Anyone really, and I mean really, understand section 5 of the firearms act?

[MudSurfer]

Essentially, my sister has a post on Farcebook with her holding a gglock handgun, which is banned under the firearms act in the uk, except if you qualify for certain criteria. It seems her husband has on his license this and a .357 revolver, under the exception of using it to humanely dispatch livestock.

Ok, that is a classification, but they live in a housing estate in west Swindon, and do not own or manage livestock, at all.

Does anyone on here know if this exception still holds even if the holder of the license and handgun, are not directly employed in any association to the ownership, management or slaughter of livestock?

Cheers.

[shokenore]

As you mentioned I would suggest that the weapon(s) are held in contravention of the act.
I very much doubt that if questioned that the gun holder could prove that the weapon was held for legitimate livestock management, and also I was under the impression that for the "management" of livestock the weapon should be at the slaughter house and not in suburbia?


One would hope that the picture you mention is not of the weapon being handled in her back garden.

[12callum]

Unless he/she has permission from a local land owner to shoot the weapon in question then I would say no!

[pasty]

I highly doubt they're section 5, for humane dispatch you can own the likes of a 9mm but it will be restricted to a single round, the magazine cannot be loaded with more than one. This is used by the likes of vets etc for humane dispatch.

The revolver will be a black powder pistol, again section 1 not 5 and totally legal for target shooting.

I have firearms of all sorts, I dont own any land but have permission from land owners to shoot their land, demonstrate "good reason" for ownership and thats all you need to legally own such firearms.

You cant own these things in the uk without being properly vetted (at every stage) by the police, they have given permission for him to poses these firearms and will have the entire demonstration of "good reason" rather than a few guys on the net guessing at things.

I find it strange that you've asked a forum about this rather than ask the guy directly.

[MudSurfer]

The picture was taken in my parents kitchen, by my sister, whose husband I think, is the only one with a firearms license. So, that is being breached by her having the handgun in her possession.

The thread and photo have since been removed from Farcebook, and I did point out that even if it is used for hunting foxes and deer (that is his reason for the arsenal he possesses) that I don't understand how not only he can justify the ownership, transportation and subsequent use if a 9mm automatic tactical assault pistol for the final shot on a fox or deer, but also how the licensing body recognise this as acceptable circumstances under which to grant the exception of section 5.

It's really upset me also that he is such a tool to believe that this is a necessary thing to own, in a house where his 10 and 6 year old daughters can find very well hidden Christmas and birthday presents, so keys to the gun cabinet are no trouble, but that he is clearly misleading the police to obtain the exceptions. The (thankfully now removed) post also made it clear that my sister and some of her friends thought owning and showing off this gun was, and I quote 'sexy'.

I am not a prude, nor against the legitimate and correct ownership and use of firearms. Those of you who have met me will also know I'm not some sort of mamby pamby townie, and those who know where I live will also realise that I have a more legitimate reason and lifestyle for owning guns, but I don't own any, as I don't need any. I live on a farm, with livestock, we sometimes have vermin issues, geese all over the fishing lake, foxes in the chickens, but for the livestock we call the vet, for the rest, our 5 dogs see them off.

Glorifying gun ownership is just ridiculous (handguns more than rifles and shotguns) and putting up photos on Facebook and using expressions like sexy to describe them is outrageous. In the past two years, more people in the us were killed by their own guns, fired by their children than were killed in the middle eastern conflicts. I don't want to have to attend the funeral of my sister or either of my nieces, nor do I want to have to visit my sister in prison (I probably wouldn't bother going) but more realistically, I don't want to see my nieces grow up thinking having a handgun is sexy, and that it's ok to have one, then end up shot by SO19 as a precautionary measure because their parental role models made it ok to wave them around at home, so they assumed it would be ok to show off with them too.

Sorry for the rant, but this whole thing has really upset and angered me that my own sister can be so damn stupid. Her husband is a dick, and I've always thought that, so I'm happy for him to be arrested for anything connected with this, it will probably make my nieces lives better without his cretinous involvement and influence in their lives.

[MudSurfer]

I highly doubt they're section 5, for humane dispatch you can own the likes of a 9mm but it will be restricted to a single round, the magazine cannot be loaded with more than one. This is used by the likes of vets etc for humane dispatch.

The revolver will be a black powder pistol, again section 1 not 5 and totally legal for target shooting.

I have firearms of all sorts, I dont own any land but have permission from land owners to shoot their land, demonstrate "good reason" for ownership and thats all you need to legally own such firearms.

You cant own these things in the uk without being properly vetted (at every stage) by the police, they have given permission for him to poses these firearms and will have the entire demonstration of "good reason" rather than a few guys on the net guessing at things.

I find it strange that you've asked a forum about this rather than ask the guy directly.

I did ask him directly, I wanted to get a different view from others who may well have handguns Andre the terms of their license, for the simple reason that he is an idiot who doesn't think things through or make sure his facts are correct.

He may well have been vetted, but that doesn't fully explain how he has been given permission to have a 15 round capable automatic handgun for dispatching a mortally wounded fox or deer (his explanation). Why did I ask on here? Because I know there are a lot of members with firearms and they will know the law better than me.

