The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

I've searched on here and around the web, but I can't find a simple answer to this. Why would someone hold an obsolete calibre'd revolver against heritage 7.1 when you can own it against section 58(2) without a certificate and any hassle?

Section 58 (2) - antique firearm which is possessed as a “curiosity or ornament” is no longer subject to the provisions of the Act.

Section 7(1) - permits certain pistols to be held at home as part of a collection, without ammunition, and allows them to be exhibited.

So I suppose my question is, what's the point of section 7.1 when the ammunition isn't available for a pistol under either section?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_(Amendment)_(No._2)_Act_1997

sec 7 would allow a more modern pistol to be held at home, as long as you don't reload it. so something like a certain 38 revolver that meets the criteria

sec 58 wouldn't allow that gun, but it would allow an original muzzle loader/ flintlock. or something from the 30's say that is an obselete caliber

The permitted firearms are not the same under the two sections. I'm no expert on the guns, but one obvious one is that a Webley revolver in .455" may be permitted under 7.1 (cartridge not on the banned list) but is not permitted under S58 (cartridge not on the permitted list).

Thanks, that makes sense although there's still a big overlap between the 2 sections. Just goes to show what a mess the firearm laws are in the UK...

bradaz11 wrote:sec 7 would allow a more modern pistol to be held at home, as long as you don't reload it. so something like a certain 38 revolver that meets the criteria

sec 58 wouldn't allow that gun, but it would allow an original muzzle loader/ flintlock. or something from the 30's say that is an obselete caliber

Thanks Iain, good point. Funnily enough I was just looking at a Webley Mk VI, what a piece of British history!

IainWR wrote:The permitted firearms are not the same under the two sections. I'm no expert on the guns, but one obvious one is that a Webley revolver in .455" may be permitted under 7.1 (cartridge not on the banned list) but is not permitted under S58 (cartridge not on the permitted list).

The reason I started to look into this tonight, is I stumbled across this S&W No3 .44 Russian revolver and I was surprised you could own it under section 58(2) -

Chambered in S&W .44 Russian obsolete calibre this antique revolver can be owned live without any form of license.

http://www.deactivated-guns.co.uk/obsol ... _5437.html

It seems odd .44 Russian is deemed an obsolete calibre, as it's the parent case to .44 special and apart from psi, the only physical variance is the case length.

.44 special case length - 29.0 mm (15,500 psi)
.44 russian case length - 24.6 mm (14,500 psi)

So how does this work? Both my underlever and my LBR are both chambered in .44 SPL/MAG. Does that mean I wouldn't be able to apply for a .44 Russian section 7.1 heritage firearm because the cartridges are too similar, but I could own it under section 58(2)? Seems a legal minefield to me!

I have a few 58(2) pistols and am thinking about going the 7.1 route. You are right it seems like a minefield. Not to mention some of the silly prices being asked.

I guess section 7.1 might be the safer route, because your FEO `should` flag any clashes between your section 1 ammo and anything held against section 7.1. My concern is when something ceases to be a “curiosity or ornament” because of a close similarity in cartridges. I noticed .44 Russian is similar to .44 SPL, but I bet there are quite a few more.

AL8 wrote:I have a few 58(2) pistols and am thinking about going the 7.1 route. You are right it seems like a minefield. Not to mention some of the silly prices being asked.

how does it being an ornament change because of a similarity in cartridges?

if you want to keep it on the wall or on a desk etc it shouldn't matter what caliber it is, as soon as you start thinking about shortening cases to use in it, then you are considering it for more uses than a paperweight, thats where you have then mentally crossed a line.

as a paperweight it's caliber is of no consequence.

If you have it as 7.1 you cannot shoot it, and it must be locked away when not being admired/fondled.

I read that a lack of intent assures it remains a “curiosity or ornament,” but a lack of intent is difficult to prove if challenged. I fully understand what you're saying, but the reality is a .44 SPL round would probably work in a .44 Russian revolver despite the extra 4.4mm case length and 1,000 psi.

I might be making a mountain out of a mole hill, but it seems to me - possession of S1 .44 SPL and a .44 Russian revolver under either section 58(2) or section 7.1, poses a potential legal risk to the licence holder. Having said that, owning a shotgun and a hacksaw draws a similar parallel, but the difference being, the revolver or ammo wouldn't need to be modified.

bradaz11 wrote:how does it being an ornament change because of a similarity in cartridges?