What ft/lb would be considered safely legal to set a springer?

[angrybear]

How do you know I haven't tweaked my rifle so that the heavy prem only only makes 11.8. I said earlier that when I was competing I had my rifle set to 11.8 with 7.9 prems. I have stated since then that I have the 7.9 prems set at 11.6. Why? The heavy prems. I am not stupid, but rather looking for actual facts, that just aren't available, only opinion. If we take the letter of the law literally then we should all have rifles running below 9ftlb. The law says capable and missile. Does not explain how you turn the rifle capable or which missile.

So, Mr Muskett yes you are correct, a pellet available in America that would put your rifle beyond 12 makes your rifle "capable" and therefore should be illegal.
Mr Bear, it says no where that only readily available pellets are to be used. Therefore how the law is written you are wrong.

But, again this is only opinion.
Be law abiding, only shoot on a club ground or a perm. Only shoot targets or genuine quarry with good reason. Test your rifle. In my opinion you are well within the law and safe. Again though this is opinion.

Well I'm still waiting for you to say where you're getting your information from, so I can't comment on what it says without reading it,
and as you seem to have a problem understanding what "capable" means I have no idea what other grammar might be causing you an issue.

I have a test procedure that does state "commercially available pellets" in the text .

[gsxrman]

The point is that the way the "law" is written, and that there is no "uniformed" test procedure, who is to say what you have read will actually happen as there is no reason for a tester to comply to anything "written", we are all open to interpret the wording unless it is written so.
You just told Mr Muskett that a pellet available in America would not count over here, but anything in America is "commercially available" as you can order them online.
Pardon the pun, but I have been "poking the bear" to see if someone from either side of the law has been through this testing procedure to relay genuine facts, but as yet nothing.
The wording of the "law" would put every full power or FT/HFT rig as illegal, as anything over 9.5 could push the 12ftlb limit easily.

[capt hindsight]

Interesting regarding the very fine points of legality. I'm not a lawyer but have had some training regarding the function of the law due to my previous job coming with legal powers.

What was drummed home to us was that despite there being laws, the uk does not have a statute law system. So conviction is based on common law and has to be based upon what is deemed 'reasonable' to a 'reasonably minded person'.

If found to be in possession of a gun and pellets that put together go over 12ft/lbs that would be a pretty clearly cut case for the prosecution. But If the police tested a gun, they could theoretically use any pellet they like. So having some unusual pellet that they know to give high power readings is unlikely to be considered 'reasonable' on their part, similarly if the gun was briefly and unintentionally dieseling, but this would be for the defence to argue out. However if they caught someone who was intentionally making there gun diesel above the limit, that would probably result in a successful prosecution.

Mitigation will be taken on a case by case basis too. Measures a person has taken to stay within the law, demonstrate responsibility and this can only be a good thing. I keep my chrony results mainly to look back to see if the power is shifting but also partly to demonstrate I take all reasonable steps to stay within the law. When my rfd services a gun he provides a print out of the chrony results when he hands it back.

Each case would be dealt with individually - but best not to end up with reason to be in court in the first place imo

[Muskett]

Sorry, can't get the case to come up. There are cases where the example of defence I gave was good enough. And thats the thing any Jury will make their own decision. And why best to have a solicitor who knows about guns and just not one who is an expert on playing golf.

The vast majority of airgun users are law abiding and would be embarrassed if they were to ever find their gun had gone over the limit somehow. They do buy in good faith the gun shouldn't. As it is a lot of guns barely make 11ft/lbs.

The power limit is there for a reason, but also there to be fully utilised especially for hunting. Though hunters agree that shot placement is the most important part, power is an aid to flat trajectory and should be utilised if only for the sake of the quarry. When the law was written there was an expectation that air guns could use the power right up to the limit, not several lbs lower.
Progress in power plants, barrel design, and pellet designs have muddied the water. Rifles weren't very "capable", but now are so much more fine tuned. They can be tuned close to the limit, though a cack handed Test Centre could force a different power level. It might be like a MOT Centre failing a car's emissions by using the wrong fuel.

I think this thread's conversation just highlights the changes that have gone on these past 30 years. The Law hasn't changed, and with words like "capable" isn't any longer good enough if taken too far.
Each here will interpret what they want. I think rifles shooting close to the limit are fine, just be sensible about it.

[Barryg]

Each here will interpret what they want. I think rifles shooting close to the limit are fine, just be sensible about it.

