Page 2 of 4
Re: Incorrect info on .gov website
Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2023 10:58 pm
by Pete
We recently completed my partners' renewal application online......I got the feeling it was very much "beta" s/ware. It had facility for uploading a photo, credit card details, and scan of med form.
There was no mention of any requirement to attach "evidence of use" of firearm, instead, the name/title of a club "officer" who would confirm that you were an active club member, was required, plus details of two referees.
There was also a box inviting comments on the form itself. The biggest gripe was that once you started the form, you had to finish it in one go, or scrap it and start over.
No chance to read it through first.
Pete
Re: Incorrect info on .gov website
Posted: Sat Mar 18, 2023 1:38 pm
by Graham M
1066 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 17, 2023 1:08 pm
Also yesterday, had a little to and fro chat with with a chap saying it was a requirement to keep the bolt secured separately from the rifle. He couldn't really explain how that idea works with a semi-auto.
This has been a recommendation for a while now with Staff's and I keep my bolts in a small safe bolted to the top of my gun cabinet.
Pain in the arse when I first started to do it as I actually went shooting a couple of times and forgot the frikkin bolt.
Re: Incorrect info on .gov website
Posted: Sat Mar 18, 2023 7:49 pm
by 1066
Graham M wrote: ↑Sat Mar 18, 2023 1:38 pm
1066 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 17, 2023 1:08 pm
Also yesterday, had a little to and fro chat with with a chap saying it was a requirement to keep the bolt secured separately from the rifle. He couldn't really explain how that idea works with a semi-auto.
This has been a recommendation for a while now with Staff's and I keep my bolts in a small safe bolted to the top of my gun cabinet.
Pain in the arse when I first started to do it as I actually went shooting a couple of times and forgot the frikkin bolt.
It always start with a recommendation, it meets no opposition, it spreads, it's talked about as if it is the law, and very soon it's condition on your certificate, and so it goes on. Yes, of course it's sensible, and being responsible owners, I'm sure we all do. However, I'm sure there a bolt action rifles where the bolt doesn't just slip out. My Anschutz I need to remove the cheek rest to remove the bolt. My Voere can be used as a semi-auto or a bolt action but the bolt can't be removed with dismantling half the rifle.
I often hear tales like "My FEO says I must log all my hand loaded ammunition" or "I must keep all my old primers to prove I'm using my rifle" or " I must ring the police before I go shooting on private land"
With each police force interpreting the guidance as they see fit and our associations no help what so ever - is it any wonder shooting as a sport is on it's knees.
Re: Incorrect info on .gov website
Posted: Sat Mar 18, 2023 8:45 pm
by PeterN
I used to keep my bolts separate, but as numbers built up it was a pain to sort through a pile of bolts to find the right one. It is easy to get mixed up when bolts are similar such as several Enfield or Mauser bolts. Murphy's law says that one day you will be in a hurry and put the wrong bolt in a rifle. Also, the Berthier bolts have to be part dismantled to get them out of the rifle. So, I now keep the bolts in the rifles. It has never been mentioned at renewals and I feel it is safer for me to keep the bolt in the rifle.
Regards
Peter.
Re: Incorrect info on .gov website
Posted: Sat Mar 18, 2023 8:45 pm
by Graham M
I didn't do it because they said so, I did it because it saves marking the rifles next to each other as I put the rifles in and out of the cabinet.
Leaving the bolt out makes it easier to put the guns away without the bolts banging into the gun next to it.
Re: Incorrect info on .gov website
Posted: Sat Mar 18, 2023 8:54 pm
by Graham M
Bought two of these. One for rimfire and one for centrefire. The ones I bought were from Tourbon and hold four bolts each.
- Bolt case.jpg (35.83 KiB) Viewed 1471 times
Re: Incorrect info on .gov website
Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2023 1:00 pm
by Dark Skies
Whatever is currently 'interpreted' as best practise wherever you are in the UK is likely to change soon, if this is anything to go by for the coming climate:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... h-shooting
The Tories have nothing of merit to offer the electorate in their forlorn hope of winning the next general election. So they'll be keen to distract the public with scare mongering over boat people and being tough on firearm crime, by targetting legal firearm owners. They'll be pleased to attract the usual racists, the gullible, and the hard of thinking to scrawl their X on a Tory candidate.
Re: Incorrect info on .gov website
Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2023 2:09 pm
by 1066
1066 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 18, 2023 7:49 pm
Graham M wrote: ↑Sat Mar 18, 2023 1:38 pm
1066 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 17, 2023 1:08 pm
Also yesterday, had a little to and fro chat with with a chap saying it was a requirement to keep the bolt secured separately from the rifle. He couldn't really explain how that idea works with a semi-auto.
This has been a recommendation for a while now with Staff's and I keep my bolts in a small safe bolted to the top of my gun cabinet.
Pain in the arse when I first started to do it as I actually went shooting a couple of times and forgot the frikkin bolt.
It always start with a recommendation, it meets no opposition, it spreads, it's talked about as if it is the law, and very soon it's condition on your certificate, and so it goes on. Yes, of course it's sensible, and being responsible owners, I'm sure we all do. However, I'm sure there a bolt action rifles where the bolt doesn't just slip out. My Anschutz I need to remove the cheek rest to remove the bolt. My Voere can be used as a semi-auto or a bolt action but the bolt can't be removed with dismantling half the rifle.
I often hear tales like "My FEO says I must log all my hand loaded ammunition" or "I must keep all my old primers to prove I'm using my rifle" or " I must ring the police before I go shooting on private land"
With each police force interpreting the guidance as they see fit and our associations no help what so ever - is it any wonder shooting as a sport is on it's knees.
Another one to day - Some chap arguing that a primed case is counted as loaded ammunition and must be counted in your total permitted possessed.
Re: Incorrect info on .gov website
Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2023 8:52 am
by Blackstuff
1066 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 20, 2023 2:09 pm
Another one to day - Some chap arguing that a primed case is counted as loaded ammunition and must be counted in your total permitted possessed.
I've heard that one a few times. The only place I could find anything near that was in the postal/courier information where they treat a primed case as the same as a full round for the purposes of their carriage policy.
Re: Incorrect info on .gov website
Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2023 12:36 am
by The Event
1066 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 20, 2023 2:09 pm
Another one to day - Some chap arguing that a primed case is counted as loaded ammunition and must be counted in your total permitted possessed.
If I remember correctly, that particular quirk comes from a case a long time ago when someone was convicted for carrying a loaded revolver in public. The gun was loaded with primed cases.