The Crackdown Begins: EU Strengthens Control Of "Legal" Firearms After Paris Attacks

a reply to: EvillerBob

so your telling me that you can buy a M4 and ammunition, and keep them at home in the UK.
you do realize that a real M4 is in the same class of weapons that Michael Robert Ryan used, just a smaller caliber.

i find it hard to believe that the resulting gun confiscation that started in overdrive after that massacre would allow for such a loop hole.
now i've read and been told in threads by members and in publications that you can own them, but they have to kept at a range or gun club.

now if you can own a .22 and keep them at home,and the ones woogleuk are talking about are built on the AR/M4 platform that might might sense

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: EvillerBob

so your telling me that you can buy a M4 and ammunition, and keep them at home in the UK.
you do realize that a real M4 is in the same class of weapons that Michael Robert Ryan used, just a smaller caliber.

i find it hard to believe that the resulting gun confiscation that started in overdrive after that massacre would allow for such a loop hole.
now i've read and been told in threads by members and in publications that you can own them, but they have to kept at a range or gun club.

now if you can own a .22 and keep them at home,and the ones woogleuk are talking about are built on the AR/M4 platform that might might sense

No, that's not what I said. Well, in a way, I can see how you reached that conclusion. Perhaps I should have been clearer.

I see that you're in the US so I'm going to guess that you don't need most of the additional info below. I'm adding it because there's probably several UK readers who might find it helps to clarify what is meant. Apologies if it comes across like I'm trying to teach you to suck eggs, that bit isn't aimed at you!

The AR15 (the M4 is just the US military designation for a select-fire AR15 with a short barrel, or AR15 carbine if you prefer) works by diverting gas from the barrel through a small hole (the gas port) and along a tube (the gas tube) back towards the bolt, causing it to rotate (which unlocks it) and cycle. If an AR15 style rifle is manufactured without a gas port drilled in the barrel, then it is not capable of operating as a semi-automatic. By not having a gas port or tube, this makes it a single shot rifle that means it has to be manually cycled between each shot. These are UK legal.

You can also get a .22RF conversion bolt, which takes a few seconds to swap out for the normal bolt. The .22RF systems are simple blowback (the bolt doesn't lock into place like the normal bolt, so when the round goes off, it pushes directly back on the bolt to make it cycle) so the lack of gas port/gas tube is irrelevant. In other words, the .22RF conversion bolt allows the single shot AR15 to work as a semi-automatic .22RF. These are UK legal.

As with almost all firearms and ammunition in the UK, they are kept at home. Part of the licensing system includes a physical inspection by the police to confirm that suitable and secure storage has been installed by the applicant. There are certain categories of firearms (mostly a small set of "traditional" handguns that meet very specific criteria for civilian ownership) that cannot be stored at home to the best of my knowledge, but it really is the exception not the rule.

This is all entirely UK legal. It's not a loophole. "Loophole" suggests that it was a mistake or oversight. It's not a mistake, it's exactly how the law was intended to operate. Single shot rifles in any calibre up to and including .50cal are section 1 firearms and can be legally owned.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "same class of weapon as Michael Ryan". That's a bit like saying that a monster truck is the same class of vehicle as a Tesla Roadster. The "real M4" (remember, the M4 is a specific version of the AR15, though many people incorrectly use the term to refer to all AR15 carbines) is a select-fire weapon, which civilians haven't been able to own since the 30's, so nothing that was owned by Ryan is a direct equivalent. If I recall correctly, he had an AK-47 clone and M1 Garand?

Incidentally, you can still legally own centrefire AK47- and M1 Garand-style firearms, but they are built in a way to limit them to straight pull (ie, manually cycle between each shot) rifles.

Edited to add: Also, you mentioned that the .22 rifles referenced by a previous poster were probably dedicated .22 rifles built on the AR platform. Off the shelf I'd certainly agree with you, but I would say that the majority of AR15s in the UK are actually .223/5.56. Having a dedicated second .22RF-only rifle built on the platform is certainly more common than using a conversion bolt, I just prefer having less bags to carry to the range. And I'm a sucker for gadgets.

a reply to: EvillerBob

i was in the Marine Corps, and have several rifles and know a little about them, more than you would think.

the M4/M16 is chamberd for NATO 5.56x45, the AR15 (civilian version ) chambered for .223. they are different

here this will help.

