The legality of 410 Folding shotguns

'Something shiny from the SHED' - A range of shooting and reloading accessories designed and built here in the UK.
Message
Author
User avatar
Sim G
Past Supporter
Posts: 10726
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 9:09 pm
Contact:

Re: The legality of 410 Folding shotguns

#11 Post by Sim G »

If presented as evidence, that evidence would be exhibited by a Forensic Science Laboratory with international accreditation.
In 1978 I was told by my grand dad that the secret to rifle accuracy is, a quality bullet, fired down a quality barrel..... How has that changed?

Guns dont kill people. Dads with pretty Daughters do...!
User avatar
Ovenpaa
Site Supporter Since 2015
Posts: 24680
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 8:27 pm
Location: Årbjerg, Morsø DK
Contact:

Re: The legality of 410 Folding shotguns

#12 Post by Ovenpaa »

I would hope the FEO/Licensing department would take a fairly pragmatic approach to shotgun barrel length, so if it was 1/16" under then so be it. Regardless of this, the law clearly states 24", not around 24" or 24" give or take a bit. I have a 1/4" diameter length of brass with a sliding stop that can be locked in place and graduations at 1/8th increments that I can use to measure true barrel length however I would never expect it to hold it up in a court of law.

As an aside, I spotted a single barrel shotgun in a gun shop a few years ago that was woefully short. Apparently they had sold it as a S2 and taken it back as a trade in a while later, oh how we laughed. Personally, if a shotgun came in with an obviously short barrel on a S2 I would do my best to get the owner to surrender it. If they refused, I would report it. Endof.
/d

Du lytter aldrig til de ord jeg siger. Du ser mig kun for det tøj jeg har paa ...

Shed Journal
Gazza
Posts: 2238
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 8:45 am

Re: The legality of 410 Folding shotguns

#13 Post by Gazza »

I just sold my Norica 410 bolt action back to the shop I bought it from. Glad this thread was after the sale :D
TRG-22
Posts: 365
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:41 pm
Home club or Range: Make me an offer.
Location: West London

Re: The legality of 410 Folding shotguns

#14 Post by TRG-22 »

It's something I've never thought about before, but the (apparent) lack of any tolerance is worrying, it's an aspect likely to p*** the courts off (judges don't like vagueness) and it flies in the face of physical reality.

If you went to a supplier of metal tubes, and placed an order for a number of 24" ones, you would find that you were in fact getting 24 ± something, you'd have to. I dare say that the smaller you wanted your ± the more you'd pay, and the harder it would be to find a supplier.

OK - a discrepancy of 0.38" is too much. You say that .0625" isn't, and its hard to see any reasonable person disagreeing, but laws shouldn't really rely on personal interpretation any more than they have to, and with measurements they don't have to. 24" could become, say, 23.9". If what people are doing is making guns with a nominal barrel length of 24" then having a limit of 23.9 does not simply move the problem 1/10 of an inch, it allows for a bit of tolerance. And for measurements being taken at different temperatures. No, a barrel (or a measuring stick) won't expand/contract a lot between -10°C and +40, but it will change a bit. Enough? The pedantry window is of unknown size.

Now I think about it, this is a generic problem affecting all laws/regulations which specify sizes, weights etc. The characters on your number plate have to be 79mm tall. Not 78.999? Not 79.1?
Tory voters. Next election. Stay at home. Protect the NHS. Save lives.
the running man
Posts: 1935
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 7:05 am
Contact:

Re: The legality of 410 Folding shotguns

#15 Post by the running man »

One could argue that all 10/22 owners are in breach of holding a section 5 weapon everytime they remove it from its stock, its still fireable, its loads less than the legal limit.....it would be a pretty mean court or cop who would prosecute you for a barrell length that was a quarter of an inch out.
Always judge a person by how they treat someone that is of no use to them......
User avatar
Blackstuff
Site Supporter Since 2015
Posts: 7709
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 1:01 pm
Contact:

Re: The legality of 410 Folding shotguns

#16 Post by Blackstuff »

Sim G wrote:Yet another reason to ditch the metric system completely....
Or we could just admit that its better to have a measuring system based on the number 10, when we have a counting system based on the number 10.... teanews green55 troutslapping lol
DVC
FredB
Site Supporter Since 2019
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 8:33 pm
Home club or Range: stourport
Location: Wolverhampton
Contact:

Re: The legality of 410 Folding shotguns

#17 Post by FredB »