I agree that it is up to the individual to set what power they feel comfortable with but the law is the law and if someone wanted to make an example for some reason the stakes are quite high with gun law and close to the limit is a risk, I won't be taking

[nishijin]

There is an ISO for testing.

https://www.keithborer.co.uk/news/ai...s-been-tested/

[angrybear]

Sorry, can't get the case to come up.

Try this,
https://www.2drj.com/post/2018/08/14...-a-certificate

While there is no standardised national test it's not hard to find an example to base your own set up on.

http://www.helstonforensics.com/wp-c...test-18312.pdf

[harvey_s]

I have never read about or come across anyone that has had their rifle confiscated and tested by the police that was not embroiled in some other case of suspected wrong doing at the time.

Usually that matter is the over-riding problem regardless of any issue with an over-powered gun.

[gsxrman]

Try this,
https://www.2drj.com/post/2018/08/14...-a-certificate

While there is no standardised national test it's not hard to find an example to base your own set up on.

http://www.helstonforensics.com/wp-c...test-18312.pdf

Interesting. Still leaves lots of questions. So they will test a rifle as it is found and place 5 of each weight pellet and 10 of the pellets that come with the rifle. On a PCP they will not charge the rifle to manufacturers recommended levels. So a regged PCP with enough air left to fire 25 test shots will be at full power but a none regged rifle could through its power curve and on the way down. None regged BSA Ultra is only capable of about 20-30 useable shots. That's just one point. There are others.
Tests should be standardised throughout the UK and be published.

[capt hindsight]

I have never read about or come across anyone that has had their rifle confiscated and tested by the police that was not embroiled in some other case of suspected wrong doing at the time.

Usually that matter is the over-riding problem regardless of any issue with an over-powered gun.

Only prosecution I heard about came first hand from two special branch officers I used to deal with. They were aware of a hand made 'air cannon' that had been constructed at someone's place of work. If I remember rightly this thing could launch coke can size projectiles.

An interesting fun project for them and nothing more sinister than them getting stupidly carried away. They got fined rather than a custodial but they definitely got prosecuted.

[Muskett]

I have never read about or come across anyone that has had their rifle confiscated and tested by the police that was not embroiled in some other case of suspected wrong doing at the time.

Usually that matter is the over-riding problem regardless of any issue with an over-powered gun.

This in heaps ^.

Someone really has to try hard to get themselves in a heap of trouble on such matters.
There is a legal limit so don't go out of your way to test that. I don't buy that every airgun owner should be scared that some unfathomable indiscetion should have them go straight to the gulag.
Anyhow, the Police have enough on their hands deciding on WOKE issues and what their sexuality within the force should be, to be chasing Joe Public with an airgun.

We all know .20 isn't girlie .177, nor macho .22, just Trans. As for .25 then thats just Fat. Saying that is more likely to get you into trouble as you might have hurt someone's feelings.

[jm5*]

I have never read about or come across anyone that has had their rifle confiscated and tested by the police that was not embroiled in some other case of suspected wrong doing at the time.

Usually that matter is the over-riding problem regardless of any issue with an over-powered gun.

HAS ANYONE EVER HAD THEIR AIRGUN TESTED BY THE POLICE ?

Does anyone actually KNOW anyone who has had their Airgun tested by the police ?

If so, what were the circumstances ?

[wobbly bob]

What was drummed home to us was that despite there being laws, the uk does not have a statute law system. So conviction is based on common law and has to be based upon what is deemed 'reasonable' to a 'reasonably minded person'.

Some confusion there. The majority of English law is contained in an immense body of statute law. Perhaps you are thinking of the presumption in English common law that, unless the Act clearly states otherwise, an accused should not be convicted unless they are blameworthy in some way. (Sweet v Parsley 1970).

On that basis there has been at least one case of a defendant unknowingly in possession of a rifle over 12 ft.lb who was not sanctioned for that offence, but as I recall he only got tested because he was doing something stupid, and got convicted of that instead. And yes, I had the case somewhere but can’t find it.

[wobbly bob]

We all know .20 isn't girlie .177, nor macho .22, just Trans. As for .25 then thats just Fat.

Just read of a case in Scotland where a bloke found with a 22 air rifle that was shooting at over 700 ft/sec walked free when he told a Scottish court that although the rifle still had its original 22 barrel it now identified as a 177

[wobbly bob]

HAS ANYONE EVER HAD THEIR AIRGUN TESTED BY THE POLICE ?

Does anyone actually KNOW anyone who has had their Airgun tested by the police ?

Well police don’t test guns - a forensic service provider will do that. But the simple answer every time the question is posed is NO