The Chambers
The significant difference between the .223 Rem and 5.56 NATO lies in the rifles, rather than the cartridges themselves. Both the .223 and 5.56 rounds will chamber in rifles designed for either cartridge, but the critical component, leade, will be different in each rifle.
The leade is the area of the barrel in front of the chamber prior to where the rifling begins. This is where the loaded bullet is located when a cartridge is chambered. The leade is frequently called the “throat.”
On a .223 Remington spec rifle, the leade will be 0.085”. This is the standard described by the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute, Inc. (SAAMI). The leade in a 5.56 NATO spec rifle is 0.162”, or almost double the leade of the .223 rifle.
A shorter leade in a SAAMI spec rifle creates a situation where the bullet in a 5.56 NATO round, when chambered, can contact the rifling prior to being fired. By having contact with the rifling prematurely (at the moment of firing), chamber pressure can be dramatically increased, creating the danger of a ruptured case or other cartridge/gun failure.
The reverse situation, a .223 Rem round in a 5.56 NATO gun, isn’t dangerous. The leade is longer, so a slight loss in velocity and accuracy may be experienced, but there is not a danger of increased pressures and subsequent catastrophic failure.
How serious is the danger of firing 5.56 ammo in .223 guns? Dangerous enough that the SAAMI lists 5.56 military ammo as being not for use in .223 firearms in the technical data sheet titled “Unsafe Firearm-Ammunition Combinations.”
.223 Remington vs. 5.56 NATO: What You Don’t Know Could Hurt You

A real M4/M16 is a assualt weapon, a Civilain verson AR15/M4 is just a semi automatic rifle that looks like it. just as the the AK that Michael Ryan used was a semi automatic just because it looks like a assault weapon it is not. although the semiautomatic AK fires the same round i have heard it said that they don't use the same pistons and buffer springs, and that the bolt doesn't have the bump on it to trip the sear, or the third whole for the sear in the receiver. i've never had a full automatic AK torn down in front of me along side a a semiauto so i couldn't say. i have also heard it said that the are the same except for the third whole in the receiver.

a 22lr built on a AR platform functions just like a AR15, meaning one squeeze of the trigger fires the round and starts the ejection and chambering a round cycle, then another squeeze repeats the process.

a single shot weapon is not the same as the above, no matter what they are chambered for or look like. you just have single shot 5.56,7.62,.22,.223,or just shy of a 308

and what i meant about class is semiauto, which if i understand is illegal to own in the UK

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: EvillerBob

i was in the Marine Corps, and have several rifles and know a little about them, more than you would think.

the M4/M16 is chamberd for NATO 5.56x45, the AR15 (civilian version ) chambered for .223. they are different

...

A real M4/M16 is a assualt weapon, a Civilain verson AR15/M4 is just a semi automatic rifle that looks like it. just as the the AK that Michael Ryan used was a semi automatic just because it looks like a assault weapon it is not. although the semiautomatic AK fires the same round i have heard it said that they don't use the same pistons and buffer springs, and that the bolt doesn't have the bump on it to trip the sear, or the third whole for the sear in the receiver. i've never had a full automatic AK torn down in front of me along side a a semiauto so i couldn't say. i have also heard it said that the are the same except for the third whole in the receiver.

a 22lr built on a AR platform functions just like a AR15, meaning one squeeze of the trigger fires the round and starts the ejection and chambering a round cycle, then another squeeze repeats the process.

a single shot weapon is not a the same as the above, no matter what they are chambered for or look like. you just have single shot 5.56,7.62,.22,.223,or just shy of a 308

and what i meant about class is semiauto, which if i understand is illegal to own in the UK

We'll have to agree to disagree on some of the finer details because otherwise it just devolves into a thread about nitpicking.

