Shooting saga


that is what i thought :+1:


Legally-speaking, they can be re-activated (because they don’t meet de-activation standards).

Practically, anyone capable of making a new barrel (which they would need) is probably capable of building a whole new rifle anyway.


Deactivation standards change all the time, again mostly due to the EU.

What is really amusing is how it is far easier to buy a deactivated rifle than a replica one.


I’m not convinced that they ever did meet the standards though


Barrels don’t necessarily have to be rifled - a man called Philip Luty tried to show that banning types of firearms was a pointless exercise, as they could be made relatively easily - see 5:15 onwards in the clip.

Plans are open-source on the internet - with a bit a metal-working skill, it wouldn’t be hard to make one.

Firing demonstration of such a type by Perth Police, Australia.

However, making a rifled (short) barrel, with some basic tools & a rifling button = perfectly feasible. A variety of YouTube clips are out there, with some clever refinements.


It’s not the rifling that’s the problem.

Making a .22LR or pistol-calibre barrel would be pretty easy. Making something that can withstand the chamber pressures of a 5.56mm NATO round is a very different challenge indeed!


No they didn’t as they have gas parts in them.


Not the hardest engineering challenge, the Luty SMG design used simple collets to reinforce the barrel; that probably wouldn’t be sufficient for 5.56mm,

Plus of course there are various 3D printing designs available for smaller calibre stuff (not just in plastic either). Buy a home-made Browning .45 " pistol copy (good quality!) for US$115!!

Wouldn’t like to try & copy this - .905" rifle - 2400 gr bullet (sniper accuracy .308" = 155 gr!)!!


If you were in the market for a firearm your first thought wouldn’t be I’ll break into a cadet hut. It shows how little “defence chiefs” understand the real world.
Anyone know of cadet huts being broken into with firearms being nicked or they’ve tried to nick them?


Ask the ACF


I was going to do SAAI next year…probably wont bother now. Acceasing weapons and keeping current will be a nightmare


More weekends given up or worse days in the week.


I presume we are talking here, withdrawal of equipment purchased and owned by the Civilian Committee being removed from squadron storage.

Was there any consultation about this, and what about Civcom being able to access the new storage as part of an inventory check.

What about insurance, and what about risk in transporting weapons between shoots and storage.

And does it mean that whilst in RAF care, they and relevant personnel need to be compliant with RAF Rs&Rs, even though the MOD or RAF do not own the kit?

When you consider the lesser number of RAF Stations, and the only other secure sites being TA centres and Barracks, it does point to another potential reduction in activities. Maybe the ACMB has a plan!


It’s annoying they haven’t given units the option to find other secure storage, plenty of TA Centres have the facilities and depending on relationships might have been willing to take custody.


So, the Civcom is operating under S11(4) of the Firearms Act? I don’t think so.

The authority to acquire is explained in the Home Office Guidance on Firearms Law 18.39. Civcom cannot acquire under this regulation so would be limited to S11(4) which would raise many issues.



excuse the ignorance, but what about Local Purchases Weapons? (LPWs)

These can be purchased by the CivCom for the Squadron…no?


Perhaps they provide the money, but the civcom, as an entity, has no entitlement to hold firearms. I guess they would be considered to have donated them to the squadron proper, who hold them in accordance with the legal entitlement given to cadet forces personnel on duty.

It demonstrates the farce of trying to separate the operational squadron from the committee side in any practical way.


but does that then grey any lines between ownership and purchaser??

Squadron purchased, with Squadron funds but always owned by the MOD??


It is almost like nobody has thought it all through!


I would suspect this is something that is a bit of a blessing in disguise really.

If they really wanted to, they could quite easily say that Sqn owned arms/ammunition can no longer be held in your arms chest from X date. Its now your problem to find somewhere safe to put them until further notice.