licence advice

jimmyd87

Is a straight pull version of a normally semi-auto weapon classed as a restricted weapon.

This particular gun was manufactered as straight pull NOT semi-auto but ive been told there are no straight pull versions available in this country.

Help much appreciated

Tackleberrywho

jimmyd87 wrote: »

Is a straight pull version of a normally semi-auto weapon classed as a restricted weapon.

This particular gun was manufactered as straight pull NOT semi-auto but ive been told there are no straight pull versions available in this country.

Help much appreciated

A straight Pull AUG is still a Bullpup design

A straight pull AR still falls into the IDONTLIKEDLOOKOFTHAT category.

Sparks

First off - argh at the "W" word...

Apart from that, it does depend on more details about the firearm than you've given. If it's an AR-15 straight-pull, then it'll probably be restricted based on appearance (the SI specifically says that assault rifles are restricted, and while it has its own quirky definition for assault rifle, the AR-15 would still fall under that definition), but that does mean that you might as well get the semi-auto version anyway as it'll be the same licence. If it's something that doesn't have that appearance problem, isn't over .308 in calibre and isn't too short, it might well not be restricted.
So basicly, more details please?

jimmyd87

Its an AR-15 in straight pull, also, it used to be semi-auto, gas tube has been removed.

The question is, if it still falls under the restricted licence category, how hard are they to get and is it a case that it might as well be semi-auto?

Again, help much appreciated

bunny shooter

Ask your FAO would your Chief Super licence one. They'll know what way the land lies

Sparks

jimmyd87 wrote: »

The question is, if it still falls under the restricted licence category, how hard are they to get and is it a case that it might as well be semi-auto?

Well, it's not the hardest thing in the world. Your security requirements go up a bit but if its the only firearm you have, you're just talking about a gunsafe. You have to apply to the Chief Super rather than the local Super, but that's not that onerous either. The appearance of the thing might be an issue, is the only thing. You might find that an AR-15 built to look like something you'd see in footage from Iraq is not going to be as easy to licence as one built to look like a Tubbs tube gun:



Which sounds daft as they're essentially the same firearm at the core, but there you are. (Well, the tubbs itself is a bolt-action, which is different, but you can get most of the fittings for a semi-auto as well).

And be sure that your good reason for having one is well articulated as well (there's no magic formula for this, by the way, I'm just saying that if you explain it clearly and simply with no BS, then it's more likely to be accepted than an unclear, overcomplicated and editorialised one).

But all of the above is really not that big a deal, it just sounds that way when you spell it out -- all it boils down to in practice is common sense and clear english.

As to whether you might as well, well, yes. Same licence at the end of the day, if semi-auto suits the purpose better than straight-pull, you might as well get the semi-auto. Straight-pull AR15s are pretty much creatures of necessity anyway, I don't think there were a huge amount of them around until after the SLR ban in the UK came in.

jimmyd87

Sound for the informative reply!

I'll have to see what way the land lies with the local gards and take it from there.

Thanks again
James:D