there's greater potential for the gun to be criminally abused.

Sell me your .32 rimfire, and it's not likely I can ever shoot anyone with it, even if I feel inclined to do so, since I'll never find ammo to fit it.

Sell me your .455 centerfire, and I can probably find ammo for it if I look around.


Jim

[tacfoley]

...you may have one with a serial number x but also a later one just because it shows a difference in the machining marks or change of proof house or even because they dont show a difference.

That's a very interesting concept there, Mr Coal - 'My collection is of extreme historical interest because all the guns in it are exactly the same'.

That's a reason to collect historically significant handguns that I must admit had thus far escaped me utterly.

tac