Re-enactors upset by ban on taking UK spec deacts to France

[meles meles]

Re-enactors appreciate firearms too, ooman: as shooters we should be encouraging support from every responsible quarter.

[Iain]

+1 to the badger.

A common sense and useful comment.

Iain

[saddler]

Hmmm, so what REALLY is the difference between any Deact and a non working replica? They are all nothing more than useless curios.

Quite a lot. See my earlier post, sorry, read my earlier post. You've been to ONE event at which re-enactors were attending.
Aside from the price difference & TOTALLY different build quality, quite a lot of legislation that makes replicas more difficult to own in the UK

Well if you did those miles as an enlisted soldier you have my greatest respect....

Both, though Airman/Gunner, not pongo. The difference being that as a re-enactor, the trips were totally funded by myself to the tune of several hundred pounds per time...with the outlay being several times that for kit/uniforms/equipment, etc.
As to the former paid occupation - I hear they're after recruits. Why not apply? (Or can I assume like some of your assumptions that you'd not pass muster?)

Well the guy I spoke to had spent quite a lot of time getting the details of his "home-made guns" to look right. The enactment guys were there just as an attraction..... it was a day out for them all.

Again, "look right" = compared to what? (& from WHAT distance?)

Awwww poor you... by that age I had my own air pistols

Contrary to the 1968 Firearms Act then?

That is what I meant.... correct caliber blanks

Mmm - moving the goal posts? Live firing is NOT blanks, LIVE firing is LIVE rounds.
Blank ammo cannot be used in a de-act., & as per my previous reply, I prefer OTHER OPTIONS over a de-act., but that is not the topic being discussed...
Several EU countries allow unrestricted rifles - "salute weapons": these are otherwise fully operational rifles, but have hardened pins through the chambers in such a position that a blank cartridge can be fired, but a live round cannot be chambered.

To repeat myself: I'm with 450Martini = and have said for years that the easiest way (if possible) is to have the rifle on a F.A.C. or S.G.C., with an E.F.P.

Ok, I agree with the use of deacts when it comes to items that are now Section 5..... but as regards butchering perfectly good rifles so that people who would not be granted an FAC can play at pretending to be soldiers is a bit sad

With you, but only as far as agreeing that it is not good to see "perfectly good rifles" chopped into de-acts; shagged out, worn out or out of proof tat? = have at it & cut them into de-acts & hang them on the wall.
BUT, as to your blanket assumption that re-enactors would not be granted an FAC, or they are "playing" - well, great to see your wealth of experience being put to good use!

Prior to the last set of Firearms Amendments, a LOT of such folk relied on the SGC system & had a smooth-bored version of whatever service rifle they so needed. When the law changed most then got an FAC instead & kept their smooth-bored (5-rd or 10-rd capacity) "rifle" on FAC instead. A few smooth-bored Garands, MP44's & G43's & similar were sadly lost...

LOOK at the 1968 Firearms Act - lots of information on re-enacting - substantially more than one trip to one event can furnish you with.
Plus. FYI, I know at least two Section 5 RFD's that make good trade renting out live firing Section 5 guns of all descriptions to the people at such events....NOT an activity that would be legal to do for anyone other than a reenactor (or similar)

[meles meles]

Sadler: don't waste eloquence and facts on him, his mind is already made up...

For those who think re-enacting and so on is 'sad', and the re-enactor a 'wannabe' or 'Walt, consider the words of Sir Henry Newbolt

The Non-Combatant

Among a race high-handed, strong of heart,
Sea-rovers, conquerors, builders in the waste,
He had his birth; a nature too complete,
Eager and doubtful, no man's soldier sworn
And no man's chosen captain; born to fail,
A name without an echo: yet he too
Within the cloister of his narrow days
Fulfilled the ancestral rites, and kept alive
The eternal fire; it may be, not in vain;
For out of those who dropped a downward glance
Upon the weakling huddled at his prayers,
Perchance some looked beyond him, and then first
Beheld the glory, and what shrine it filled,
And to what Spirit sacred: or perchance
Some heard him chanting, though but to himself,
The old heroic names: and went their way:
And hummed his music on the march to death.

