Is it a Firearm or is it a Weapon????

clivej

Reading the debate between Ezridax and Tackleberry this definition comes to mind:

Quote from the Crown Prosecution Service @ http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/d_to_g/firearms/#a01

Definitions of Firearms and Air Weapons

A firearm is "a lethal barrelled weapon of any description from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged" (section 57 (1) Firearms Act 1968), it includes:

• any prohibited weapon (see below in this guidance section 5 Firearms Act 1968), whether it is such a lethal weapon as aforesaid or not; and
• any component part of such a lethal or prohibited weapon; and
• any accessory to any such weapon designed or adapted to diminish the noise or flash caused by firing the weapon.

Lethality is a complex issue and although case law exists (Moore v Gooderham [1960] 3 All E.R. 575), only a court can decide whether any particular weapon is capable of causing "more than trifling and trivial" injury and is therefore is a "firearm" for the purposes of the Acts. The Forensic Science Provider (FSP) will be able to advise in any case where "lethality" is likely to be an issue. See also: R v Thorpe 85 Cr. App. R 107 CA.
"barrelled" is a question of mixed law and fact - R v Singh (1989) Crim. L.R. 724, CA, involved an evidential dispute as to whether a flare launcher was barrelled.
"from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged" has to be capable of discharging a missile either in its present state or with adaptation. To prove that a weapon is a firearm, it is essential to call evidence as to whether a bullet or missile can be discharged from the weapon or which can be adapted to discharge any missile: Grace v DPP (1989) Crim L.R.365 where the conviction was quashed as there was no evidence that the air rifle could have been fired.
"component parts". R v Clarke (F), 82 Cr App R 308, CA states that the component part of a prohibited weapon is itself a prohibited weapon. Although there is no statutory definition, the Home Office Guidance to the Police at paragraph 13.70 states the following:

The term "component part" may be held to include (i) the barrel, chamber, cylinder, (ii) frame, body or receiver, (iii) breech, block, bolt or other mechanism for containing the charge at the rear of the chamber (iv), any other part of the firearm upon which the pressure caused by firing the weapon impinges directly. Magazines, sights and furniture are not considered component parts.

R v Ashton, CA, 1 February 2007 seems to suggest that any part that stops the weapon functioning as it was designed would be a component part:

"Whether in fact this particular gas plug is a component part of a prohibited weapon, is a matter of fact for the court to decide the words have their ordinary natural meaning. as a matter of reasonable interpretation it means a part that is manufactured to the purpose screw or washer, would not be a component part for present purposes. Similarly, a component part must be a part that if it were removed, the Gun could not function without it."

Air Weapons


An air weapon is defined, under section 1(3)(b) and 57(4) of the Firearms Act 1968 as:

"an air rifle, air gun or air pistol which does not fall within section 5 (1) (a) and which is not of a type declared by rules made by the Secretary of State under section 53 of the Firearms Act to be specially dangerous".

Any air rifle, air gun or air pistol which uses or is designed or adapted for use with, a self contained gas cartridge system is a prohibited weapon: section 5(1)(af) Firearms Act 1968 e.g. a Brocock
An air rifle is "specially dangerous" if it is capable of discharging a missile so that the missile has, on being discharged from the muzzle of the weapon, kinetic energy in excess in the case of a pistol of 6 ft lbs or, in the case of an air weapon other than an air pistol, 12 ft lbs: Firearms (Dangerous Air Weapons) Rules 1969 rr. 2, 3 (Archbold 24-8a.)
Paintball guns are a type of air weapon. The Home Office regard self-loading or pump action rifled airguns (including paintball guns) as outside the scope of the Firearms Act, unless they are sufficiently powerful to fall within the category of a "specially dangerous" air weapon (Archbold 24.8a). Paintball guns could be considered imitation firearms.
Unless an air weapon falls within one of the above exceptions, it is not subject to section 1 Firearms Act 1968.

johngalway

It's a firearm, every day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

Witcher

I'd go with firearm, less potential for hassle that way. We had the same debate in airsoft for a while 'should it be called a weapon?' and it was largely agreed it was the intent to cause harm that made it a weapon not necessarily the items potential to cause harm.

