VZ58 MARS - Variation hold up

[saddler]

Jeff - phone them back & ask if they're not granting the variation due to your being a Muslim.

See how quick they change their minds....

[pe4king]

Surely the variation is for a 7.62 or .223 etc rifle, and not the action type. Or am I missing something

[polemass]

Is it not Scott who shot himself in the foot?-in his first flyer about MARS he insisted on action description as compulsory or no deal...or something changed now?

[phaedra1106]

Pe4king, No, you're not missing anything except that Durham insist on having the action specified contrary to current firearms law and H.O. guidance and if you don't then you don't get the rifle.

Polemass, No, Scott said the Fac must either state "MARs action" for those forces (like Durham) who insist on the action type being specified or not specified at all (like it should be) ie. ".223/5.56mm (or 7.62x39 etc.) cal rifle for target shooting, bunny bashing or stalking etc." Even the exact chambering isn't required, a ".30cal" rifle would suffice for 300aac, 303, 308 etc.

[saddler]

Surely the variation is for a 7.62 or .223 etc rifle, and not the action type. Or am I missing something

You're not missing anything, Durham are by not complying with the law as written (a la Alice in Wonderland - "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."): far too much local office politics & empire building goes on within FLO sections...
...and WHY NOT?? All salaried staff, funded by taxpayers....few of their cosseted staff could survive in the real world: MUCH better to continue to fund incompetence & inefficiency, all the while calling for more money to solve the crisis of departmental underfunding

[Blackstuff]

Spoke with the guy at Durham FLD who was looking at this from the 'legal' angle today and he's satisfied that CCA haff zare paperz in order for ze gun. tongueout

The only hold up now is that M.A.R.S. isn't an action type shown on the NFLMS :roll: The subject is now been looked at nationally by Mark Groothuis to get the action added. Apparently this has to be done at a national level, individual forces can't just add an action type to the system :cool2:

Anyone who already has one might be in for an 'exciting' time if their certificate is up for renewal/they put in for a variation etc before this is sorted as once the guns' entry gets moved into the official 'Firearms Possessed' section 1(i) (as opposed to just where its written in on Table 1 by the seller/RFD) it must (according to Durham) be assigned an action from the system. If the action type isn't there and the FLD won't just put it in as something else (e.g. lever release action etc) thats when the fun begins emrolleyes

[phaedra1106]

I may well be wrong but it sounds (yet again) as if Durham are talking out of their backsides, there is no requirement in firearms law or HO guidance that requires an action type to be specified or printed on your FAC. Ask Northumberland, all they require is calibre type and use, so 7.62x39 rifle for target shooting is all that's required.

I almost had similar problems when they couldn't find 300aac or 300 Blackout on the NFLMS and wouldn't just put .30cal

[Blackstuff]

While i agree that i don't believe its a lawful requirement or in accordance with the guidance for an entry in section 1(ii) (Firearms authorised to acquire) for an action type to be specificed (after all there isn't even a column for it), as there is a specific column in section 1(i) (Firearms possessed) for the action i doubt you could argue otherwise

[20series]

While i agree that i don't believe its a lawful requirement or in accordance with the guidance for an entry in section 1(ii) (Firearms authorised to acquire) for an action type to be specificed (after all there isn't even a column for it), as there is a specific column in section 1(i) (Firearms possessed) for the action i doubt you could argue otherwise

OK so something has to be added to the action column, what's wrong with "lever release??" the trigger is a lever that operates the action...in my world of common sense and logic it seems perfectly simple...

I know I'll go and Gibbs slap myself silly

Alan

[Blackstuff]

While i agree that i don't believe its a lawful requirement or in accordance with the guidance for an entry in section 1(ii) (Firearms authorised to acquire) for an action type to be specificed (after all there isn't even a column for it), as there is a specific column in section 1(i) (Firearms possessed) for the action i doubt you could argue otherwise

OK so something has to be added to the action column, what's wrong with "lever release??" the trigger is a lever that operates the action...in my world of common sense and logic it seems perfectly simple...

I know I'll go and Gibbs slap myself silly

Alan

You know what you've done, and you're prepared to accept the punishment for it. Well done that man :lol:

If Durham are to be believed 'lever release' doesn't exist on the NFLMS either! When i had my 9mm LRA it was on my FAC as 'lever action' :roll: That raised an eyebrow come my renewal when the FEO was inspecting the contents of my cabinet expecting to see a Winchester/Marlin etc "Er, where's the lever?" he asked. Oh here it is i said pointing to the 1" thumb lever :lol: