legal limit?

[AndyBlissett]

Your point is only partly right. I accept the fact that just because no-one on this forum is prepared to say-openly or via email to me-that they knew of a person who had been jailed does not mean that no-one has been jailed-although it is a pretty good indicator as many active members of this forum are very well informed. However my information comes from many sources including the Police rather than just forum members. I repeat again: after considerable searching, I am unable to find one person who has been jailed just for having an air rifle tested and found to be operating above 12 ft lb. May I ask if you know of one? Just one will do.
Furthermore I take issue with your jibe about 'responsibility'. I take my legal obligations very seriously indeed. Not just for the benefit of the 'lurking guests' did I make the point about observing the 12 ft lb limit. You are free to use another word but I genuinely regard the threat of a five year jail term for just having an air rifle testing at over 12 ft lb as a paranoid reaction. This should not in any way lessen the care we as responsible air gunners take to keep our rifles 'legal'.

i tend to agree with you Rapidnick. I was speaking to someone yesterday who said that their friend was fired from their job beacuase they stole a pen from work- a biro. Obviously this is absolute rubbish, she was fired because she was terrible at her job, and the pen was just an excuse to remove her from her post. Happens all the time.

The same thing applies for an airgun at 12.00001 ft pound. You wont get nicked for that, IN ISOLATION, but if you were using a 12.1 ft pound rifle in an illegal manner (waving it around a shopping centre for example) then this offence would count, and would be added to the other list of offences you have commited.

So, if you are out hunting, with BASC insurance, full written perimission, are not a total idiot, and are behaving yourself, then you will not be nicked, bothered etc for a rifle just a smidgen over 12 ft lb.

Just a question of common sense really.

Andy

[dazzpol]

With regards to the 5 years stretch and examples.

I posted here a while ago on this. I have not yet heard of anyone getting 5 years for an over the limit airgun. However as Terry said I wouldn't discount someone in the future getting it and I only really hear about things happening in my area, so I can't say hand on heart no one ever has.

You will probably remember way back in the late '80s early 90s when car theft - UTMV-TWOC or whatever else you want to call it was the 'en vogue' thing for kids to do. The government introduced a law called aggravated vehicle take and aggravated allowed to be carried. This law also carried a mandatory 5 year custodial sentence. I have dealt with lots and lots of these offences and none of my defendants got that (even on their 5th go!)

The punishments handed out by the courts or 'advice' from CPS never seems to be set in stone. If you have cranked your rifle up to XX ft/lbs with the intention of deliberatelly flaunting the law - or - believing you won't get caught and you do, then I would suggest you may be looking at a bit of 'bird'.
If your rifle has run in and crept up a wee bit over, the chances are it will be returned to you after it has been turned down by a gunsmith. Before anyone jumps up and down, I've known this to be the case a number of times.

Having said that these electronic devices that measure pellet speed are readily available, the majority of gunshops own them. Recently manufactured rifles have anti-tamper devices/stickers in place so it is becoming increasingly difficult to 'blag' your way out of a nasty confrontation with the law. I personally would risk 'getting away' with it on the assumption no-one gets 5 years.

As a side thing, I got myself a brand spanky AAs410 on Tuesday. When I chrono'd it when I got home it never shot above 10.7ft/lb across the charge of air, this was using Bis Mags 10.6grn. I sat down and scoped it up, zeroed and had a major plinking session with it. After recharging the rifle numerous times and nearly a tin of pellets I re checked the chrono, it was doing 11.4ft/lbs. The moral of this tale, don't be tempted to mess with your rifle just because it's low on power when you get it.

Dazz

[RaveWar]

Brian Simpson wrote:

Try searching 4 posts above this one

Charming. Tounge in cheek it maybe, but dismissing people's concerns about how airgunning is treated in the eyes of the law with "holier than thou" innuendo doesn't contribute to a sensible discussion.

