Muzzle Breaks

[DaveB]

What an incredibly silly law. Is this another one of those 'appearance' laws? A flash hider looks evil and so must be banned?

I have a Remington 700 SPS Tactical with a short (however still legal) barrel in .308 Win calibre. I would not care to be shooting this at dusk without a flash eliminator (which also coincidentally serves as a quick-detach suppressor mount). You would ruin your night-vision without it.

Why do morons want to ban anything even remotely useful?

[shotgun sam]

Thanks to everyone that has commented it has clarified what I thought was the situation.
Maybe someone that is knowledgeable/in the trade could compile a list of everything that is restricted and have it as a sticky note.
Sam

[Mattnall]

Why do morons want to ban anything even remotely useful?

No one wants to ban them (other than those that want all things shooting banned). I believe this has been on the statutes as long as sound moderators have.

They are controlled more like shotgun cartridges in that if you have a slot for the firearm it can fit then you can have the brake. If you buy a rifle with one on it is not listed separately and if you take it off, for example, to fit a moderator then it is still OK to possess. However don't try to sell it to a non FAC holder and be careful what you do with it. I have no idea how airsoft (and similar) replica flash hiders would fair in a legal sense even if they would fit the rifle and survive firing.

When I spoke to the Firearms Department about flash eliminators/hiders (apart from the fact the FEO had never heard of them before!) they did some investigation and a search on the database showed only three have ever been listed on FAC (in England and Wales only I think), and of these three 2 have since been disposed of. All were in the East Anglia area (Norfolk or Suffolk IIRC).
I was told that with the absence of a court ruling and no guidance from the HO on the subject it would be best to sell only as part of a firearm or attached to a barrel or to those who could show they had a suitable firearm for it to go on.

[MistAgain]

There has been a conviction for possession of a flash hider in the past .
The flash hider had been removed from a legally held (at the time) H & K. Actually it used to unscrew during firing .

The police expert witness claimed that flash hiders were only of use to criminals .

The Judge , summing up stated that a flash hider was used by assasins and criminals so they could shoot but not be seen .

The owwner of the flash hider was found guilty .

[Mattnall]

There has been a conviction for possession of a flash hider in the past .
The flash hider had been removed from a legally held (at the time) H & K. Actually it used to unscrew during firing .

The police expert witness claimed that flash hiders were only of use to criminals .

The Judge , summing up stated that a flash hider was used by assasins and criminals so they could shoot but not be seen .

The owwner of the flash hider was found guilty .

Do you have case reference?
Was the flash hider's owner also he owner of the H&K?

[MistAgain]

There has been a conviction for possession of a flash hider in the past .
The flash hider had been removed from a legally held (at the time) H & K. Actually it used to unscrew during firing .

The police expert witness claimed that flash hiders were only of use to criminals .

The Judge , summing up stated that a flash hider was used by assasins and criminals so they could shoot but not be seen .

The owwner of the flash hider was found guilty .

Do you have case reference?
Was the flash hider's owner also he owner of the H&K?

This is going back at least 8 years , and I dont have the case reference.
He was the owner of the H & K , it was handed in as part of the handgun ban from memory .
There were other things involved however .

[Mattnall]

Ah, was this the 'straight-pull' H&K that possibly wasn't S1 or was easily convertible?

If it was found to be a S5 weapon then the flash hider would be a part of a S5 weapon and would always be so and therefore prohibited. The possession offence would then be for a part of a prohibited weapon and not for a S1 flash hider not listed on a FAC.
Different thing altogether.

[Blackstuff]

I have a letter from the HO that states individual parts for a S5 (ab) firearm (AKA semi-auto rifle) are in fact considered to be S1 parts and a S5 firearm only exists with all parts assembled/in one location.

I think the problem, as stated earlier, is these sorts of things rarely get to a court and there's no 'standard practice' for them.

Other than the devices fitted to an XM177 and AKS-74U (both of which are dual purpose devices and not even JUST flash-hiders), I've never seen a flash-hider that actually diminishes flash, from the targets perspective anyway. Most make what would appear as a white/yellow dot 2-4" wide into a 6-20" wide star of varying number of 'spokes' depending on the model

[Mattnall]

When I started importing firearms and parts over 20 years ago I asked for guidance from the HO regarding this and the response said in effect that there are no S5 parts, just parts of S5 weapons. Common parts are deemed to take the lower category until fitted to a weapon and then take on the category of that weapon.

[Strangely Brown]

When I started importing firearms and parts over 20 years ago I asked for guidance from the HO regarding this and the response said in effect that there are no S5 parts, just parts of S5 weapons. Common parts are deemed to take the lower category until fitted to a weapon and then take on the category of that weapon.

A very useful post for those clubs and individuals who are currently battling the MOD Police in court for possession of their L98 cadet rifles back.