The problem with the number 10, is that calculations always use powers of 10---that is, your answer may be ten to the power 6, 7, ---etc. Get this number wrong and you have an aborted space mission---it has happened.
There are 1760 yards in a mile. This number is not habitually used for anything else and hence is easy to remember correctly. Virtually all the imperial conversion factors are similar in that respect.
There are other more practical metric problems: the metric screw thread system is a bad one, Standard ISO metric threads are too coarse and a sloppy fit. Hence, a nut only needs to turn through a small angle to lose all preload and be effectively slack.
The imperial system evolved over a number of years through practical experience. The metric system was decided by drones in committee meetings, mostly with no experiece of the devices and systems that they were standardizing.
I used to design trucks. Many parts and systems in automotive engineering last longer than the market life of a vehicle in production. In the late 1970's, we had metric cabs sitting on imperial chassis fitted with metric engines coupled to imperial gearboxes. All brought about by the desire for standardization!
The USA got it right by refusing to change from an old, well proven system to a new, unproved and less user friendly replacement.
Fred
User avatar
dromia
Site Admin
Posts: 19964
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 4:57 am
Home club or Range: The Highlands of Scotland. Cycling Proficiency 1964. Felton & District rifle club. Teesdale Pistol and Rifle club.
Location: Sutherland and Co Durham
Contact:

Re: The legality of 410 Folding shotguns

#18 Post by dromia »

What can I say but to re-iterate:

Imperial good!

Metric bad!

Now repeat after me...
Image

Come on Bambi get some

Imperial Good Metric Bad
Analogue Good Digital Bad

Fecking stones

Real farmers don't need subsidies

Cow's farts matter!

For fine firearms and requisites visit

http://www.pukkabundhooks.com/
TRG-22
Posts: 365
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:41 pm
Home club or Range: Make me an offer.
Location: West London

Re: The legality of 410 Folding shotguns

#19 Post by TRG-22 »

FredB wrote:The problem with the number 10, is that calculations always use powers of 10---that is, your answer may be ten to the power 6, 7, ---etc. Get this number wrong and you have an aborted space mission---it has happened.
You see the thing about the number 10 is that that is the base of our numbering system, so of course when talking about very large, or very small numbers, we are going to have to use an exponent notation and express numbers in powers of 10. If we used a different base, e.g. 60, as used by the ancient Babylonians, we'd express numbers in powers of 60. Good luck with that.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the Imperial vs Metric "debate". If you disagree, please show why we would intrinsically write the average distance from the Sun to Mars as 143,000,000 miles and not 1.43E8.

There are 1760 yards in a mile. This number is not habitually used for anything else and hence is easy to remember correctly.
And there you have it. You have to know and remember that. If you misremember, any calculations you do where you convert yards to miles will be wrong.

OTOH, it's not possible to get the number of metres in a kilometer wrong unless you simply don't know the ISU prefixes.

Can you explain why having to remember how many yards there are in a mile, or how many ounces in a pound, is less likely to go wrong than knowing that kilo means 1000, so km, kg, kA, kV etc are 1000 metres, 1000 grams, 1000 amps, 1000 volts, etc?

There are other more practical metric problems: the metric screw thread system is a bad one, Standard ISO metric threads are too coarse and a sloppy fit.
Hmmm...

Image

(Obviously -7BA and -8BA don't exist, but if they did, those are the pitches they would have.)

The imperial system evolved over a number of years through practical experience. The metric system was decided by drones in committee meetings, mostly with no experiece of the devices and systems that they were standardizing.
Do you have any evidence to support that assertion?

Do you think that standardisation of screw threads is a good thing, or a bad thing? Would life be easier or harder if every engineering/manufacturing company in the world had their own screw threads, incompatible with everybody else's?

If we are to have standards, should they be developed and maintained, "owned" if you like, by private corporations or by standards bodies? Would life be easier or harder if every engineering/manufacturing company in the world had to make different versions of their products if they wanted to export them to other countries? Or if it were done the other way round would life be easier or harder if garages, say, had to stock dozens of different systems of screws, nuts, bolts, washers, spanners and so on in order to be able to maintain cars?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screw_thr ... ardization

I used to design trucks. Many parts and systems in automotive engineering last longer than the market life of a vehicle in production. In the late 1970's, we had metric cabs sitting on imperial chassis fitted with metric engines coupled to imperial gearboxes. All brought about by the desire for standardization!
Can you explain how it would be better if the threads on Iveco trucks were different from those on Ford, and both were different from Volvo, and all 3 were different from DAF, and all 4 were different from...?

In short, can you show why standardisation, per se, is a Bad Thing?

The USA got it right by refusing to change from an old, well proven system to a new, unproved and less user friendly replacement.
SAE? That was neither Imperial nor ISO.

A ½" United States Standard thread screw would have had a TPI of about 12.5, so somewhere between ½" BSW & ½" UNC.

UNC and UNF are of course US standards, and the former is coarser than BSF but finer than BSW, and the latter pretty much the same as one of the fine ISO Metric sizes.

Which ones are more, or less, user friendly than others? And why?

Unproven? ISO Metric is what, 60-70 years old? How long before it is proven?
Tory voters. Next election. Stay at home. Protect the NHS. Save lives.
TRG-22
Posts: 365
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:41 pm
Home club or Range: Make me an offer.
Location: West London

Re: The legality of 410 Folding shotguns

#20 Post by TRG-22 »

dromia wrote:What can I say but to re-iterate:

Imperial good!

Metric bad!
Why?

How many people know, without looking it up, how many tuffets there are in a comb?

How may people would have to look up how many ml there are in 10l?
Tory voters. Next election. Stay at home. Protect the NHS. Save lives.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests