Safe side of the law - rifle / pistol classification

[danco1987]

Hi guys,
I've been trawling past posts but just thought I'd post my plans for my Crosman backpacker rifle to see if anyone thinks it falls foul of the law.

So my backpacker started life as an original Crosman Backpacker, not a 1322 pistol and is therefore was manufactured as a rifle subject to our 12fpe law. I then fitted a shorter 1322 10.25" .22 barrel and have a threaded barrel band and mini silencer. All modded internally, flat top piston etc and runs at 9.5 fpe at 10 pumps as I wanted. It has a fixed stock and I know the 30/60 firearms barrel or total length rule doesn't apply to airguns, but it's just over 60cm in total length anyway.

Now I want to fit a folding Crosman stock as per the below image which I found on Google for close range use from a vehicle cabin.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/0e/af...68e9fb037c.jpg

I'm concerned that this rifle with the stock folded down could technically still be fired and even though it would be difficult, it could be held in one hand like a pistol, or both hands. Therefore, in the unlikely event I got pulled, the law might see it as an air pistol and doing 9.5fpe I'd be in trouble.

What I was thinking was to add the original .22 backpacker barrel and shorten slightly to 12" (30cm) so it would meet the 30cm firearms rule despite this not being applicable. This would in turn increase the folded length and make it harder to be used as a pistol with the stock folded (not that I intend to ever do that, but as it's seen in the eyes of the law).

What do you guys think? Am I over thinking this or does this still not meet requirements?

[short-carabine]

If it's already only just over 60cm in length, you might have some explaining to do (in the very remote chance you got pulled up) as to why you fitted a folding stock in the first place. Crosman Ratcatchers are fitted with AT screws so that it is not terribly easy to de-stock them (yes, I know you can drill them out etc, but that's intentional). Personally, I wouldn't, if I thought there was the potential to get pulled with it.

[danco1987]

Thanks for your thoughts.

It's frustrating that the law isn't clear on the definitions of a air pistol / rifle.

Not sure how the authorities would ever know that it was once 60cm in length and my reason for fitting a folding stock would be for transit purposes and pest control in confined spaces. Not sure that would cut it in court though, nor do I ever want to be in that situation.

My thinking was that even though airguns are excluded from the 30/60 rule, it nevertheless meets the 60cm total length currently with a fixed stock so therefore is legal (although the screws are not AT which must be a new thing?). By fitting the folding stock, it would no longer meet the 60cm spec as it does currently, but would then meet the 30cm barrel spec instead. However if the sole differentiation between an air rifle and air pistol is being able to use and hold it like a pistol because the 30/60 rule doesn't apply, even though it would be a long one and rather unwieldy, it could still be used that way.

I think the fact I'm having doubts, backed up by your caution as well, means the safe option would definitely be to leave it as it is. I just really like the idea of the folding stock and in the grand scheme of things, it's hardly a weapon of mass destruction. God, firearms laws in this country are a mess!

[short-carabine]

Thanks for your thoughts.

It's frustrating that the law isn't clear on the definitions of a air pistol / rifle.

Not sure how the authorities would ever know that it was once 60cm in length and my reason for fitting a folding stock would be for transit purposes and pest control in confined spaces. Not sure that would cut it in court though, nor do I ever want to be in that situation.

My thinking was that even though airguns are excluded from the 30/60 rule, it nevertheless meets the 60cm total length currently with a fixed stock so therefore is legal (although the screws are not AT which must be a new thing?). By fitting the folding stock, it would no longer meet the 60cm spec as it does currently, but would then meet the 30cm barrel spec instead. However if the sole differentiation between an air rifle and air pistol is being able to use and hold it like a pistol because the 30/60 rule doesn't apply, even though it would be a long one and rather unwieldy, it could still be used that way.

I think the fact I'm having doubts, backed up by your caution as well, means the safe option would definitely be to leave it as it is. I just really like the idea of the folding stock and in the grand scheme of things, it's hardly a weapon of mass destruction. God, firearms laws in this country are a mess!

