section 58 converted to live fire and it's legality

[breacher]

So a dealer sells a sec 58 as a wall hanger the customer buys it with the express intention of shooting it,the dealer sells them all the reloading kit for it.....everything still in the realms of legal?

No, and RFDs won't knowingly make a sale here as to do so makes them an accessory to a criminal act, or at any rate the likely intention to commit one. In fact, most if not all RFDs won't sell a firearm to somebody they know already owns such a piece on-ticket. I met a Martini Cadet collector and shooter once who told me with considerable indignation that he had half a dozen of the blighters but would have had one more if the dealer concerned hadn't been 'unreasonable'. He'd handed over the cheque for the rifle and was just lifting it off the shop counter when he happened to mention that he owned several examples and shot two or three of them as 'on-ticket' rifles. As soon as the dealer heard that, the rifle was pulled back, the cheque returned and the buyer told he could reserve it if he wished to buy against a variation. I asked several other RFDs about this subsequently and they all said they'd do the same thing.

Owning an S58 off-ticket and having handloading tools and components to shoot it is taken as prima facie evidence of an intention to own and use it illegally and this has been validated in several prosecutions over the years - catching the owner in the act of off-ticket shooting / ammunition ownership isn't required.

Years back, there was a get-out in that owners of 'curios' were allowed to shoot them once 'for research' or some such reason. I don't know if there is still such a get out of jail card - given the general tightening up on firearms ownership and application of the law, I'd doubt it.

That is surprising !

Using that logic, possession of a shotgun and also possessing a hacksaw could be deemed intent to possess a sawn off shotgun !!

[Sim G]

Exactly Brian. How does the selling of a muzzle loading revolver, cased, with balls, powder flask, cap tins and moulds fit into this? It doesn't. It's poppycock.

The guidance does say that if a former s58 is owned on FAC with shooting condition and ammunition and other s58 firearms are owned that are the same calibre, best practice is also to put them on ticket so that the others could not be construed as s1.

"Evidence of an intention to use it illegally"? I'd be interested to se that case law! A quick trawl of a number of law books here on my shelf can't point to any such case. What on earth would the charge be? And to show that a s58 was being used as a s1 you would need either proof of use or ammunition, the restricted and/or controlled items. Just because the blokes on here all possess penises, that does not make them potential rapists...

The real problem here is that published advice is amalgamated with hearsay, conjecture and rumour then pumped out as the law. Well, read the legislation. Read the guidance of how the legislation should be interpreted, then tell me where reloading components and tools are ammunition.

[bnz41]

bnz41. Well done on getting the 310 cadet. Lovely rifles. When you bought it the dealer, who I know, was in the clear. The minute you bought the reloading items you were technically breaking the law as your intention was to shoot the rifle and you had the evidence of that intent on you. You should have waited until you had your variation before buying the items. This might sound a bit 'nit picking' but you would have been an easy target for any plod looking for an easy result.

Robert 303

I did not say what reloading items I bought, NO brass bullets were bought (so hard to shoot it without), I already have small rifle primers and powder for our on ticket unerlever Winchester 38/357 so how did I break the law?

What I did buy was a die set, 2 shell holders (one to cut down for my lee auto prime) very old bullet mold, and bullet lube, all these from two different dealers at the show and not the Cadet seller, and all reloading items/equipment.

One dealer did have brass and said I could buy it as long as I did not put a primer in it, empty brass is not ammo, we did not buy ran out of money as well.

Many thanks Simon.

[Robert303]

Yes I'd forgotten he'd mentioned the intention to shoot so agree he should have had a suitable FAC. If he did not say anything that indicarted his intention the dealer would be in the clear. I agree if he just had reloading components they would not be the offence but if he had .310 components such as dies, cases, bullets whilst they themselves are 'Innocent' they would provide evidence of intent to shoot and so make it easier for the prosecution over the unlicensed rifle. Sorry I was not clearer in the original post.

[FredB]

I bought a second 310 some years ago, having had one for 1 years on ticket. Following guidance, I sent in a variation to add the new one. The reaction was :why do you need a second one on your FAC? Do you intend to fire it?" I replied that I certainly wanted to shoot it as it was a Rook Rifle variant and this was accepted with the explanation for the query being that lots of collectors have one to shoot but never use the others and so they remain antiques /curios.
Fred

[Robert303]

I have 2 Cadet Rifles as well, one on FAC and one off as it's known not to shoot as well as the one that is on ticket. Lovely little rifles.