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

Perhaps the RFD should sell ammunition vouchers which the customer can use to buy ammunition?
So 10 people each buy enough vouchers to pay for 5K rounds of 7.62x54 or whatever & the dealer then goes out & buys 50K rounds which the customers can purchase over time using the vouchers.

The Event wrote:Perhaps the RFD should sell ammunition vouchers which the customer can use to buy ammunition?
So 10 people each buy enough vouchers to pay for 5K rounds of 7.62x54 or whatever & the dealer then goes out & buys 50K rounds which the customers can purchase over time using the vouchers.

Vouchers ( like gift vouchers ) would certainly be more plausible than any of the other ideas so far and would look better than sudden "deposits" clapclap

Can someone show me a pic of 50K of military ammunition to see what storage space is required?

Redcat

redcat wrote:Can someone show me a pic of 50K of military ammunition to see what storage space is required?

Redcat

If I recall rightly, from when I worked for a Section 5 dealer, load bearing capacity was also a consideration ( apart from having enough room ) when he built his armoury.

An example would be .308 / 7.62 packed in 400rds per standard nato can. That would be 125 cans. Which would fit on a pallet. I remember milsurp stacked in layers of cans on wooden pallets about 5 layers high which would be about 50,000 I guess.

I think weight is marked on the cans if anybody has one to hand ?

breacher wrote:
Edit - if I was a keen prosecution barrister I would say you do have access above your limits because you can pop in to the RFD and take away a number of rounds putting you above your limit as the RFD does not know how many you have left at home from last collection.

by that arguement, we could all be prosecuted for having access over our limits, as any one of us could go into a RFD and buy ammo up to our allowance as the RFD does not know how much we have at home. IE if I have 700 limit, and have 500 at home from a purchase 5 months ago, I can still buy another 500 from the RFD. I don't because I know that is illegal but I would have the ACCESS to be able to do so.

breacher wrote:

redcat wrote:Can someone show me a pic of 50K of military ammunition to see what storage space is required?

Redcat

If I recall rightly, from when I worked for a Section 5 dealer, load bearing capacity was also a consideration ( apart from having enough room ) when he built his armoury.

An example would be .308 / 7.62 packed in 400rds per standard nato can. That would be 125 cans. Which would fit on a pallet. I remember milsurp stacked in layers of cans on wooden pallets about 5 layers high which would be about 50,000 I guess.

I think weight is marked on the cans if anybody has one to hand ?

As mentioned before, I seem to remember 25k rounds (mixed) was around 800kgs which was a lot to move around without a pallet truck.

bradaz11 wrote:

breacher wrote:
Edit - if I was a keen prosecution barrister I would say you do have access above your limits because you can pop in to the RFD and take away a number of rounds putting you above your limit as the RFD does not know how many you have left at home from last collection.

by that arguement, we could all be prosecuted for having access over our limits, as any one of us could go into a RFD and buy ammo up to our allowance as the RFD does not know how much we have at home. IE if I have 700 limit, and have 500 at home from a purchase 5 months ago, I can still buy another 500 from the RFD. I don't because I know that is illegal but I would have the ACCESS to be able to do so.

Yes - we have access. Its not illegal to have access to the amount stipulated on your fac.

Froggy was saying his idea was legal as long as he did not have access to that larger amount of ammo. Again, access is another word with various definitions.

Basically the legislation was drawn up to prevent us buying more than a certain amount. And some want to buy more than that limit albeit take delivery in portions.

And the intention of the legislation is just what a Judge will be looking at if the matter ever went to court.

The 50K rounds figure came up because it is the maximum that would fit onto a palet . The unit transport cost is calculate per palet, but nothing prevents you to fit only 10,000 rounds onto it but it means the transport cost as much as for 50K.

breacher wrote:

bradaz11 wrote:

breacher wrote:
Edit - if I was a keen prosecution barrister I would say you do have access above your limits because you can pop in to the RFD and take away a number of rounds putting you above your limit as the RFD does not know how many you have left at home from last collection.

by that arguement, we could all be prosecuted for having access over our limits, as any one of us could go into a RFD and buy ammo up to our allowance as the RFD does not know how much we have at home. IE if I have 700 limit, and have 500 at home from a purchase 5 months ago, I can still buy another 500 from the RFD. I don't because I know that is illegal but I would have the ACCESS to be able to do so.

Yes - we have access. Its not illegal to have access to the amount stipulated on your fac.

Froggy was saying his idea was legal as long as he did not have access to that larger amount of ammo. Again, access is another word with various definitions.

Basically the legislation was drawn up to prevent us buying more than a certain amount. And some want to buy more than that limit albeit take delivery in portions.

And the intention of the legislation is just what a Judge will be looking at if the matter ever went to court.

by the argument you had in the first quote, its illegal to have access above your limit, we all have access ABOVE our limits, we just haven't bought it.

But the fact remains that you are using fancy terms like "depositing" in order to avoid the "purchase" word.
NoI do not. As it happens the 2 words have a different meaning.

Basically the legislation was drawn up to prevent us buying more than a certain amount.
Again , you are miss-guided. the legislation is designed to prevent us from having immediat access above a certain amount.

As I suggested, discuss it, as I did, with a lawer, police or a judge and see for yourself, cos my or your understanding or miss-understanding (...) is quite irrelevant and pure time wasting . It is those guys' opinion that is important, yours is not.