RFD’s requirement if over 12ft/lbs

[where's it gone]

Interesting thread. Many years ago, I took a HW77 to a RFD to replace the spring and so called tune up. When I collected the rifle, the power was explained as ' it now shoots to page X in the yellow pages, where it only shot to page X before.'
My, how things have changed.

[DJP]

It seems to me, that certain police forces interpret the law to suit themselves...

And the Home Office and the CPS and Courts.

That's the problem.

[distantcamera]

Interesting thread. Many years ago, I took a HW77 to a RFD to replace the spring and so called tune up. When I collected the rifle, the power was explained as ' it now shoots to page X in the yellow pages, where it only shot to page X before.'
My, how things have changed.

Hah! That's exactly how teenaged me tested air rifles. Out of interest when I became a grown up and had an HW77 that I knew was doing 11.4 with the pellets I had I fired it into a yellow pages. Fair to say my teenage owned guns were well under the limit.

[lensman57]

Hah! That's exactly how teenaged me tested air rifles. Out of interest when I became a grown up and had an HW77 that I knew was doing 11.4 with the pellets I had I fired it into a yellow pages. Fair to say my teenage owned guns were well under the limit.

Didn't the US army's definition of ' lethal ' was determined on how far a pellet would penetrate a piece of 1" wood at 50 yards or something along those lines? I guess they have made ours simple by setting it at 1J.

A.G

[where's it gone]

Interesting thread. Many years ago, I took a HW77 to a RFD to replace the spring and so called tune up. When I collected the rifle, the power was explained as ' it now shoots to page X in the yellow pages, where it only shot to page X before.'
My, how things have changed.

When you look at it, if you know the power of a rifle and fired into an Argos catalogue, recorded the page number the pellet penetrated, you could use this as a very rough measure of the power of any other rifle, couldn't you ?

[bighit]

Weapons with a muzzle energy that varies over time
1.189 The problem is illustrated in R v Puttick.
287 P pleaded guilty to possessing a .22 air rifle
(unloaded) without a firearm certificate contrary to section 1 of the Firearms Act 1968.
P told police that he had owned the air rifle for about 20 years. Upon testing, the
highest muzzle energy velocity was 13.7ft/lb, and therefore above the permitted level of
12ft/lb stated in the 1969 Rules (as an air rifle declared to be “specially dangerous”).
However, in mitigation, P adduced an expert’s report that at the time of purchase, the
rifle had been “within the limits” such that no certificate would have been needed for it.
The experts agreed (prosecution and defence) that with ordinary use over time, an air
rifle which was manufactured within the legal limits might creep over the limit without
further modification, “and that appeared to have happened in this case”.
1.190 The section 1 offence is one of strict liability, and thus, on the facts in Puttick, it seems
that a person in possession of an air weapon can creep in and out of the ‘legality zone’
depending on the condition of the gun.288
1.191 P’s counsel informed the Court of Appeal289 that, with expert assistance, the air rifle
could be brought back within the limits laid down by the 1969 Rules. The point is of
interest in that some regard would need to be had (it is submitted) to section 7 of the
Firearms (Amendment) Act

the above is from here
https://www.25bedfordrow.com/cms/doc...son_090715.pdf
page 51



288 See http://www.justairguns.co.uk/source/...ow_booklet.pdf - a useful publication by
the British Association for Shooting and Conservation, which includes information concerning this
topic as well as the use of chronographs (and their limitations).
289 An application was made by P for the order for forfeiture of the weapon to be revoked. The
application failed.


No doubt its been up dated since that was published.

[nimrod177]

I have always worked on this principle:
customer: Can you test my air rifle please as i want to know the power?
me: Yes i can, however if i find it to be above 12ftlbs then you will not be allowed to leave here with it due to the fact it will be deemed to be a firearm requiring a valid firearms certificate and need to be entered onto your ticket. Or you can have it put within the legal limit at your expense, or you can surrender it for destruction. Or you can leave it at your expense in respect of storage until you have a valid firearms licence and it will be returned to you on production of the licence.
This then gives the customer the option to continue with the chrono test. If it is shown to be over the limit i then show them the whole process of testing. I also test a gun off the rack to ensure the chrono is giving a consistent reading. Meaning if i pick an air arms and it is shooting at 11.5 and theirs is shooting 14.5 there is very little argument that their rifle is fac. I will test both on the lightest pellet and the heaviest pellet thus giving very little grey area. Avon and Somerset, Dorset and Devon and Cornwall require us not to return a rifle to a customer that is over the limit. We abide by what they say as they are the ones who issue our rfd. I have only once had to with hold a rifle and that was from a customer who got very upset about what he was told. He was offered: a reasonable price for the gun, to put it within the legal limit at his expense or, apply for a firearms licence, or have the rifle destroyed. He wanted none of this until the point (stroppy) that he was told that we would have to call the police if he tried to remove the rifle. It was a BSA Buccaneer (export fac) "bought by a friend" direct from a company abroad because it was cheaper. It was running at 17.5 Ftlb on 18grn air arms. He opted to sell it to us. He had the choice to have it chrono'd and went ahead with it even after i advised him it was an export model and would most likely be fac. You just can't tell some people or they just don't want to listen. My advice will always be buy a sodding chrono. Confiscated doesn't always mean you can't have it back, it just means you can't have it back until either you or it is legal. If some people want to argue the fact then they are welcome to wait for the police to turn up and argue the fact with them and the courts.

