The media again ...

[safetyfirst]

The thing that most of us can do to help is promote our guest days, make sure our clubs use their 12 days a year and make them busy and popular events, get out on Facebook, make videos of people trying out shooting, that’s not so hard!

[Polchraine]

The devil is in the detail, so they say.

The air rifles and air pistols pictured are, by definition, firearms. Likewise, they are controlled/exempted under the auspices of the Firearms Act. As opposed to Staffordshire Police being dishonest, they are perhaps being a little disingenuous. They would argue that they are being “technically correct” I’d have no doubt.

I did suggest it was the BBC not Staffs Police althopgh crossbows definitely are not.

Reading te CPS website, https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/firearms suggests that the air rifles are not considered firearms either and not subject to the acts.

[artiglio]

The devil is in the detail, so they say.

The air rifles and air pistols pictured are, by definition, firearms. Likewise, they are controlled/exempted under the auspices of the Firearms Act. As opposed to Staffordshire Police being dishonest, they are perhaps being a little disingenuous. They would argue that they are being “technically correct” I’d have no doubt.

I did suggest it was the BBC not Staffs Police althopgh crossbows definitely are not.

Reading te CPS website, https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/firearms suggests that the air rifles are not considered firearms either and not subject to the acts.

Interesting link, but from the way i read it, its all covered by the “firearms act” though differentiated within it. The bit about lethality was surprising in that there is no legal definition as such, then you have the muzzle energy of air guns , imitation and component part.
It’d be a stretch but it looks as though you could conceivably argue, that a broom handle taped to a sub 12lb air rifle stock used to intimidate and cause fear would be a breach of the firearms act. And if you were on the receiving end of such an act and felt you were in danger of being shot, you’d probably think it was a fair charge.

It would probably be fairer to all involved if any such story, broke the Items into classifications, air, live firing, deact, imitation, etc. It’d still mean nothing to the vast majority that read it though.

[Sim G]

Reading te CPS website, https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/firearms suggests that the air rifles are not considered firearms either and not subject to the acts.

S1(3) of the 1968 Act exempts low powered air weapons, “high powered” are then subject to s1. S5 prohibits some air weapons. S53 allows the Home Secretary to declare airweapons as “specially dangerous” s57 defines firearm and air weapons. S48 FAA 1997 exempts Co2...

I’d say the firearms acts certainly use the auspices of such to control air weapons.

[1066]

The devil is in the detail, so they say.

The air rifles and air pistols pictured are, by definition, firearms. Likewise, they are controlled/exempted under the auspices of the Firearms Act. As opposed to Staffordshire Police being dishonest, they are perhaps being a little disingenuous. They would argue that they are being “technically correct” I’d have no doubt.

I did suggest it was the BBC not Staffs Police althopgh crossbows definitely are not.

Reading te CPS website, https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/firearms suggests that the air rifles are not considered firearms either and not subject to the acts.

Interesting link, but from the way i read it, its all covered by the “firearms act” though differentiated within it. The bit about lethality was surprising in that there is no legal definition as such, then you have the muzzle energy of air guns , imitation and component part.
It’d be a stretch but it looks as though you could conceivably argue, that a broom handle taped to a sub 12lb air rifle stock used to intimidate and cause fear would be a breach of the firearms act. And if you were on the receiving end of such an act and felt you were in danger of being shot, you’d probably think it was a fair charge.

It would probably be fairer to all involved if any such story, broke the Items into classifications, air, live firing, deact, imitation, etc. It’d still mean nothing to the vast majority that read it though.

I'm sure there are meeting/memo's about how these meagre collections are to be presented to drive the particular agenda. I well remember going to a Sussex County road safety meeting where we were told that when referring to serious road crashes we must use the phrase "killed or seriously injured" rather than just killed. 296 KoI plays much better to joe public rather than just 9 killed.

[Pippin89]

The devil is in the detail, so they say.

The air rifles and air pistols pictured are, by definition, firearms. Likewise, they are controlled/exempted under the auspices of the Firearms Act. As opposed to Staffordshire Police being dishonest, they are perhaps being a little disingenuous. They would argue that they are being “technically correct” I’d have no doubt.

I did suggest it was the BBC not Staffs Police althopgh crossbows definitely are not.

Reading te CPS website, https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/firearms suggests that the air rifles are not considered firearms either and not subject to the acts.

Interesting link, but from the way i read it, its all covered by the “firearms act” though differentiated within it. The bit about lethality was surprising in that there is no legal definition as such, then you have the muzzle energy of air guns , imitation and component part.
It’d be a stretch but it looks as though you could conceivably argue, that a broom handle taped to a sub 12lb air rifle stock used to intimidate and cause fear would be a breach of the firearms act. And if you were on the receiving end of such an act and felt you were in danger of being shot, you’d probably think it was a fair charge.

It would probably be fairer to all involved if any such story, broke the Items into classifications, air, live firing, deact, imitation, etc. It’d still mean nothing to the vast majority that read it though.

An old school friend of mine had a father who was in prison for armed robbery. He went into wherever he robbed with 2 pieces of copper pipe under a cloth and held it to look like a shotgun. No gun of any type involved but the intent to cause fear with the impression he had a shotgun was enough for it to be classed as armed robbery!

[Chuck]

Police Scotland and the Scottish executive seem to think all airguns are firearms and lead pellets are the same as live ammo do they not?

Of course the media don't care and technically as SIm pointed out, they ARE firearms - just a pity the police can't be part of the solution and not the problem at times with their idiotic scare mongering over what used to be considered toys that anyone could shoot anywhere. That was before paranoia and tolerance of criminal behaviour came in..

[Sim G]

I have a small pamphlet that was produced in 1997, just before the handgun ban. Written by a bloke called Robert Powell and it’s a chronological history of gun control on the UK. The Town Police Clauses Act of 1847 is the first piece of legislation where the police have influenced gun laws. And it pains me to say, that in the 170 years since the police have not learned the most plain of lessons. Restricting where and when and with what does nothing to improve crime prevention, detection or deterrence!

[MistAgain]

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liv ... sbows-1674

I do love this word ..........."viable" .

"Many of the guns will now be destroyed, so that they never end up on the streets again."

I dont think they were ever on the streets, but thats a minor detail .