And I haven't been jailed for an overpowered airgun btw. Keep searching for someone that has. Did my post really sound that bitter?

[AndyBlissett]

I assure you that the charge of an airgun-based 'unlawful possession of a firearm' has most certainly been the factor that has led to a custodial sentence, Nick. In fact, since the 'five years mandatory' law, at least three people to my knowledge are almost certain to do time over it.

Anyway, jail term or not, having a firearms offence on your CV is never going to be an advantage, is it?

Of course we don't need to be 'paranoid', but we do need to regard the legal limit as more than 'arbitrary'.

Terry. These three people, were they over the limit by 0.1 ft lb, or substantially over it. Also, a key point what else were they doing when caught with them?

[Brian.Samson]

Charming. Tounge in cheek it maybe, but dismissing people's concerns about how airgunning is treated in the eyes of the law with "holier than thou" innuendo doesn't contribute to a sensible discussion.

And I haven't been jailed for an overpowered airgun btw. Keep searching for someone that has. Did my post really sound that bitter?

Nick said that he had searched all over the BBS and hadn't found a single post where someone had said they knew of anyone that had fallen foul of the 12fpe limit - 4 posts above the post you quoted, Terry D posted that he knew of a few cases personally.

My comment was neither 'holier than thou', an 'innuendo' (isn't that an Italian suppository?) nor dismissive of anyones concerns about anything
It was a light hearted comment - that's why there was a at the end of it.

[Rapidnick]

I assure you that the charge of an airgun-based 'unlawful possession of a firearm' has most certainly been the factor that has led to a custodial sentence, Nick. In fact, since the 'five years mandatory' law, at least three people to my knowledge are almost certain to do time over it.

Anyway, jail term or not, having a firearms offence on your CV is never going to be an advantage, is it?

Of course we don't need to be 'paranoid', but we do need to regard the legal limit as more than 'arbitrary'.

Terry I bow to your superior information. You are the first person to say in response to my previous posts that they know of someone who will be jailed. In fairness to me I did also specify jailed just for possession of an air rifle over 12 ft lb-that is with the 'offence' not being exacerbated by doing something else with it such as waving it about in Guildford High Street! Could you give any information as to the circumstances of the incidents to which you refer?
I also think that in the context of my post, 'arbitrary' was referring to the choice of limit whether it be age when you are allowed to drink alchohol in public, drive a car , vote etc. Arbitrary is not to be applied to the citizen's attitude to it. Hope that is clear.

[Rapidnick]

I wasn't having a jibe at you or questioning how responsible you are Nick, I apologise if it sounded that way.

No apology necessary Brian! Sorry if I was a bit acerbic.

I have responded to TD's point already. I would be very interested to know the approximate circumstances of the cases he mentions and I hope he will post them in due course.
Not wanting to beat this point to death I am referring to cases where the excess power of the rifle is the ONLY offence involved. I understand that if an air weapon was used in a robbery for example, then a test which found the robber was using a weapon above the legal limit would very much increase the seriousness of the offence in the eyes of the law.
This is not inconsistent with the application of all laws involving 'arbitrary limits'. For example a driver convicted of driving at 35 mph in a 30 limit will not be so severely dealt with as one who drives at 55mph in the same place. Whilst I wait for TD's post, I would be very surprised indeed if an otherwise upright citizen went to jail for owning an air rifle operating at 12.5 ft lb.
For the avoidance of all doubt I am most emphatically NOT advocating that any air gunner has a rifle capable of operating above the legal limit without an appropriate FAC.

[RaveWar]

Nick said that he had searched all over the BBS and hadn't found a single post where someone had said they knew of anyone that had fallen foul of the 12fpe limit - 4 posts above the post you quoted, Terry D posted that he knew of a few cases personally.

Sorry. Can't count today.

[Brian.Samson]

Sorry. Can't count today.

