UKAHFT External Power Adjusters

Discussion in 'UKAHFT Official Forum' started by Scooby, Sep 2, 2010.

  1. raygun

    raygun Non member

    There is no standard test.

    I understand that up to date what happens is that rifles are tested usually at the Forensic Science Service labs. They would be tested with any pellets seized with the rifle, plus light, medium and heavy pellets.

    An AMTA Working Group was tasked with coming up with a standard test but chose instead to continue working on an AT system rather than a standard test which would have been the greatest use to us the customer.

    ATB
    Ray.
     
  2. rogb

    rogb Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    611
    Location:
    London
    Forensic tests use a range of light, medium and heavy pellets.
    PCPS generally produce more power with heavier pellets while springers do the same with lighter pellets.

    Given the cost of a forensic test may quite a few hundred pounds, perhaps up to £700, there would have to be a very good reason to test in the first place, perhaps if another offence has taken place such as armed trespass.

    The implication in the case here is that easily adjustable external adjusters are in the spotlight. THe Steyr external adjuster has a lock screw. If this is very tight, it would be almost impossible to adjust easily. The problem if it was loose then power could well be upped with something as simple as a toothpick and you could be sure that is what would be done in the test.
    Mine is very tightly done up and I have permanently blanked off the adjuster. It is no longer externally adjustable. There needs to be a significant disassembly now to adjust power.
    Well it was lovely while it lasted...
     
  3. raygun

    raygun Non member

    The problem is that once you accept that adjustment is allowable there is absolutely nothing to say where that adjustment has to stop, or indeed if it has to stop at all.

    If adjustability is accepted you give Police Forces/FSS Labs Cart Blanche to do what they wish. If it's true that a manufacturer started this ball rolling just because they thought someone was depriving them of work it, and them are a disgrace. Akin to the farcical 12 FPE limit the manufacturers Lobbied for, which was another ball set rolling we're now saddled with.

    I don't know what the tactics of Lee's legal team were but the indication is that they just wanted him to plead guilty, which unfortunately is what he did.

    Perhaps that plea can be changed and Lee can be represented by a legal team that understands Firearms Law and also has experience of it.

    The 1st October may just be the day that airgunning will be the most difficult hobby to participate in.

    ATB
    Ray.
     
  4. Dale

    Dale Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    347
    Location:
    Cornwall
    Just to throw in a point in a devils advocate way.

    How do you view people who deliberately modify rifles without being RFD to operate OTT for people without FAC's?

    Should the law be lenient or not?

    Think on that one carefully...........
     
  5. Scooby

    Scooby Pete Dutton

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2008
    Messages:
    2,620
    Location:
    Rotherham
    It bring a whole new light on the modification of 6ft/lbs 10m rifles
     
  6. Scooby

    Scooby Pete Dutton

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2008
    Messages:
    2,620
    Location:
    Rotherham
    Then again it could have been the result of a much more serious incident where the police specifically targeted people reputed to turn up rifles without FAC's.

    The decision to plead guilty may have been the result of a deal to admit to a lesser charge or face a trial based on much more serious charges. If however he's been given poor advice by his legal team I'm sure it will come out very soon.
     
  7. raygun

    raygun Non member

    If there are other reasons for bringing a prosecution ie. working on Sec1 rifles/making rifles Sec1 illegally then that is the case that should be progressed.

    It matters nought personally to me whether Lee is guilty of this particular demeanor or not. It appears not, as these charges were dropped. If they were so important they should have been progressed.

    What is being claimed is another agenda from either a manufacturer or the police. Another fact is the rifles were sent to be examined by Ripley who retained them for some time, presumably outside of police control. Hardly the way to treat evidence.

    What is important, or should be to any airgunner is that fact that the Tester decided he could adjust the rifles to get a result. Note, if this is accepted there is absolutely nothing that says when that adjustment has to stop or even what the adjustment can be. The Tester can make any rifle or pistol over powered as there are no restraints.
    This means there is no safe way to set your rifles under the 12 FPE limit.

    ATB
    Ray.
     
  8. RobF

    RobF Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2010
    Messages:
    12,526
    Location:
    New Forest, Hampshire
    Club:
    Parkstone Gun Club, South Dorset FTC, Southampton Buccaneers
    the CPS don't always prosecute the worst offense, often just the one most likely to get a conviction.
     
  9. raygun

    raygun Non member

    The CPS decided the charges should include working on/repairing Sec1 rifles without an RFD.

    That should mean that they thought they had the evidence to prove such, otherwise why offer the charges ?
    They then drop the charges they wanted to do him for. Just doesn't make sense.

    ATB
    Ray.
     
  10. JAGXKRS

    JAGXKRS Sparky's Bodyguard

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    2,038
    Location:
    Lyneham
    So the people that reported him were given access to the guns after they had been seized:eek::eek::eek: Thats a little bit naughty to say the least:cool: I'm no lawyer but even I could have thrown enough reasonable doubt around court on that one. As for the tester turning the guns up IMO that is wrong they should have been tested as they came in. There are now an awefull lot of worried AA, Theoben, Walther, Steyr owners plus a few others out there I should imagine, AMTA/BASC need to get off there collective arses and get a definative answer on what "Capable" means and exactly what the test proceedure is!!! because at the moment it would appear that they are making it up as they go along, or what the CPS think they can get away with!!
     
  11. JAGXKRS

    JAGXKRS Sparky's Bodyguard

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    2,038
    Location:
    Lyneham
    CPS chance there arm and go for the higher charge knowing that the weak defence will come back with a plea bargain;);)
     
  12. Dale

    Dale Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    347
    Location:
    Cornwall
    Possibly, but provided the modification are done in such a way to avoid them exceeding the 12ft.lbs limit then I am not sure there would be an issue.

    Unless someone was doing it by way of trade or business without being an airgun RFD or full RFD.
     
  13. RobF

    RobF Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2010
    Messages:
    12,526
    Location:
    New Forest, Hampshire
    Club:
    Parkstone Gun Club, South Dorset FTC, Southampton Buccaneers
    I kind of think you should be RFD to work on guns. Hypocritical i know, because I know who has worked on my guns... but i think you still should be... no matter if that's to fix a seal or wind a 6 up to 12 or whatever...
     
  14. Numb Nut

    Numb Nut New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    41
    Location:
    West Lothian
    Sorry Rob, but that's totally bonkers! :mad:
     
  15. RobF

    RobF Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2010
    Messages:
    12,526
    Location:
    New Forest, Hampshire
    Club:
    Parkstone Gun Club, South Dorset FTC, Southampton Buccaneers
    why?

    im not talking about fixing a seal yourself, but if your into regularly servicing guns for other people, then i think you should be rfd
     
  16. rogb

    rogb Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    611
    Location:
    London
    Sorry Rob, that doesn't make sense:confused: If I replaced some parts for a sub 12ft/lb gun myself, like seals then that's OK, but to do it for a friend, I'd need an RFD - how do you come up with the reasoning for that?

    If I decided then to sell my gun, I would need to get an RFD to be able to sell it, because then it would be someone elses gun, wouldn't it?

    Sorry mate, that's daft, that is!:D

    Now if you phrased it " you would need an RFD in order to fit an external power adjuster which would take it to FAC levels, that gun to be supplied to an FAC holder with the correct slot on their permit", then I would agree with you:p:)
     
  17. Numb Nut

    Numb Nut New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    41
    Location:
    West Lothian
    Ok, so you weren't clear about DIY in your first statement.

    But how do you define "regularly servicing guns"?

    When does adjustment (or routine maintenance) become servicing? How often is "regularly" defined to be? Should the restriction only apply if the person takes payment for the work? How about if payment is just for the price of parts and postage? :D

    Why do you really want to create a new offence for working on an airgun for other persons without RFD status, aren't there enough restrictions already?

    Will I find myself saying "Sorry mate, I've changed 3 pellet probe o-rings and cleaned gunk of 2 hammers and adjusted 3 triggers already this year - that's my quota - I'd love to sort out your rifle but any more tinkering and I'm in danger of arrest due to 'RobF's anti-tinkering' law. :D
     
  18. RobF

    RobF Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2010
    Messages:
    12,526
    Location:
    New Forest, Hampshire
    Club:
    Parkstone Gun Club, South Dorset FTC, Southampton Buccaneers
    I think we all know the difference for working on something for a mate, or working on several guns for lots of mates.

    I'm not trying to make a law about it, just saying if you do, i think you should be RFD.

    I know my first post wasn't clear, i hope that is a little better.
     
  19. Numb Nut

    Numb Nut New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    41
    Location:
    West Lothian
    Erm... not really, unless you define what you mean by "several", "lots" and "mates". :D
    If it's not law then it makes no difference to anything. :)
    :eek:
     
  20. rogb

    rogb Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    611
    Location:
    London
    I don't agree with you on this Rob, but I agree with your right to say it - I think:)
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice