Dummy launcher legality

[ovenpaa]

Is anyone aware of any laws or restrictions on the use of dummy launchers for dog training?

[saddler]

Nope....been around for decades

[Mattnall]

They aren't usually barrelled so they are not caught by the Firearms Act, AFAIK.

[Ian]

My first FAC (more years ago that I wish to recount) was a free issue for a set of Miniflares in which the flare screwed INTO the hand held projector, thus held to be a barrel.

These days Miniflares have the flare screw on OUTSIDE the projector, thus no barrel and no FAC needed.

The same reasoning applies to the dummy launchers.

[breacher]

A barrel by itself is not the issue.

It is whether it is "lethal" that defines it as a firearm.

I would say that it is not a firearm as even if it has a barrel, it is not designed to be lethal.

[Sim G]

Ah, but Brian, cast your mind back me old mucka to case law surrounding Offences Against the Person Act 1861. "Lethal" is regarded as not being able to cause death, but being capable of causing harm and is determined by a court....

"Lethality is a complex issue and although case law exists (Moore v Gooderham [1960] 3 All E.R. 575), only a court can decide whether any particular weapon is capable of causing "more than trifling and trivial" injury and is therefore is a "firearm" for the purposes of the Acts. The Forensic Science Provider (FSP) will be able to advise in any case where "lethality" is likely to be an issue. See also: R v Thorpe 85 Cr. App. R 107 CA."

[Mattnall]

A barrel by itself is not the issue.

It is whether it is "lethal" that defines it as a firearm.

I would say that it is not a firearm as even if it has a barrel, it is not designed to be lethal.

I think this applies;

57 Interpretation.

(1)In this Act, the expression “firearm” means a lethal barrelled weapon of any description

This has been used to argue signal flares are not firearms, IIRC

[Laurie]

This is the sort of issue that the Law Commission review of the firearms acts is picking up on. It (correctly) says that the various acts are full of terms such as 'lethal' but without any definition of their exact meaning, and so open to all sorts of (mis)interpretation by firearms users, traders, and law enforcers / courts.

Exact legal definitions aside, one has to be careful about public perceptions. A shooting acquaintance took his dog out one day and for a bit of fun rather than serious training took an old blank-firing Webley can launcher with him on a walk outside of his village and had the dog fetch a drinks can back a few times. The next thing that happened was a police chopper buzzing him - the launcher went under his jacket; he pretended to drink fom the can and was just another dog-walker, the police eventually leaving after searching the area. It turned out that a local resident was virulently anti-shooting and rang the police every time she saw anybody anywhere locally with a shotgun or suchlike including the farmer who owned the land.

[ovenpaa]

A can launcher is the sort of thing I am looking for and I have a tin of black powder .22 rimfire blanks on the shelf.

[Laurie]

Dave,

here's a 2012 Bill Harriman answer to the legal question if you've not already seen it.

http://www.shootinguk.co.uk/answers/do- ... cher-23944