Dummy launcher legality

[ovenpaa]

Crikey 1066, I was hoping to find something a bit cheaper that I can use my Black powder blanks with, work with the dog and generally make a bit of noise and some smoke. Thanks for the link all the same.

[1066]

They do come up now and again - I saw one at a boot fair about a year ago for a fiver so just keep your eyes open.

Here's one that didn't sell for £25

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Webley-Scott- ... 7675.l2557

[Maggot]

I don't know why this has become a pi$$ing contest, but that's not what was intended. The subject of lethality came about because you said that a dummy launcher was not designed to be lethal. That is not disputed to a degree. But, I brought up that the proof of lethality lies with a court, dependant on the circs. That was it. I have shown that is both CPS guidance and legal opinion, at the moment. (The Law Commission have suggested a stipulated level of "lethal" should be legislated for, as low as 1.5ft/lbs!)

I will opine, discharge maliciously, a can launcher into someone's face, "firearm" and "lethality" will be high on the legal argument agenda.

As for the example of sub 12ft/lbs air weapons, they are already exempted from firearms legislation based on ME so the simple possession of would not require jury clarification on "lethal". Air weapons can be regarded as firearms for certain aspects of the law in relation to cause fear of violence, resist arrest, commit an indictable offence, etc. But due to their already exemption as a lethal barrelled weapon, no "lethality test" would be required only whether the actual harm caused was commensurate with s47, 20 or 18.

And CPS will run on a 51/49 chance of conviction....

Not a p*** comp - just friendly debate.

The op was regarding possession. And my opinions are based on same.

Any article used intentionally or recklessley to injure, will of course be treated differently to mere possession.

A water pistol is not a weapon. Ammonia is not a weapon. You can possess both. A water pistol filled with ammonia and sprayed in the face of a cash in transit guard before you snatch his cash box ?

Back to the op. A device to launch dummy birds for training, possessed without malign intention is not a weapon and is not lethal. To say otherwise is paranoia and to speak like some of those silly FEOs we criticise for taking letter of the law to silly extremes.

A "barrel" has not been defined neither. Should we start worrying whether tubular parts of innocent items we possess, could be defined as "barrelled" ?

Should those tennis training ( aarrrggghhh some are even semi automatic with huge magazines and high rate of fire ) be regarded as lethal barrelled until a court case decides ?

Despite what some would have us believe, common sense DOES trump poorly worded legislation more often than not.

Bugger...I have had an old mini flare launcher kicking about in my tool box since they stopped being orange and went black.....

Cant see how its a barrel. The flare yes as you could put a .22 rimfire into the flare case (dont suppose it would stay in one piece though) then screw this into the launcher and hurt someone/yourself....although we generally used them for their intended purpose of launching flares/setting fire to ranges/corn fields/terrifying cobra pilots on Exercise Lionheart

Now a zip gun on the other hand....

Anyhooo...this is all irrelavent. Ovenglove wont be launching any dummies any time soon.....I live to far away from Lincs

Happy weekend all.