Legalities of modifying air rifles

[Blue407]

Ok, here's a question:-

I'm currently working on my TX200 Mk3, fitting a Tinbum tuning kit, polishing the internals, trying different grease etc as well as trying a piston extension.

So there is a strong possibility that in my gun bag may be enough bits to easily take my TX200 over the legal limit if fitted together. Is this perfectly legal?

Could they accuse me of having equipment to make my rifle a FAC one? Innocent until proved guilty or would I have to somehow prove my innocence?



Just a thought for a hot Wednesday afternoon...

[angrybear]

Once assembled why would any spare parts be in your gun bag??

don't worry changing parts does not come in to it, it's the rifle as it's assembled.
Problems are only caused where something like a screw could be adjusted with a spanner/screwdriver/hex key to change the power, not by a complete strip & rebuild with other parts.

[DJP]

Once assembled why would any spare parts be in your gun bag??

don't worry changing parts does not come in to it, it's the rifle as it's assembled.
Problems are only caused where something like a screw could be adjusted with a spanner/screwdriver/hex key to change the power, not by a complete strip & rebuild with other parts.

This^^.

[Blue407]

Once assembled why would any spare parts be in your gun bag??

don't worry changing parts does not come in to it, it's the rifle as it's assembled.
Problems are only caused where something like a screw could be adjusted with a spanner/screwdriver/hex key to change the power, not by a complete strip & rebuild with other parts.

Because I do not have space to shoot and test at home, would have to go somewhere to do that and strip and fit pieces in the field.

So they cannot accuse you of 'Intent to take it over the limit' ?

[Part451]

I'm not an expert but I would expect it would go something like this: You're in court and prosecution have hired an expert witness to test your gun. It's assembled & tested, it's illegal, and your stuffed. You would argue that it is not assembled and the expert would agree but point out how easy it was to assemble = stuffed again. It is really not worth the hassle trying to squeeze Ftlbs out without the correct paperwork.

[angrybear]

Because I do not have space to shoot and test at home, would have to go somewhere to do that and strip and fit pieces in the field.

So they cannot accuse you of 'Intent to take it over the limit' ?

Fill a bucket with sand & shoot in to that to chrono check, you can do that anywhere, far easier than carry a workshop around to strip it in the field.

I would think that almost everyone who works on air rifles has at some point put one together that is over so needs to be stripped & de-tuned, If you were unlucky enough to be raided at that exact second then you possess an illegal gun but as soon as you know it's over you stop and strip it down to make any adjustment.

You cannot know what effect a part will have until you try it, owning it is not an offence, while the gun with it fitted might be.

[Biker_Bob]

I wouldn't be out with the parts that could take your gun over the limit AND the tools to fit them.
A Chombro is £45 or thereabouts - if you're modifying an air rifle you should own a chrono.

[Blue407]

I wouldn't be out with the parts that could take your gun over the limit AND the tools to fit them.
A Chombro is £45 or thereabouts - if you're modifying an air rifle you should own a chrono.

Combro arrived this morning

[Blue407]

Fill a bucket with sand & shoot in to that to chrono check, you can do that anywhere, far easier than carry a workshop around to strip it in the field.

I would think that almost everyone who works on air rifles has at some point put one together that is over so needs to be stripped & de-tuned, If you were unlucky enough to be raided at that exact second then you possess an illegal gun but as soon as you know it's over you stop and strip it down to make any adjustment.

You cannot know what effect a part will have until you try it, owning it is not an offence, while the gun with it fitted might be.

Bucket of sand, good call (Will collect bag of sand ASAP)

[timmytree]

[QUOTE=Blue407;6422621]Bucket of sand, good call (Will collect bag of sand ASAP)[/QUOTA bucket of sand will be sat on the floor with you firing downward, combros work best if they're level. Get a shoebox or similar and pack it tight with scrap paper and cardboard, then wrap it in gaffer tape. Stick it on the kitchen worktop or bench in the shed and away you go.

[Blue407]

I'm not an expert but I would expect it would go something like this: You're in court and prosecution have hired an expert witness to test your gun. It's assembled & tested, it's illegal, and your stuffed. You would argue that it is not assembled and the expert would agree but point out how easy it was to assemble = stuffed again. It is really not worth the hassle trying to squeeze Ftlbs out without the correct paperwork.

That's kinda what I was thinking....

[Turnup]

I'm not an expert but I would expect it would go something like this: You're in court and prosecution have hired an expert witness to test your gun. It's assembled & tested, it's illegal, and your stuffed. You would argue that it is not assembled and the expert would agree but point out how easy it was to assemble = stuffed again. It is really not worth the hassle trying to squeeze Ftlbs out without the correct paperwork.

I really can't agree that having the parts is in any way illegal.

Think about this: You are carrying your FAC rifle, in it's gunslip, in a public place (say for the sake of argument on your way to a range or your permission), and you have in your possession the ammunition for that gun. An expert can point out that these are easily assembled into a loaded firearm in a public place, and he would be correct but until such assembly takes place no law is broken.

There was a slightly similar case which went to court regarding cartridge operated nail guns. These are significantly powerful and have an interlock requiring pressure of the "muzzle" against a solid object before they can be fired. CPS argued that application of say a cable tie would make it possible to be fired without being against a solid object. Judge agreed but pointed out that until such a modification were made then there was no law broken - case dismissed.

Having the parts, and even having the intent is not an offence, actually doing it is the offence.