[lensman57]

When you look at it, if you know the power of a rifle and fired into an Argos catalogue, recorded the page number the pellet penetrated, you could use this as a very rough measure of the power of any other rifle, couldn't you ?

No that is not strictly true. A pointed/diabolo pellet made of hard lead alloy fired from a weaker gun would penetrate much deeper than a pellet of wadcutter/hollow point design made of soft lead alloy fired from a much more powerful gun. It is energy dissipation that determines how far a pellet would penetrate into a catalogue or even into the ballistic gel.

A.G

[AndrewE]

I agree with your interpretation Nimrod177.
The reason I started this thread was that I was told by my RFD the FAC reg was the only option after confiscation and could not be offered the “reset to sub 12ft/lb at my cost”
I have a cheep chrono which I use to keep my gun inside the law but would like the option to confirm my old chrono is giving the correct readings. The fear of having my gun confiscated with out getting it back make me not want to have it checked.
Where would I stand legally if I was over but I had been regularly testing my guns on my chrono but that chrono was show to be wrong. Could it be shown I was ‘showing due diligence’?

[rancidtom]

I agree with your interpretation Nimrod177.
The reason I started this thread was that I was told by my RFD the FAC reg was the only option after confiscation and could not be offered the “reset to sub 12ft/lb at my cost”
I have a cheep chrono which I use to keep my gun inside the law but would like the option to confirm my old chrono is giving the correct readings. The fear of having my gun confiscated with out getting it back make me not want to have it checked.
Where would I stand legally if I was over but I had been regularly testing my guns on my chrono but that chrono was show to be wrong. Could it be shown I was ‘showing due diligence’?

It's a completely hypothetical question but...
Firstly up to the police, secondly up to the Crown Prosecution Service and thirdly up to the magistrates or judge/jury if it goes to Crown Court.
If you wish to verify your chrono ask the chrono manufacturer if they can or will calibrate it for you.
Even a calibrated chrono can give incorrect readings if used incorrectly so bear that in mind, no matter how you plead that you used it regularly and believe it to be correct the way the firearms act is written doesn't give anyone any "leeway" and certainly doesn't express or imply a "diligent" procedure, not you the owner or the RFD who may chrono a gun and find it over.
As stated previously there is no prescribed procedure for RFD's however in my case (and I'm sure most RFD's will do the same) I will advise the cutomer on the options and endeaver to adjust a gun if possible to get it under the limit.

[DJP]

...Avon and Somerset, Dorset and Devon and Cornwall require us not to return a rifle to a customer that is over the limit...

Under what Act & Section, I wonder?

The police have various powers of seizure, but AFAIK (and I'm happy to be corrected) you don't.

"But the police said so" isn't law (something that senior police officers seem to forget with monotonous regularity ).

And what would you do if it was a pistol? The Home Office seem to think that would be S5. Are you a S5 RFD? Because if not you would be committing the same crime as your customer.

And let's not forget that no gun is over the limit until a court says so and that your chrono is not evidence but merely an indication.

It's a minefield.

[secretagentmole]

A FAC rifle once registered as a FAC Rifle cannot be un-FAC'ed. However, for a non FAC gun when serviced its normal that some fettering would be required to get it set up correctly to the right power. Once a gun has been found to be over the limit, it may well require proof that every effort was being made to reduce it back under the limit. Taking the spring out would show some effort was made, and getting it booked in for a service. Having said that home servicing is also worthy, just more difficult to prove; book in another chrony test as you would going back for another MOT after a small failure.

Yes it jolly well can. Norfolk allow RFDs to take an FAC gun, make it sub 12 and will remove it from the FAC register. Once again it all depends on the police in your area. Some forces will, some won't!

[Muskett]

Yes it jolly well can. Norfolk allow RFDs to take an FAC gun, make it sub 12 and will remove it from the FAC register. Once again it all depends on the police in your area. Some forces will, some won't!

Oh good. I wasn't sure what was involved and how difficult. Nice it is possible.

Would that mean a Webley Patriot, which is basically an FAC rated Omega, be deFAC'ed? Or many of the FAC rated Theobens? Just that there are a few too many, being FAC, sitting on shelves with little likelihood to find a new home.

A rifle found well over the limit could be dismantled, spring taken out, so therefore could leave the shop. I think we would all just like a sensible solution.

[bighit]

Oh good. I wasn't sure what was involved and how difficult. Nice it is possible.

Would that mean a Webley Patriot, which is basically an FAC rated Omega, be deFAC'ed? Or many of the FAC rated Theobens? Just that there are a few too many, being FAC, sitting on shelves with little likelihood to find a new home.

A rifle found well over the limit could be dismantled, spring taken out, so therefore could leave the shop. I think we would all just like a sensible solution.

You would have to ask your force if they will allow it as some do and some don't . you may be able to have it taken into aN RFD thats forces does allow it and have it done.

I know some have de tuned the Theoben Eliminator and they said they were poop. Maybe if short stroked they may be better

[Muskett]

Thanks.

I think the faffing about makes it a lot of work so never going to be common practice.

All good to know.