24" and less, a place to discuss all things handgun related, section 7.3. Long barrelled revolvers, long barrelled pistols and section 5. Overseas contributions are more than welcome.
bradaz11 wrote:
to clear up a possible misunderstanding. I mean registered when it is in the USA etc, not anything to do with the UK...
Registered with who in the US? It doesn't matter to the UK Police/Courts what the history of a gun is other then did it comply with Sec.1 or Sec 5. when it was manufactured at the factory. They have no real way of checking it's history in the U.S. unless they went to the FBI or gun manufacturer and that may not help. There's no easily searchable central registry/database of firearms in the U.S in any case.
Now that in itself, is possibly why this loophole exists. There is no easy way for the UK Police and border control to find out whether a semi-auto pistol with a long barrel (for instance) was made from a pile of spare parts (which were never made into a gun) or converted from what they consider to be a Sec. 5. So they let it slide, as at least it conforms to the current legislation and the actual number of technically illegal guns in circulation is fairly small.
safetyfirst wrote:The RFD in question here needs a letter from the home office confirming what he plans to sell is section 1 or he’s risking prison.
That’s what most people do with projects like this, just ask the HO.
So... devils advocate, if the RFD has a letter of approval from the HO then surely this relinquishes the responsibility of the buyer and should mitigate any issues with the buyers FAC issuing force?
All views expressed are my own unless otherwise stated! So please take your time to consider my opinions as biased to what i think is best....
bradaz11 wrote:
to clear up a possible misunderstanding. I mean registered when it is in the USA etc, not anything to do with the UK...
Registered with who in the US? It doesn't matter to the UK Police/Courts what the history of a gun is other then did it comply with Sec.1 or Sec 5. when it was manufactured at the factory. They have no real way of checking it's history in the U.S. unless they went to the FBI or gun manufacturer and that may not help. There's no easily searchable central registry/database of firearms in the U.S in any case.
Now that in itself, is possibly why this loophole exists. There is no easy way for the UK Police and border control to find out whether a semi-auto pistol with a long barrel (for instance) was made from a pile of spare parts (which were never made into a gun) or converted from what they consider to be a Sec. 5. So they let it slide, as at least it conforms to the current legislation and the actual number of technically illegal guns in circulation is fairly small.
/\ /\ although I wouldn't describe it as a 'loophole'
In the GSG factory the frames, slides etc for the 1911 copies are all the same, the ones destined to be UK abominations are not made separately/specially. At some point a number of completed frames are syphoned off to have 4 holes drilled in the bottom on the magazine well so the coat hanger can be attached. Before that point they are perfectly capable of being used for what would be a Section 5(aba) firearm under UK law, so how does that work then?
As long as the gun enters the UK's jurisdiction in a Section 1 format personally I am entirely satisfied that it is legal and there is nothing to worry about until someone shows me case law that suggests differently.
safetyfirst wrote:The RFD in question here needs a letter from the home office confirming what he plans to sell is section 1 or he’s risking prison.
That’s what most people do with projects like this, just ask the HO.
So... devils advocate, if the RFD has a letter of approval from the HO then surely this relinquishes the responsibility of the buyer and should mitigate any issues with the buyers FAC issuing force?
I doubt if the Home Office would issue any letter before checking on the provenance of the major parts .
Blackstuff wrote:
In the GSG factory the frames, slides etc for the 1911 copies are all the same, the ones destined to be UK abominations are not made separately/specially. At some point a number of completed frames are syphoned off to have 4 holes drilled in the bottom on the magazine well so the coat hanger can be attached. Before that point they are perfectly capable of being used for what would be a Section 5(aba) firearm under UK law, so how does that work then?
...
Key words being in the GSG Factory. They do not leave the GSG factory, go to a third party company to be modified or taken apart and rebuilt, they are in the manufacturing process and leave the factory a Sec. 1. gun.
You honestly cannot see how that is not the same as a man buying a glock which has left the glock factory, then taking it apart and rebuilding it?
safetyfirst wrote:The RFD in question here needs a letter from the home office confirming what he plans to sell is section 1 or he’s risking prison.
That’s what most people do with projects like this, just ask the HO.
So... devils advocate, if the RFD has a letter of approval from the HO then surely this relinquishes the responsibility of the buyer and should mitigate any issues with the buyers FAC issuing force?
I would envisage so yes, better still he just needs to be able to prove provenance for his parts which should not be hard since invoices and shipping manifests will be dated and have serial numbers and then job done.
There is no process of HO type approval... The onus is very firmly on the RFD to only deal (import / manufacture / sell) in firearms compliant with their approval, be it 1 or 5.
You only need to look at the list of offences to see this.