I'm not sure where the list of calibres comes from, however. There is no fixed list, it's basically any calibre up to and including .50 cal.

Semi-auto is legal for .22RF and shotguns, but nothing else.

I see what you mean about the "class" now, thank you for the clarification. Under UK law, the M4 (which would actually be considered an automatic as it has a burst mode) is indeed classified as section 5, exactly like a semi-automatic AR15.

A socialist response, nothing more to add...

originally posted by: infolurker
Strange, I did not know that the recent terrorists in Europe with full auto AK 47's acquired them legally.... LOL

This is sad. So if you actually legally have a weapon for self-defense you may have a good chance of loosing it then because ISIS terrorists are legally acquiring them ? (I somehow doubt that highly, I assume they illegally acquired their arms)

Anyone else see the stupidity here? How about disarming all of your European Police forces so that ISIS cannot get their weapons as well? Ridiculous.

So, because bad guys are getting military grade firearms to use against you, you are supposed to relinquish what is left of your legally owned firearms?

Why? to make yourselves even more defenseless?

Insanity.



www.china.org.cn...

The European Commission on Wednesday adopted a package of measures to strengthen control of firearms across the European Union(EU).

The measures will help prevent terrorists from accessing weapons in the EU, better track legally held firearms and increase cooperation between member states, it said in a statement.

The package of measures includes a revision of the firearms directive to tighten controls on the acquisition and possession of firearms, which need to be approved by the European Parliament and European Council.

An implementing regulation on common minimum standards for deactivation of firearms is included in the package, which sets out common and strict criteria on the way member states must deactivate weapons.

"Today's proposal will help us tackle the threat of weapons falling into the hands of terrorists. We are proposing stricter controls on sale and registration of firearms, and stronger rules to irrevocably deactivate weapons," said Juncker.

www.blacklistednews.com... 7430/0/38/38/Y/M.html

And while on average European citizens are less weaponized than the US (except of course for the safest people in Europe, the Swiss, where 30% own guns ), just like that what little armaments can be obtained legally has been drastically reduced. As for whether this “Crack down” by Brussels bureaucrats will put even the tiniest dent in the procurement of weapons by ISIS, we have just one word: Chicago.

It's the same in most all of the countries...Those in charge are doing their best to protect the muzlims from their citizens...This or next year apparently is the year of the New World Order...The people must have no power...Control by the elites...

All the Western countries will be under terrorist attack at the same time...Total chaos...It's going to get ugly...

It is soooo predictable, but I guess, like a Hollywood movie plot, if it works then why reinvent the wheel. Bloodbath -> blame [insert latest boogeyman here] -> "tighten security" -> rinse and repeat

It is obvious nobody is reading carefully or researching the topic of this thread, and are just going by the thread title...

The thread title is FALSE.

There is no "crackdown" on legal weapons going on or planned!

originally posted by: Bluesma
It is obvious nobody is reading carefully or researching the topic of this thread, and are just going by the thread title...

The thread title is FALSE.

There is no "crackdown" on legal weapons going on or planned!

I might not have read the links in the original post... but I have read the press release from the European Commission indicating that they are seeking to strengthen control over legally held firearms.

Other than suggesting the measure is already passed when it's actually still just a proposal, the title is essentially correct - which you would have known if you had been "reading carefully or researching the topic" before throwing stones at the rest of us.

Of specific interest is the recategorisation of:

...Semi-automatic firearms for civilian use which resemble weapons with automatic mechanisms...

europa.eu...

No matter how many stabbings, shooting, bombings European common man is plagued with, he will never get legal firearms, of any sort, Sweden now has the highest rape rate in the world, Swedish women are not allowed any sort of protection, they are just told " don't go out at night, don't go out in daylight alone" , yeah, thanks for that.

originally posted by: [post=20061083]EvillerBob

I wasn't refering to you, I was refering to the flippant responses that were ignorant. Specifically to those that have repeatedly made comments about France particular, and how they cannot have any weapons already or won't be able to anymore.

