SGC 9mm - Catastorphic Failure - Almost lost an eye :(

[ovenpaa]

Are these covered by the 24" ruling so barrel must be 12" or more inches and overall length of firearm must be 24" or more inches?

[Sandgroper]

GSG5 etc can have a fixed stock but removable so barrel & action must be over 600mm.

No it doesn't. The GSG5 can have a retractable or folding stock, so the measurement must be taken with these stocks retracted or folded. The GSG5 also has a fixed stock, so the measurement will be taken with this stock in place, as with the others, as it can't be folded or retracted.

All of the GSG5 stocks, folding, retractable or fixed, are secured to the weapon by a screw, so why would they have to be removed? Likewise, my 10/22, all of my Marlins, my Savage and whatever else, have their stocks held to the action by a screw and can be removed. They don't have to be removed, so why a GSG?

From what I read when the GSG-5 first came out, it because there was stocks available for it that were collapsible - it had to meet the 12/24 rule with the stock removed. As least that's what the reviews implied or said. :G

However, this doesn't make sense as you can get collapsible/folding stocks for other makes of rifle. :?

Edit: eg http://www.gunmart.net/gun_review/gsg-5/

You can’t fail to notice that the GSG-5 comes with what appears to be a moderator, which is actually a dummy barrel shroud. When it first appeared many people thought they could simply get the barrel cut down to a more realistic length; I’m afraid not! To qualify as a Sect 1, Large Firearm it needs to be a minimum overall length (muzzle to butt) of 24” with a 12” barrel. Due to the short action this is not possible, as the fixed butt is removable and a telescopic unit can be substituted. So to conform the tube has to be 16” to make up the required 24” to the end of the receiver, regardless of your choice of furniture.

[Sim G]

GSG5 etc can have a fixed stock but removable so barrel & action must be over 600mm.

No it doesn't. The GSG5 can have a retractable or folding stock, so the measurement must be taken with these stocks retracted or folded. The GSG5 also has a fixed stock, so the measurement will be taken with this stock in place, as with the others, as it can't be folded or retracted.

All of the GSG5 stocks, folding, retractable or fixed, are secured to the weapon by a screw, so why would they have to be removed? Likewise, my 10/22, all of my Marlins, my Savage and whatever else, have their stocks held to the action by a screw and can be removed. They don't have to be removed, so why a GSG?

From what I read when the GSG-5 first came out, it because there was stocks available for it that were collapsible - it had to meet the 12/24 rule with the stock removed. As least that's what the reviews implied or said. :G

However, this doesn't make sense as you can get collapsible/folding stocks for other makes of rifle. :?

Edit: eg http://www.gunmart.net/gun_review/gsg-5/

You can’t fail to notice that the GSG-5 comes with what appears to be a moderator, which is actually a dummy barrel shroud. When it first appeared many people thought they could simply get the barrel cut down to a more realistic length; I’m afraid not! To qualify as a Sect 1, Large Firearm it needs to be a minimum overall length (muzzle to butt) of 24” with a 12” barrel. Due to the short action this is not possible, as the fixed butt is removable and a telescopic unit can be substituted. So to conform the tube has to be 16” to make up the required 24” to the end of the receiver, regardless of your choice of furniture.

No, Grant, Moore has it wrong. If what he was saying was correct, then actually, you could lose another inach and half off the barrel and still make 12/24. (I've just measured mine.) On top of which, he has delusions if he thinks the 16" barrel was chosen for UK considerations. It wasn't, it was because of the US market and their minimum 16" barrel on long guns.

He also wrote;

Also you cannot get round this by electing to stay with the fixed butt, as this part has to be removable to allow stripping.

What, just like my 10/22, then?

And, as you said, there are plently of other guns with folding/retractable/removeable stocks and the GSG is the only model that is subject to ths? Or, is Pete Moore the only gun writer that has eluded to this?

[M99]

My Sig 522 when folded is exactly 24" - but if you take the muzzle brake off it, it then becomes only 22". So Moore must have it wrong, as removing my muzzle brake certainly takes it below the 24"

Mike

[toffe wrapper]

My thinking was wrong just mesured my HK 416 it has 12 inch barrel with a total length of 26.5 inches flash hider to end of stock tube. The stock tube could be removed making total length 20 inches. So total length must inclued fixed stock that is just bolted on. Another 1.25 inches would be removed if the flash hider was repaced by a nut to tighten the barrel sleeve.

Sorry for any mis information

TW

[Porcupine]

The examples you give i.e. the shotgun - S2 guns with a magazine that could take more cartridges are usually crimped, therefore on inspection by the police it could be readily seen that you had modified the gun yourself = threat of conviction = a GOOD reason not to do it. An exception to this is of course a S2 shotgun thats chambered for 3.5", using shorter cartridges you can get 1 or possibly 2 more in the magazine, but is an extra cartridge really going to matter in terms of 'threat to public safety' - which remember, is what firearms legislation is all about :-P :roll:

My point was that you can remove the crimped mag tube and replace it with a regular, un-crimped one (which you might own separately since it's not a controlled part, or as a component of a section 1 gun). Even if 'leaving evidence of having been modified' were the important factor, and I've seen nothing to indicate that it is, you could swap the gun back to its original configuration or even crimp the mag tube yourself.