So it's not a case of people guessing at things, Im not lacking in intelligence to make that level of naive assumption.

Clearly a lot of the blame lies with the permitting authorities too, if he has received the vetting he should have and still been allowed these handguns.

[shokenore]

I highly doubt they're section 5, for humane dispatch you can own the likes of a 9mm but it will be restricted to a single round, the magazine cannot be loaded with more than one. This is used by the likes of vets etc for humane dispatch.

The revolver will be a black powder pistol, again section 1 not 5 and totally legal for target shooting.

I have firearms of all sorts, I dont own any land but have permission from land owners to shoot their land, demonstrate "good reason" for ownership and thats all you need to legally own such firearms.

You cant own these things in the uk without being properly vetted (at every stage) by the police, they have given permission for him to poses these firearms and will have the entire demonstration of "good reason" rather than a few guys on the net guessing at things.

I find it strange that you've asked a forum about this rather than ask the guy directly.

A few guys guessing at things .
What a joke.
Pasty
I don't have to justify my qualifications to the likes of you, and as a point of fact I highly doubt I would discuss what and when I hunt and what weapons I own or don't own or indeed what weapon I last used, especially on a open unrelated forum.
The OP was asking a reasoned question, I knowing some of the situation and the opinion that it was for the OP to divulge any other information, which, he now has.
I for one would have great concern for any numpty, you included that takes gun ownership that lightly.
Handguns of that nature have a very limited legitimacy of ownership, especially under the conditions the OP has outlined.
And as this person of concern lives within gunshot, quite literally, to me and my close and extended family I think I have the right to comment on the question.

The OP was voicing his concerns on a unrelated forum, much as most of have do and will.
Do I find this unusual, no not at all.
Far better than to start a potential family conflict via FB, by asking for opinions here first.

My point however still stands I highly doubt the person in question can show legitimacy in his claim on those weapons for animal management,and that in a nutshell is the question.

[pasty]

A few guys guessing at things .
What a joke.
Pasty
I don't have to justify my qualifications to the likes of you, and as a point of fact I highly doubt I would discuss what and when I hunt and what weapons I own or don't own or indeed what weapon I last used, especially on a open unrelated forum.
The OP was asking a reasoned question, I knowing some of the situation and the opinion that it was for the OP to divulge any other information, which, he now has.
I for one would have great concern for any numpty, you included that takes gun ownership that lightly.
Handguns of that nature have a very limited legitimacy of ownership, especially under the conditions the OP has outlined.
And as this person of concern lives within gunshot, quite literally, to me and my close and extended family I think I have the right to comment on the question.

The OP was voicing his concerns on a unrelated forum, much as most of have do and will.
Do I find this unusual, no not at all.
Far better than to start a potential family conflict via FB, by asking for opinions here first.

My point however still stands I highly doubt the person in question can show legitimacy in his claim on those weapons for animal management,and that in a nutshell is the question.

wow...wtf did that come from?!....looks like I've touched a nerve, stand dont soldier no need to be rude and obnoxious.

I wont entertain attitude like that but for what its worth and of course you know this as you are "qualified" but I have the condition for humane dispatch on my certificate and if I so felt the need and reason could legally acquire both those hand guns.... as it stands I dont as all my humane dispatch is done with a shotgun.... I repeat the revolver will be black powder and under a differing condition allowing its use solely for target shooting.

You know theres shooting forums where many thousands of people talk openly about this stuff?.... of course you do, you're "qualified".

[shokenore]

wow...wtf did that come from?!....looks like I've touched a nerve, stand dont soldier no need to be rude and obnoxious.

I wont entertain attitude like that but for what its worth and of course you know this as you are "qualified" but I have the condition for humane dispatch on my certificate and if I so felt the need and reason could legally acquire both those hand guns.... as it stands I dont as all my humane dispatch is done with a shotgun.... I repeat the revolver will be black powder and under a differing condition allowing its use solely for target shooting.

You know theres shooting forums where many thousands of people talk openly about this stuff?.... of course you do, you're "qualified".

Glad to see that you have totally missed the point.

[pasty]

maybe if you'd put you point across with some social grace I wouldnt have been blinded by your rude obnoxious manner.

[MudSurfer]

Come on, that's not what this thread is for. Thanks pasty for pointing out that your certificate effectively entitles you to own the same handguns, but you have clearly been able to exercise good judgement when it comes to the ones you have chosen.

He, on the other hand, is a show off. My sister seems to be following his rather immature lead, so I'm as far as his certificate may well state he can own such weapons, there is no need for him to do so, as he can (and probably should) finish the job on the fox or deer with the same firearm he used to bring them down in the first place.

He doesn't deal with livestock, as he lives in grange park, Swindon, and goes on the odd shoot through the year.

Ade, mate I don't think he's close enough to you, thankfully.

The problem I have is that people are 'allowed' to buy these weapons, by saying stuff about humane slaughter of animals, but why do the bodies that allow this deem a Glock 9mm a suitable weapon for this.

Yes, there are loads of specialist forums for this, but I'm not a member of any of them.