Lol - I just figured that out a few minutes ago - couldn't understand why my post had upset you so much, then realised that your post was 3 above mine and you thought I was having a pop at you

[boltaction]

Firearms (Dangerous Air Weapons) Rules 1969.
UK gun mfrs lobbied Government to introduce this law to prevent US mfrs selling higher powered guns over here.
That's business.

The Case against Gun control

Bang on........pardon the pun . I remember it well, nothing that B.S.A and Webely made were exceeding that limit at the time, but some imported guns were going well over it, some of them recoilless as well, so more accurate than the home produced guns.

Blatant piece of protectionism I am afraid


jim

[dazzpol]

I understand that if an air weapon was used in a robbery for example, then a test which found the robber was using a weapon above the legal limit would very much increase the seriousness of the offence in the eyes of the law.

Bad example really, a better one would be causing damage...

If an air rifle pistol were to be used as a weapon like this ie imitation/replica it would be dealt with as a firearm regardless of it's power limit.

Dazz

[chris ballard]

You saw what happened when Jeremy Clarkson did a programme on guns...Is that what you want? Cos thats wahts gonna happen.

Joking aside, they do seem to have a real set of double standards, I mean, I had never thought of sucking up petrol with a hoover...shant now either, but I bet some idiot tried it, and if that is the target viewer...gord elp us

Maybee its just as well as they have not come up with top gun on the beeb yet

On a serious side, a law is a law. Its there for a reason, not always well thought out I grant you, but there you go.

Quite why so many people think its a joke is beyond me.

I took my nice, shiny, new S410K into the shop to get it chrono'd, just to make sure. Oh good I said, its legal then.

Some half doped git laughed and said "thats funny".

I pointed out that it mattered to some of us, and then went on to make the bloke feel a bit stupid..well he deserved it. I'm no goody goody, but we have certain obligations.

No doubt If I had said I was the local FLO he would have reported me for impersonting a copper and I would have got 5 years

[Rapidnick]

Bad example really, a better one would be causing damage...

If an air rifle pistol were to be used as a weapon like this ie imitation/replica it would be dealt with as a firearm regardless of it's power limit.

Dazz

You are quite right Dazz-firing it and causing damage is probably the best example.

[dazzpol]

I took my nice, shiny, new S410K into the shop to get it chrono'd, just to make sure. Oh good I said, its legal then.

Some half doped git laughed and said "thats funny".

I pointed out that it mattered to some of us, and then went on to make the bloke feel a bit stupid..well he deserved it. I'm no goody goody, but we have certain obligations.

No doubt If I had said I was the local FLO he would have reported me for impersonting a copper and I would have got 5 years

Chris I spend quiet a bit of time 'shooting' the breeze at my local gun shop. Some of the idiots that come in and spout ****e.

Just the other day I was in there and some bloke wandered in. He claimed he wasn't impressed with the barrel of his .22 HW100. He claimed it was crap because he could see the pellet in flight...

I asked him if it was accurate, he said it was and it killed rabbits ok too. He obviously used the 'if I can see the pellet it must be crap and underpowered rule' I think he was angling for the I want more power thing.

A few times people have gone on about putting the power up 'cos they won't get caught and how will the police know' just to be shot down in flames when they find out what I do... The back tracking and "I'm only joking" would be quiet funny. Some folks shouldn't be let loose with water pistols let alone anything else.

Dazz

[Stingray177]

now I'm getting a complex!!! We americans are responsible for the 12 ft lb rule??? sorry bout that... and not to mention is was the likes of the pump airguns?? hate those pump guns ...load a pellet then announce to the surrounding woods that you are 'powering' up your rifle...never made sense to me to have that loud, armbreaking procedure to just fire the pellet - in the mean time, every critter has taken for cover.

So what is it about the 12ft lb that made that the lucky number? Why not 16 or 18 or 20 ft lb?? What are the characteristics of the velocity, power, range and pellet that make 12 ft lb acceptible over say, 14 ft. lbs? How was it decided? Curious.