The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

As this was done over the phone, and you could be anyone on the phone, the shop was probably covering their own back from suspicious callers.

If you were there with an FAC in hand, I'm sure there'd be no problem.

Since you/your father offered that you were going to use it for nitro conversion, you'd probably need to show an FAC regardless.

Would it not come down to the intent, rather than the item.

If you intended to use them for shotgun, they'd be exempt, however if you show intent to use them on section 1, then you'd need to show proof of permission.

If I were an RFD, I'd do it as par for course to make sure I wasn't supplying something I shouldnt.

TattooedGun wrote:As this was done over the phone, and you could be anyone on the phone, the shop was probably covering their own back from suspicious callers.

If you were there with an FAC in hand, I'm sure there'd be no problem.

Since you/your father offered that you were going to use it for nitro conversion, you'd probably need to show an FAC regardless.

Would it not come down to the intent, rather than the item.

If you intended to use them for shotgun, they'd be exempt, however if you show intent to use them on section 1, then you'd need to show proof of permission.

If I were an RFD, I'd do it as par for course to make sure I wasn't supplying something I shouldnt.

Right....so what about my need for Large Pistol primers for CBC Magtech 12-ga cases?

You're showing the intent to use it for Shotgun.

Common sense should prevail at some point.

Common sense & (most) RFD's = oxymoron

TattooedGun wrote:As this was done over the phone, and you could be anyone on the phone, the shop was probably covering their own back from suspicious callers.

If you were there with an FAC in hand, I'm sure there'd be no problem.

Since you/your father offered that you were going to use it for nitro conversion, you'd probably need to show an FAC regardless.

Would it not come down to the intent, rather than the item.

If you intended to use them for shotgun, they'd be exempt, however if you show intent to use them on section 1, then you'd need to show proof of permission.

If I were an RFD, I'd do it as par for course to make sure I wasn't supplying something I shouldnt.

We've actually dealt we the RFD in question multiple times, so they knew it was us and know we have FAC's. I guess we'll be clearing it up on the day. Sadly like Saddler said..... Common sense and some RFD's, don't often mix.

I had this problem a few years ago when I was trying to buy some Large pistol primers to reload a batch of blanks made from CBC 24 gauge brass converted to 577-450 Martini Henry. The Shop assistant at the RFD refused the sale because after checking through all 19 of my FAC entries he saw I did not possess a "large pistol calibre". I left empty handed and took an hour detour to another dealers where I had no problem. I emailed my Firearms department after and they were as confused as I was and they reassured me that I had all the correct paperwork to purchase any kind of reloading primer I needed. A lot of time people know there is a law but not knowing any details about it. It seems these days to get anything done in shooting you have to be a Barrack Room Lawyer with immediate access to Real Lawyers.

450 Martini wrote:I had this problem a few years ago when I was trying to buy some Large pistol primers to reload a batch of blanks made from CBC 24 gauge brass converted to 577-450 Martini Henry. The Shop assistant at the RFD refused the sale because after checking through all 19 of my FAC entries he saw I did not possess a "large pistol calibre". I left empty handed and took an hour detour to another dealers where I had no problem. I emailed my Firearms department after and they were as confused as I was and they reassured me that I had all the correct paperwork to purchase any kind of reloading primer I needed. A lot of time people know there is a law but not knowing any details about it. It seems these days to get anything done in shooting you have to be a Barrack Room Lawyer with immediate access to Real Lawyers.

The trouble is, if it's a murky area, either in law or in your knowledge, is it worth losing your livelihood to risk selling something to someone who *may* have good reason as opposed to someone whose paperwork takes out any doubt. :(

I'm glad it's not me making the call. As annoying as it is to you, I'm sure you can see their dilemma, especially if it's an assistant as opposed to the main RFD themselves.

HOW is it a "MURKY AREA"?

Not following HOW/WHERE there is a "murky area"? The LAW is clear on the legality of what is needed to purchase "Item X", but sadly that needs ALL parties to have a working knowledge of the law.
Shop staff (owner or employee/assistant) that FAIL to know the laws around what they are trading in, are a hazard both to the trade in general & their business in particular.

If the DILEMMA is taking the path of least resistance by not bothering to ENSURE that they KNOW the LAW & merely operating on a jungle-drums-urban-whispers level of knowledge, then the dilemma is one of their own making & they should seek another line of work: it'd be one thing acting that way if they were selling shoes or BigMacs, another altogether when the products they are in charge of have such implications to cause mayhem in the wrong hands...if someone is so "not bothered" then it is only a matter of time before they make a major mistake...

Sadly - such ignorance is not just restricted to RFDs.
Quite a lot of recent cases come to mind of errant FLO & FEO staff not doing their job, properly for whatever reason

saddler wrote:HOW is it a "MURKY AREA"?

Not following HOW/WHERE there is a "murky area"? The LAW is clear on the legality of what is needed to purchase "Item X", but sadly that needs ALL parties to have a working knowledge of the law.
Shop staff (owner or employee/assistant) that FAIL to know the laws around what they are trading in, are a hazard both to the trade in general & their business in particular.

If the DILEMMA is taking the path of least resistance by not bothering to ENSURE that they KNOW the LAW & merely operating on a jungle-drums-urban-whispers level of knowledge, then the dilemma is one of their own making & they should seek another line of work: it'd be one thing acting that way if they were selling shoes or BigMacs, another altogether when the products they are in charge of have such implications to cause mayhem in the wrong hands...if someone is so "not bothered" then it is only a matter of time before they make a major mistake...

Sadly - such ignorance is not just restricted to RFDs.
Quite a lot of recent cases come to mind of errant FLO & FEO staff not doing their job, properly for whatever reason

As I said, if it's a murky area in the knowledge of the person behind the counter, then it's acceptible to think that they will err on the side of caution and refuse the sale (Which any retailer is at liberty to do with any sale).

I see what you're saying, but if they are erring on the side of caution and refusing sale of course it's annoying as a customer who understands the law, but it's understandable.

All staff can't be perfect straight away and know all the laws instantly and I wouldn't expect them to take the word of "man on the street". It may require some background knowledge or further reading. It might also be the first time they've been in this position and not had reason to investigate that part of legislature previously.

You cant expect average Joe to learn off by heart the legislation and amendments to everything to do with firearms and their components overnight.

Sometimes I think some people on here have unreasonable expectations of service.