But, the question of reinforcing controls on legal semi- automatic weapons,
as I said earlier, the point was to get other countries in the EU on the same level of control-
there isn't a change in ours. You still have to get a license for sport with those, get a physical, be a member of shooting club, etc.

They just wanted to put pressure on our neighboring countries (and some of them rife with conflict) to instill similar controls. (as well as reinforce border controls which have been just about non-existent until now). The criminals here get them from nearby countries that have little or no control.
For us regular citizens in France, at least, there is no change.

The only change us law abiding citizens will see is actually being stopped when we cross the border, and perhaps our police will start carrying firearms regularly and off duty.
We're going to see more legal weapons, and (hopefully) less illegal ones.

We have catagory 1 arms at home, so we're following closely on changes.

a reply to: pikestaff
Urban myth. The rate of rapes recorded in Sweden is higher because of the way sexual crime is recorded. Nothing to do with lack of legal firearms.

originally posted by: Bluesma

But, the question of reinforcing controls on legal semi- automatic weapons,
as I said earlier, the point was to get other countries in the EU on the same level of control-
there isn't a change in ours. You still have to get a license for sport with those, get a physical, be a member of shooting club, etc.

Except this now extends it to semi-automatic firearms that look like firearms that have an automatic equivalent.

That's even tighter than existing UK regulations, and ours are ridiculous already! The vast majority of people I shoot with at the club have firearms that would be moved to Category A under this Directive - in other words, they magically become prohibited firearms just because they are built on an AR platform.

my god!
next they will ban illegal guns!

I bet not one legal gun was use'd.

The Crackdown Begins: EU Strengthens Control Of "Legal" Firearms After Paris Attacks

Not strange.

Par for the course.

In order to combat 'muslim' violence. They push more gun control.

If they were being consistent they would be pushing religion control.

a reply to: neo96

Of course they wouldn't do that, though. That would affect Christians, too.
Honestly, I think the gun control laws are fine there as they are. Even if 100% of the population had a gun, it wouldn't make any difference unless they carried it everywhere, since terrorists don't give forewarning. Literally everyone having a concealed pistol is not something you want, no no no.

originally posted by: infolurker
Strange, I did not know that the recent terrorists in Europe with full auto AK 47's acquired them legally.... LOL

What you didn't know????? European K-MART sells AK47's all day., You're just not allowed to purchase the full auto sear on the same day... duhhh



AMAZING logic from the EU folk eh???

originally posted by: BlueJacket
a reply to: infolurker

Patently absurd. Like these knuckleheads went to a licensed gun shop and purchased full auto military grade weapons. They got them from the same place as all of the terrorist groups, gangs and other n'er do well outfits...the black market...fully supplied by US military arming "moderate rebels," or Cartels in Mexico. Beautiful reasoning these morons have.

Somehow I doubt the US supplied anyone with AK47's. M16's perhaps, but considering the MILLIONS of surplus AK's in eastern Europe, I doubt these weapons are coming from the US or cartels. Hell, after the USSR collapsed, you could buy a case of AK47's with 100,000rounds of ammo for about $250usd

originally posted by: Maxatoria
a reply to: NthOther

Like its going to be fun in places that serve alcohol where 'you spilled my pint' doesn't end up in a bit of a face off but 5 people dead and 27 injured when you pull out two handguns and go all 'murican.

we drink more over in europe so drinking+guns aint going to be the right combo.

Could i imagine a bunch over here in the uk of chav's tanked up on cheap cider with weaponry ...... fecking hell if that happens i want m-60's with DU ammo

that why you check them at the door

a reply to: dismanrc

It's a different world over here, generally we do get bladdered and i'm sure bouncers at the door really fancy dealing with someone after 9 pints and is packing a 1911 and is not happy that they can't get into the nightclub for a few more beers.

Its a cultural thing is what i'm mainly saying, we drink hard but don't have guns...americans drink bud light and have guns but one of the main reasons for our hard drinking was until recently we had times when our pubs etc could open so it was 11am-3pm and 7pm to 11pm so it was fill your boots time when the pub was open and while we have had in theory 24 hour opening for a while we're still in that sort of mode so we could make more bombs etc in WW1