[HH1]

As much as I hate to see good rifles deactivated, isn't it a bit presumptuous and judgemental to assume that those reenacting wouldn't be granted FACs? Some people simply don't want to, or arent able to (for reasons other than their character) to possess active firearms.

it seems you have a problem with those who choose to do living history, and rifles being deactivated would appear to more of a justification rather than a legitimate reason to look down on them. Your choice of language throughout this thread would certainly suggest as much.

No, I don't have a problem with people who do living history Two of our club officials dress up in period costumes and give demonstrations at various game fairs which is very educational and entraining ..... but they are typically using blank firing ammunition through fully functional rifles held on the club's FAC.

Deactivation should really be the last resort...... serviceable firearms should be kept intact for people to shoot.... not butchered and welded up.

Battle re-enactors don't use historically important "live" blades, axes spears etc.... they use blunt reproductions / replicas so why can't people use replica rifles as well?

[HH1]

Sadler: don't waste eloquence and facts on him, his mind is already made up...

For those who think re-enacting and so on is 'sad', and the re-enactor a 'wannabe' or 'Walt, consider the words of Sir Henry Newbolt

No, actually I am finding this subject interesting. An insight into something that I ought to learn about.

I don't mean any harm to anyone!

[meles meles]

*Withdraws comments immediately*

[breacher]

Very FEW re-enactors portray a specific relative - so next to no-one WILL have the ACTUAL rifle that that particular relative carried: so zero validity of that argument (HOW would they be able to source the exact issued rifle even if they knew the serial number, unless it was sold to their relative or "lost" & brought home by them?

Just reading that bit about the serial number reminds me I have a notebook from the Great War that was my Grandfathers......and on the inside of the front cover, written in pencil, is his rifles serial number!.
I wonder what the chances are that someone owns it and shoots it today?.

What with the FLMS database, it would be possible to check........

[HH1]

As to the former paid occupation - I hear they're after recruits. Why not apply? (Or can I assume like some of your assumptions that you'd not pass muster?)
.
Yes, you are correct... given that I was diagnosed last year with pulmonary hypertension and heart disease, I probably would not meet the grade despite it being "low-level" and that I am fit otherwise. Besides I enjoy my job and my very specialised skills help to save many thousands of lives so I don't have any plans for a career change.

Awwww poor you... by that age I had my own air pistols

Contrary to the 1968 Firearms Act then?
I was shooting before I could walk..... and that was before 1968 My Dad bought the air-pistols/rifles and while some of them were "mine" he obviously locked them away when we weren't using them.



With you, but only as far as agreeing that it is not good to see "perfectly good rifles" chopped into de-acts; shagged out, worn out or out of proof tat? = have at it & cut them into de-acts & hang them on the wall.
Agreed

BUT, as to your blanket assumption that re-enactors would not be granted an FAC, or they are "playing" - well, great to see your wealth of experience being put to good use!

I don't think I said that..... but if a person has a FAC and can shoot the real thing, would they really be that bothered about having a deact version of the same gun? It would be like "second-best", yes, it would have some use for re-enactment or training but otherwise, it is just a wall hanger....
]

My Dad got his first gun when he was 4 years old... he will be 82 next month and he still shoots with me several times each week everything from .22 to 45-70, 303 Lee Enfields and a ruck of shotguns..... I've grown up around guns so I have shot most of what he has owned at some point or other including various handguns before the ban....... so I've never really seen the need for deacts as such. Maybe if Dad had had one or two of his favourite handguns deactivated , then I'd understand the appeal, but the way I see it is that you'd be torturing yourself over something you can no longer use. I guess I take after my Dad, if you can't have a gun that actually works as it should, he tends to loose interest.

[Sandgroper]

Battle re-enactors don't use historically important "live" blades, axes spears etc.... they use blunt reproductions / replicas so why can't people use replica rifles as well?

While they are reproduction weapons it would be more accurate to think of them as deacts in this case. "Battle ready" swords etc are designed to be as safe as possible while being as authentic as possible and strong enough to withstand the rigours of re-enactment and unfortunately a deactivated firearm fits the bill nicely. I still don't like firearms being deactivated but I understand why re-enactors would use them over a replica - it would be like using a latex LARPing sword instead of a "battle ready" one.