Hate to 'stir the semi auto nest' but...

[Terry D]

It's reasonably well know the UK airgun industry does not want to rock the apple cart though (Imagine idiots with 10 shot semi auto rifles would make things far worse than they are now), so won't bring them in or manufacture them for uk sub 12 use...I just wish they would publicly admit to this policy instead of spouting that they are illegal when they are not.

As I've already said, the advisors of the AMTA deem semi-auto rifles to be prohibited. That is the interpretation of the law upon which AMTA policy is formed. If that interpretation differs from that of others, then it wouldn't be the first, and I doubt it will be the last.

We each have our own ways of working toward the protection of our sport, that's all.

Some things really are more simple than some try to make them appear.

[Minuteman]

As I've already said, the advisors of the AMTA deem semi-auto rifles to be prohibited. That is the interpretation of the law upon which AMTA policy is formed. If that interpretation differs from that of others, then it wouldn't be the first, and I doubt it will be the last.

We each have our own ways of working toward the protection of our sport, that's all.

Some things really are more simple than some try to make them appear.

Creeping normalcy from within??

I'm still not seeing how we are better protected than we were before, given the fact this Evanix smooth bored semi-auto monster is being marketed as fully uk legal, then at the same time such advice that the AMTA have received would seek to define existing owners of other guns as possessing illegal air rifles? All in the face of what is clear public guidance from the home office, the CPS, the BASC and historic ownership of these type of rifles.

I'm all for not kicking a hornets nest and not seeking greater clarification than we already have - as gone into at length on that BASC thread - but would it be fair to say perhaps it was time for some new advisors to the AMTA and a little more pressure from the people that represent us to get something a little more along the lines of what is already out there exempting these airguns that are not especially dangerous from being lumped with rocket launchers - this for example was only updated 6 months ago and would have presented an excellent opportunity to progress that: https://www.gov.uk/government/public...he-police-2012

[Airsporter1st]

Creeping normalcy from within??

I'm still not seeing how we are better protected than we were before, given the fact this Evanix smooth bored semi-auto monster is being marketed as fully uk legal, then at the same time such advice that the AMTA have received would seek to define existing owners of other guns as possessing illegal air rifles? All in the face of what is clear public guidance from the home office, the CPS, the BASC and historic ownership of these type of rifles.

I'm all for not kicking a hornets nest and not seeking greater clarification than we already have - as gone into at length on that BASC thread - but would it be fair to say perhaps it was time for some new advisors to the AMTA and a little more pressure from the people that represent us to get something a little more along the lines of what is already out there exempting these airguns that are not especially dangerous from being lumped with rocket launchers - this for example was only updated 6 months ago and would have presented an excellent opportunity to progress that: https://www.gov.uk/government/public...he-police-2012

The AMTA are hardly neutral anyway, are they?

Don't they represent the airgun manufacturers?

Wasn't it the airgun manufacturers that were responsible for the introduction of the 12ft-lb limit in the face of increasing competition from abroad?

[CORKY.]

I see AMTA as part of the problem... not part of the answer. Thank goodness we have BASC.

[Terry D]

I see AMTA as part of the problem... not part of the answer. Thank goodness we have BASC.

Do explain how AMTA are 'part of the problem', Corky.

Thanks.

[Terry D]

The AMTA are hardly neutral anyway, are they?

Don't they represent the airgun manufacturers?

Wasn't it the airgun manufacturers that were responsible for the introduction of the 12ft-lb limit in the face of increasing competition from abroad?

AMTA are most certainly not 'neutral'. We defend our sport and our industry, from an airgun-specific standpoint, extremely vigourously. No sport, no industry. We never, ever lose sight of that - not for a second.

As for the 12 ft.lbs. limit; seriously, what ever you think of it, what on earth has that to do with AMTA?

[Terry D]

.... would it be fair to say perhaps it was time for some new advisors to the AMTA ...

The input, effect, and value of AMTA advisors is assessed regularly. I work closely with them and I believe they do a great job.

[GaleForceEight]

members section here on the forum, David from BASC posted they are in fact legal

It's reasonably well know the UK airgun industry does not want to rock the apple cart though (Imagine idiots with 10 shot semi auto rifles would make things far worse than they are now), so won't bring them in or manufacture them for uk sub 12 use...I just wish they would publicly admit to this policy instead of spouting that they are illegal when they are not. I am not bothered we don't have semi auto, what bothers me is that the truth about them is being hidden intentionally, or the subject totally numbed down.

Much like sec1 rifls with sub 305mm barrels, no where does it state you can bond a shroud on and it counts as a barrel in law, there have been cases where bonded shrouds on sub305mm barrels have been kicked out, and there are cases on going right now.

My stance on the two subjects is this, semi auto sub12 is legal right now, but the industry chooses to not make them available, and anyone who runs a sub12 rifle with a sub 305mm barrel needs to make sure it stays sub12, anyone with a sec1 rifle with a sub 305mm barrel (note barrel means the rifled tube and NOT a bonded on shroud) needs to get it rebarrelled asap to conform with the law.

Also there are sub12 semi auto's in the UK, another owner has just been pointed out to me today, if they were illegal this owner would for sure not have it.

Firearms law as it stands indicates that they are not in fact legal.

However they were not really considered when the legislation was drafted and the way the legistlative structure is in regards to the firearms act is not particularly practical in regards to accounting for innovation. BASC's stance would appear to be that the exemption from licencing due to sub 12ft/lb takes precedence over the secion 5 definitions.

I am guessing that Terry has positioned himself as one of AMTA's advisors (not beating about the bush here) and is therefore portraying his own view while trying to avoid saying as much on the forum; and much as I disagree with his stance on certain issues I believe his interpretation of the law as it currently stands is the correct one - HOWEVER, this does not mean that clarification of the law in regards to this issue should not be sought.

The AMTA seems happy to take a defensive position as they are not representing anyone other than themselves and do not wish to ask a question and risk the answer being 'no'. They took Neville Chamberlain's style of appeasement policy in regards to the anti-tamper in a gargantuan effort to demonstrate that the industry was capable of self regulation by means of protectionist policies at the expense of the end user.

BASC however is representing their members within the shooting community and are therefore far more proactive in pushing for clarification in support of their members wishes, which is a good thing so long as they don't overreach themselves to the point of being seen as a nuisance by the lawmakers - it's a question of fine balance, but I would see BASC's lawyers bricking themselves if one of their members had a sub 12ftlb true semi seized and was asking for assistance contesting it, as I don't see how any guideline or advice to CPOs can take precedence over established law no matter how illogical the construction of that law is!

[Parabuteo]

Given the number of perfectly serviceable, accurate, and reliable multi and single shot PCPs available...WHY?

[bigtoe01]

Firearms law as it stands indicates that they are not in fact legal.

However they were not really considered when the legislation was drafted and the way the legistlative structure is in regards to the firearms act is not particularly practical in regards to accounting for innovation. BASC's stance would appear to be that the exemption from licencing due to sub 12ft/lb takes precedence over the secion 5 definitions.

I am guessing that Terry has positioned himself as one of AMTA's advisors (not beating about the bush here) and is therefore portraying his own view while trying to avoid saying as much on the forum; and much as I disagree with his stance on certain issues I believe his interpretation of the law as it currently stands is the correct one - HOWEVER, this does not mean that clarification of the law in regards to this issue should not be sought.

The AMTA seems happy to take a defensive position as they are not representing anyone other than themselves and do not wish to ask a question and risk the answer being 'no'. They took Neville Chamberlain's style of appeasement policy in regards to the anti-tamper in a gargantuan effort to demonstrate that the industry was capable of self regulation by means of protectionist policies at the expense of the end user.

BASC however is representing their members within the shooting community and are therefore far more proactive in pushing for clarification in support of their members wishes, which is a good thing so long as they don't overreach themselves to the point of being seen as a nuisance by the lawmakers - it's a question of fine balance, but I would see BASC's lawyers bricking themselves if one of their members had a sub 12ftlb true semi seized and was asking for assistance contesting it, as I don't see how any guideline or advice to CPOs can take precedence over established law no matter how illogical the construction of that law is!

during last years consultation with the HO this was what was posted...

The Home Office have consulted ACPO and the Crown Prosecution Service about the legal status of these
weapons and have agreed, in the absence of a court ruling, that the issue should be resolved formally at the next
legislative opportunity. In the meantime chief officers are advised that self-loading or pump-action rifled airguns
should continue to be regarded as falling outside the certification process provided that they are low powered
and do not fall within the Firearms (Dangerous Air Weapons) Rules 1969

Also I have just been reminded ACPO also deem sub12 semi auto as legal (although a written source would be nice to quote here not just from BASC)

I trust BASC, they were present with the HO for the consultations, they cleared the issue of 30/60 for sub12 up and made it quite clear about sub 305mm sec5 also. The statement David from BASC made is on the members forum here, out of public view, go read it, the link is back a page here in this thread.

There is a reason semi auto is not available in the UK, I know it, and others do also, however that has not stopped some semi auto rifles being sold/supplied, If they were totally illegal they would not have been supplied.

Im all for semi auto not being available, the reasons against it are valid and strong...i just do not like the smoke and mirrors we are seeing in this thread.

im done!

[Terry D]

I am guessing that Terry has positioned himself as one of AMTA's advisors (not beating about the bush here) and is therefore portraying his own view while trying to avoid saying as much on the forum;

I am in no way, shape or form one of AMTA'S political advisors. Not. A. Chance.

That job is incredibly specialised and demands intensive, in-depth knowledge, experience and specialist political smarts that very people have, and I'm definitely NOT one of those people.

I'm a spokesman, I'm in contact with thousands of airgun shooters, year in, year out, and I do all I can to promote and defend our sport, but navigating it through our political system is a job best left to genuine experts.

A man should know his limitations - and trust me, I know mine.

[Turnup]

during last years consultation with the HO this was what was posted...



<snip>

Im all for semi auto not being available, the reasons against it are valid and strong...i just do not like the smoke and mirrors we are seeing in this thread.

im done!

OK, enlighten us - what are the valid and strong reasons?

[bigtoe01]

OK, enlighten us - what are the valid and strong reasons?

study on what semi auto was used for in other countries

[Turnup]

study on what semi auto was used for in other countries

Gimme a clue here - any idea how big a subject that could be?

[Airsporter1st]

AMTA are most certainly not 'neutral'. We defend our sport and our industry, from an airgun-specific standpoint, extremely vigourously. No sport, no industry. We never, ever lose sight of that - not for a second.

As for the 12 ft.lbs. limit; seriously, what ever you think of it, what on earth has that to do with AMTA?

AMTA represent the Airgun Manufacturers. They therefore may defend the industry but not necessarily the sport.

It has been said a number of times before, and I have seen no better explanation for it, that the 12 ft/lbs limit came about as a result of the UK Airgun manufacturers' inability to compete with a superior product from abroad. They responded not by rising to the challenge, but by employing protectionism. UK shooters were hardly at the forefront of their minds whilst they were working that piece of skulduggery.

AMTA represent the airgun manufacturers so I personally remain suspicious of their motives in not addressing legislative issues in defence of our sport.