With the rifle, unless it's some kind of modular gun that the police aren't particularly savvie with* it wouldn't be 'readily convertible' and therefore there would be a determined process involved which again would make most people less likely to do it.

*The Police are well aware of what can and can't be done with an AR for example. So if even if you bought a short barreled but long/fixed stock gun, the actual length measurement is take from the back of the recoil buffer tube, not from the heel of the stock, therefore if you also had a long barreled but folding/collapseable stocked 2nd AR and you mixed and matched, the guns OAL would still be greater than 60cm legal length

I'll talk about where you measure guns from down below, but ignoring AR type rifles even, you don't need an unusual design at all. Take a Ruger 10/22, one of the most common rifles going, with a short barrel of say 12 inches like this one in the UK:



Perfectly legal in the UK under section 1, meeting the 24" overall length due to its fixed stock.

Then take another Ruger 10/22 with a longer, 16 or 18 inch barrel and a folding stock like this (receiver and stock when folded add about 9 inches to overall length on top of the barrel itself):



Again, that's a gun for sale in the UK. With a long barrel, perfectly legal because the length, even when folded, is 25" long (16 + 9 = 25). But you could then swap the folding stock from the long gun onto the short one and end up with a rifle of 21" (12 + 9 = 21) - shorter than the 24" minimum and therefore section 5. And yet both of the above examples are legal. Swapping stocks on a a 10/22 is no harder than removing the stock from an AR and you could swap back again without leaving any evidence.

So I don't think that being 'readily convertible', even when this is possible without leaving any evidence, is necessarily a problem. And even if it was, that hardly necessitates an entirely new blowback action. All you'd need to do would be to make the way the lower attaches to the upper a little different - different size or shape of receiver hinge, something like that. You'd then have a 5.56 AR that could take aftermarket stocks, pistol grips, barrels, possibly even triggers, with a safe and proven DI gas system instead of a new fangled and apparently unreliable and potentially even unsafe blowback action that can't handle high pressure chamberings - and, like I say, you could even make it so it wouldn't take other AR lowers with minimal changes to the design of a regular AR.

Moving to the issue of overall length measurements, the law says that:

"For the purposes of subsection (1)(aba) and (ac) above, any detachable, folding, retractable or other movable butt-stock shall be disregarded in measuring the length of any firearm."

But, what's detachable? You can take the stock off just about any rifle and it is still a working firearm. I think the intention of the law was to disregard stocks designed to be removed quickly for concealment like the famous Tommy gun. Of course, in practice you can take the stock off a lot of rifles just as quickly, though they're not usually intended to be used that way, which creates a lot of confusion and uncertainty.

The other relevant pieces of law:

"any firearm which either has a barrel less than 30 centimetres in length or is less than 60 centimetres in length overall [is prohibited]"

and

"any self-loading or pump-action smooth-bore gun which is not chambered for .22 rim-fire cartridges and either has a barrel less than 24 inches in length or (excluding any detachable, folding, retractable or other movable butt-stock) is less than 40 inches in length overall [is prohibited]"

An illustrative example for how overall length is measured would be section 1 shotguns again. These have more restrictive length limitations - 24" barrel and 40" overall length as in the quote above. Clearly, virtually all section 1 shotguns do not meet the 40" minimum length with their fixed stock disregarded/removed - even though they are still functioning firearms with the stock removed.

So it could be that only traditional, fixed, straight or half-pistol-grip stocks are counted in length determination - since, without them, the gun could be considered un-weildly. You could argue that without its buttstock an AK or AR type rifle is still, not only a technically working firearm, but also practical to use since it has a pistol grip to hold onto. I'll return to that theory below.

Going back to the issue of swapping lowers around, just to add another example of why I don't think this is a problem, you can today own a section 2 shotgun with a pistol grip only (no stock) or a folding stock (still meeting the 24" minimum length due to a 24" barrel), and also own a section 1 shotgun with a fixed stock and 24" barrel, and then swap stocks between them - violating the 40" minimum length for the section 1 gun.

If making a gun that allowed for the 'easily swapping bits to make it illegal' possibility was itself illegal then you wouldn't be able to own most section 1 shotguns or short-barreled rifles because their stocks could be swapped to create section 5 guns - but you can. So why should a Unicorn be treated any differently?

Returning to overall length measurements...

My Sig 522 when folded is exactly 24" - but if you take the muzzle brake off it, it then becomes only 22". So Moore must have it wrong, as removing my muzzle brake certainly takes it below the 24"

The law says, as we've seen quoted above, that folding stocks should be disregarded for length measurement. It does not say that removable muzzle devices should be disregarded for the overall length measurement - though it seems clear they would not be included in barrel length measurements unless fixed. So 24" would seem be the correct measurement for your gun... But then, if you actually remove the muzzle brake, haven't you just created a section 5? Might want to keep that on the DL

If you remove a traditional half-pistol grip stock from a rifle or shotgun you could argue, as in my theory above, that you have not created a section 5 gun since the rifle is now awkward to use, but a SIG without a muzzle brake is perfectly usable.

