LP5/50 now section 5.

[dave milne]

We have consulted with ACPO and the CPS .... Chief Officers are advised that self loading and pump action rifled airguns should be considered to be regarded as falling outside the certification process PROVIDED THEY ARE LOW POWERED...

I have a letter from the Home Office dated Nov 1998 together with the relevant circular (HOC68/97) which states that despite the wording of the law unintentionally banning some low powered air guns, they will continue to be regarded as...

LOW POWERED AIRGUNS FOR WHICH NO LICENCE IS REQUIRED.

unless they have changed something..

So how can they (Who? Yorkshire Police?) stop Steyr from importing them but still leave some in the hands of private individuals?

[Turnup]

We have consulted with ACPO and the CPS .... Chief Officers are advised that self loading and pump action rifled airguns should be considered to be regarded as falling outside the certification process PROVIDED THEY ARE LOW POWERED...

I have a letter from the Home Office dated Nov 1998 together with the relevant circular (HOC68/97) which states that despite the wording of the law unintentionally banning some low powered air guns, they will continue to be regarded as...

LOW POWERED AIRGUNS FOR WHICH NO LICENCE IS REQUIRED.

unless they have changed something..

So how can they (Who? Yorkshire Police?) stop Steyr from importing them but still leave some in the hands of private individuals?

The letter you have, while providing some comfort, is unfortunately only an opinion and not binding on anyone. It is also entirely possible that since 1998 those opinions have changed. I think it will take a court case to resolve this.

I presume that NYP cannot simply seize these items and retain them in the long term, they can only seize them as evidence of a possible crime. Therefore they must either prosecute the alleged offence or return them to their rightful owners.

[Jerry Cornelius]

The letter you have, while providing some comfort, is unfortunately only an opinion and not binding on anyone. It is also entirely possible that since 1998 those opinions have changed. I think it will take a court case to resolve this.

I presume that NYP cannot simply seize these items and retain them in the long term, they can only seize them as evidence of a possible crime. Therefore they must either prosecute the alleged offence or return them to their rightful owners.

You would be wrong if you said the letter had no effect.

The way it would work is IF the CPS decide to prosecute, you immediately judicially review the decision as a breach of legitimate expectation based on the letter (and the CPS own guidance which is freely available online). Public bodies, and that included the CPS, can't simply say they will do A, and then without telling anyone go and do B. That's not me saying "I don't think they should be allowed to do that", that's me saying "there is a mass of case law saying they can't do that".

You DO NOT try to use the letter as a defence in a criminal trial. I don't think that would work although I'm not a great expert on criminal procedure. You have to attack the decision to prosecute.

I would expect the judicial review to be successful with the result that the decision to prosecute would be quashed.

[Norfolkngood]

Good news, they are both legal.
BREAKING NEWS!!!!
Today Monday 26th June 2017 we have officially been informed that the Steyr LP50 is indeed self indexing and not self loading as defined by section 57(2A) of the Firearms Act 1968. Therefore does not fall within any category of Section 5 or Section 1.

As the Steyr Hunting 5 Auto is the same mechanism and sub 12 foot pounds muzzle energy this also does not fall in the Section 5 category of self loading.

Sales, service and repair are now fully resumed

[gingernut]

They don't believe it on General Airgun Forum as the information comes from Steyr UK.

I am sure North Yorks Police will release a press statement soon.
As if.

[Norfolkngood]

I posted it on there as well two minutes after this but it has disappeared. I assume this is because somebody else posted the same info at the same time. BAR say you can order from them now.

[T 20]

I assume this is because somebody else posted the same info at the same time.

Correct sir --- your thread was simply deleted as a simular thread was already up and running.