I know what you mean- the whole thing is nuts! Maybe some others on here have some thoughts or opinions. It is questionable whether a folding stock would bring it into pistol classification, but using it as a pistol with the stock folded for close vermin control would a a poo trap IMHO. IIRC I read a post about fitting a folding stock, but somehow making it impossible to shoot (somehow) while the stock was folded. Pretty sure it was on BBS.

[danco1987]

I know what you mean- the whole thing is nuts! Maybe some others on here have some thoughts or opinions. It is questionable whether a folding stock would bring it into pistol classification, but using it as a pistol with the stock folded for close vermin control would a a poo trap IMHO. IIRC I read a post about fitting a folding stock, but somehow making it impossible to shoot (somehow) while the stock was folded. Pretty sure it was on BBS.

O no, definitely would never consider shooting vermin with the stock folded. By shooting in confined spaces, I just mean keeping it in the vehicle cabin just to save space, then when the time is right, unfold and away you go. I was just pointing out that in theory it can still be used folded up as that's the angle the law would take.

Making it unshootable whilst folded would be great. Not sure how it could be done with a Crosman. Unless a protruding pin is fitted to the stock so that when it folds up, the pin lines up with the trigger and blocks it or possibly the pin pushes against and engages the safety button. In fact, that might be something I will explore actually. That way, it would meet the 30cm barrel spec, it was manufactured as an air rifle with the relevant serial number and if I can show how I've gone to lengths to make it unable to fire folded up, then in the highly unlikely event I got pulled up, it shows I've gone to the same lengths Air Arms have with their TDR rifles.

Cheers

[Turnup]

Agree that there is a lack of clarity regarding pistol/rifle in the airgun legislation, and it is not a good thing for such matters to be left in doubt. The idea of making the gun impossible to fire with the stock folded sounds initially appealing but is probably a non sequitur - none of the existing legislation makes any distinction on these grounds so I doubt that there would be any defence, and anyway it would be difficult to contrive such a device which also made it impossible to fire when nearly folded.

[danco1987]

Agree that there is a lack of clarity regarding pistol/rifle in the airgun legislation, and it is not a good thing for such matters to be left in doubt. The idea of making the gun impossible to fire with the stock folded sounds initially appealing but is probably a non sequitur - none of the existing legislation makes any distinction on these grounds so I doubt that there would be any defence, and anyway it would be difficult to contrive such a device which also made it impossible to fire when nearly folded.

True.

I suppose the question is what makes an air rifle no longer an air rifle? And as current legislation doesn't clarify this, one could assume that an air rifle with a folding stock remains an air rifle as it was manufactured. However, taking this stance would mean that I could fit pistol grips and it would still be a rifle and I cannot see a court ruling that. Without a clear definition, the courts have to rely on previous rulings and as I'm aware, there hasn't been one and I sure as hell don't want to be the test case. Quite frustrating

If anyone has heard differently though, I'd be interested to hear

[RichardH]

Easy answer is write to your firearms licensing office and ask, they are likely to say if it was made as a rifle that’s how it is considered legally which is a sensible viewpoint.

Keep the letter and you are pretty much covered.

[danco1987]

Easy answer is write to your firearms licensing office and ask, they are likely to say if it was made as a rifle that’s how it is considered legally which is a sensible viewpoint.

Keep the letter and you are pretty much covered.

Good shout. Pretty much covered that's as good as I can ask for with this query. Cheers

[Turnup]

Easy answer is write to your firearms licensing office and ask, they are likely to say if it was made as a rifle that’s how it is considered legally which is a sensible viewpoint.

Keep the letter and you are pretty much covered.

If my shotgun was a compliant S2 gun and I fit pistol grips and short barrels it remains S2?

If I remove the butt extension from my S1 LBR it remains S1?

Sorry but the gun in question has been modified from its manufacturing spec and this can certainly change its classification.

[danco1987]

If my shotgun was a compliant S2 gun and I fit pistol grips and short barrels it remains S2?

If I remove the butt extension from my S1 LBR it remains S1?

Sorry but the gun in question has been modified from its manufacturing spec and this can certainly change its classification.

The difference being that we have clearly defined classifications for S1 and S2 firearms so you know clearly when a modification, such as shortening a barrel, strays outside of these. As 12fpe airguns are exempt from these rules, knowing whether certain modifications change a classification of an air rifle/pistol or not, is difficult.

[Geezer]

It's a total grey area. It can only be decided by a court.

The 30/60 rule ought not to apply to airguns, on a careful reading of the Acts. But a judge could perhaps decide that it did, as the only legal definition of the difference between a rifle and a pistol, albeit (strictly on the letter of the law) limited to S1.

Richard H's idea is interesting. If it worked, you'd get a "get out of jail free" card. But what if they wrote back and either said "we don't know" (no use, beyond flagging to them that you might be about to create something "tasty") or "we think it would be illegal"? In the last case, you've just created a document that, if publicly disclosed, could later be used as evidence against others who thought air rifles did not have to meet certain size requirements.

I'm also leery of the argument around "if it was originally made as X, it stays X". If you hack sawed down an S1 rifle to have no butt and a 6" barrel, you definitely end up with an S5 pistol. Yes, I know the S1/5 dimensions are laid down in law, but, again, this has not been tested in a court in respect of airguns.

Of course, some common sense is needed. An old Jackal Woodsman or Theo Fenman has a short barrel, but is obviously a rifle. Imagine a lawyer trying to persuade a jury that something a yard long that looks just like a rifle isn't a rifle? No way. Whereas a short Crosman that uses a pistol action? Trickier.

[danco1987]

It's a total grey area. It can only be decided by a court.

The 30/60 rule ought not to apply to airguns, on a careful reading of the Acts. But a judge could perhaps decide that it did, as the only legal definition of the difference between a rifle and a pistol, albeit (strictly on the letter of the law) limited to S1.

Richard H's idea is interesting. If it worked, you'd get a "get out of jail free" card. But what if they wrote back and either said "we don't know" (no use, beyond flagging to them that you might be about to create something "tasty") or "we think it would be illegal"? In the last case, you've just created a document that, if publicly disclosed, could later be used as evidence against others who thought air rifles did not have to meet certain size requirements.

I'm also leery of the argument around "if it was originally made as X, it stays X". If you hack sawed down an S1 rifle to have no butt and a 6" barrel, you definitely end up with an S5 pistol. Yes, I know the S1/5 dimensions are laid down in law, but, again, this has not been tested in a court in respect of airguns.

Of course, some common sense is needed. An old Jackal Woodsman or Theo Fenman has a short barrel, but is obviously a rifle. Imagine a lawyer trying to persuade a jury that something a yard long that looks just like a rifle isn't a rifle? No way. Whereas a short Crosman that uses a pistol action? Trickier.

It is tricky one. Thanks for your advice all. As a result, I'm probably going to stick with it as it is. It's 60cm in length at the moment, stock is fixed in place with screws. It can't be shot like a pistol in its current state with the rifle stock. It has a pistol action underneath sure, but so do most the Crosman rifles. This does mean the stock could just be removed with a screw driver and used as a pistol, but then again most rifles and shotguns can have their stocks shortened simply using a saw.
In its current form, I'm confident of its status whereas a folding stock in combination with the pistol grips is too much of a grey area and a risk I do not want to take by the looks of things.

[hammy]

I read somewhere once that the advice to the courts was , If it looks like a rifle , then it's a rifle . If it looks like a pistol it's a pistol.
Just wish I could mind where I read it.
It's just a pity the laws are so grey.

[AaronR]

Would the proposed folding stock be like a solid ‘proper’ rifle stock from the pistol grip back, or a skeleton type with a butt plate? Dependin on where it hinges (if it swings round to one side or the other) you could have a part of it which protrudes through the trigger guard so it cannot be fired

If it folds over the top/underneath you could block access to trigger in the same way - or if it slides back/forwards into position make it so the forward edge of butt plate matches up with back of pistol grip so it cannot be held