Russian Military & Outdoors sell Saiga 12" barreled AKs with folding stocks - they only meet the 24" minimum because of their muzzle brakes. They say on their website that the muzzle brake has been pinned and welded to meet the 24" minimum overall length ("In order to add to the legal minimum length of the gun, the flash hider was pinned & welded,"). That could just be a liability thing - not wanting to let people take off things that would end up creating an illegal gun, or they might believe, rightly or wrongly, that removable items aren't included in overall length measurements even when the item is not a buttstock (remember the law only says specifically to disregard detachable buttstocks, it doesn't say anything about other detachable parts).

What would be interesting is if there are any short-barreled rifles in the UK with fixed stocks but also pistol grips, and short barrels. If an AK for example (no buffer tube adding length), had a 12" barrel, no muzzle brake (or only the Soviet slant style) and a fixed stock it would only meet the 24" minimum if the stock is included - yet if the stock is removed you still have a halfway practical firearm due to the pistol grip. If such a gun is out there and approved by the Home Office then we know that ALL fixed stocks are included in measurements, not just those that incorporate a grip. If on the other hand this kind of configuration is not allowed, then I'd say my theory is right that fixed stocks inclusive of a grip are included in measurements, but stocks where the grip is separate are disregarded.

[Sim G]

Going back to the issue of swapping lowers around, just to add another example of why I don't think this is a problem, you can today own a section 2 shotgun with a pistol grip only (no stock) or a folding stock (still meeting the 24" minimum length due to a 24" barrel), and also own a section 1 shotgun with a fixed stock and 24" barrel, and then swap stocks between them - violating the 40" minimum length for the section 1 gun.

The minimum length requirements of 24/40 relate to all shotguns on S2 also, regardless of mechanism/type. You can fit a pistol grip to any S2 or S1 semi/pump and it will still need to meet 24/40. The only exceptions to over all length on shotguns would be a S1 single barrel, SxS, O/U or lever gun. 12/24 applies with them.

What would be interesting is if there are any short-barreled rifles in the UK with fixed stocks but also pistol grips, and short barrels. If an AK for example (no buffer tube adding length), had a 12" barrel, no muzzle brake (or only the Soviet slant style) and a fixed stock it would only meet the 24" minimum if the stock is included - yet if the stock is removed you still have a halfway practical firearm due to the pistol grip. If such a gun is out there and approved by the Home Office then we know that ALL fixed stocks are included in measurements, not just those that incorporate a grip. If on the other hand this kind of configuration is not allowed, then I'd say my theory is right that fixed stocks inclusive of a grip are included in measurements, but stocks where the grip is separate are disregarded.

There were some Imbel FALs made to S1 and one of the models was called the Wasp. This had only a 13" barrel. Standard FAL pistol grip and standard FAL butt. If the stock is fixed it is counted in the OAL, regardless of pistol grip or not. If the stock is folding, the stock has to be folded (extended length disregarded) to get the weapon's OAL.

[Sandgroper]

No, Grant, Moore has it wrong. If what he was saying was correct, then actually, you could lose another inach and half off the barrel and still make 12/24. (I've just measured mine.) On top of which, he has delusions if he thinks the 16" barrel was chosen for UK considerations. It wasn't, it was because of the US market and their minimum 16" barrel on long guns.

He also wrote;

Also you cannot get round this by electing to stay with the fixed butt, as this part has to be removable to allow stripping.

What, just like my 10/22, then?

And, as you said, there are plently of other guns with folding/retractable/removeable stocks and the GSG is the only model that is subject to ths? Or, is Pete Moore the only gun writer that has eluded to this?

The 16 inch requirement makes sense for the US market.

To be perfectly honest regarding Pete Moore, it could have been his article reworded for a different magazine or other writers following on without checking the facts for the GSG-5. So it has sort of taken on a life of it's own and is now regarded as fact. :-P

It seems a quite a few people believe this of the GSG-5 as I've several for sale with sound moderators fixed in place, eg http://www.guntrader.co.uk/GunsForSale/110427103924001

Who knows?

[IainWR]

I think for this discussion we need to note S7 Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988 as amended:

(1)Any weapon which—

has at any time (whether before or after the passing of the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1997) been a weapon of a kind described in section 5(1) or (1A) of the principal Act (including any amendments to section 5(1) made under section 1(4) of this Act);

(b)is not a self-loading or pump-action smooth-bore gun which has at any such time been such a weapon by reason only of having had a barrel less than 24 inches in length,

shall be treated as a prohibited weapon notwithstanding anything done for the purpose of converting it into a weapon of a different kind.

This is the law that says that if it was ever S5 within the current definition thereof, it remains so regardless of what you do to it.

[phaedra1106]

Just had a look at my GSG-5 SD Titanium, it's marked for the US importers "American Tactical Imports", 16" barrel which goes to the end of the fake moderator, I have used the MP5PK version in the US which has no stock and about a 4-1/2" barrel, pity we'd not get away with that here