Tackleberry.

Ah hem will real tackleberry please stand up!

Cass

clivej wrote: »

Reading the debate between Ezridax and Tackleberry this definition comes to mind:

Not Tackleberry, the user is Tac.

There are and always will be a firearm. Call them a weapon if you like its no skin of my nose, but as i said on the thread why would you? I don't care what the definition of a firearm or weapon is. Its people's perception that matters.

Picture this. Two lads speaking to people that are not into hunting. both describing a deer they shot. Which sounds better?

1. So i was out the other day and i used my weapon to blow the brains out of this deer. Yeah, blooded the rifle well and good.
2. So i was out the other day and got a lovely deer with a head shot usingmy firearm. Animal dropped instantly and painlessly on the spot.

Exact same scenario, aptly described by each. However the second is more "user friendly". The only reason for talking like in example 1 would be to show off or try and needlessly impress with big scary words. Its pointless, futile, and counter serving. We have tried for years to be seen as sportsmen, not mindless gun weilding nut jobs.

This attitude of "well i'll call them what i like" annoys the crap out of me. So rather than use a more polite or correct terminology to settle non shooters views/ideas of sports shooters they would sooner "startle/scare" them with the use of words more commonly associated with war programmes/films.

Its the same scenario when a non shooter sees my target rifle. "Wow thats some sniper rifle" is the usual response. Now i could let this go, but its not correct, and the word sniper conjures images of people being shot. Thats not what i do, what i use the rifle for, and never will be. So i correct them saying its a target rifle for long distance paper punching. Suddenly their ears pick up and they start to ask questions about the discipline, what invloved.

Even if they never got into it, they have come away with a better understanding, and most likely a more "forgiving" attitude towards firearms and their uses.

Vegeta

Different terminology for different user groups imho

They're all guns but different groups call them different things. As I am only interested in their sporting purposes I choose to call them firearms.

clivej

Tackleberry. wrote: »

Ah hem will real tackleberry please stand up!

Ezridax wrote: »

Not Tackleberry, the user is Tac.

apologies to Tackleberry (but I'll blame him anyway)

Tac

Yea that was me guys... it was in relation to another lad who is having a delay in getting a 2nd cert for a rifle...
i refered to 'weapon'...as that is a word a Superintendent will be referring/considering when deciding an application.
meant no offence to anyone here or bad PR,

Sparks

Those Gardai described by the Firearms Policy Unit as "problem Superintendents" call them "weapons". Usually in court cases against issuing licences.
Those who feel that private firearms ownership is a Bad Thing (tm) call them weapons (and hunters murderers, but that's another thread).



Those of us who know one end of them from the other call them firearms. Because that's what they are. The word "weapon" conveys intent, which a firearm cannot have, being an inert inanimate object.

clivej

So then is a Firearm a weapon in disguise???

Tac

It all depends on who is holding it...
Is a golf club a weapon or an object for sporting purposes?

Sparks

No more than every object in the world is a weapon in disguise.

And you know the joke about boy scouts, target shooting, potential killers and potential prostitutes, don't you?

johngalway

Sparks wrote: »

No more than every object in the world is a weapon in disguise.

And you know the joke about boy scouts, target shooting, potential killers and potential prostitutes, don't you?

He was a General last time I heard it, what the hell did he do

johngalway

clivej wrote: »

So then is a Firearm a weapon in disguise???

Nope.

Tac

Nope.
i call them guns. always have done so and always will.... my point is saying weapon, was that word will be considered by Superintendents, not just problem super's.
i have 5 certs altogether and have held certs since i was 16.
Its a massive responsibility for a superintendent (person) to grant a cert for a potential weapon to another person he does not know... not trying to annoy anyone at all.. but would you not be asking a sh1t load of questions before signing off on a person you do not know to have a gun?..because it is a potential weapon. Thats why i reffered to a gun as a weapon..in the legal aspect.

Norwayviking

clivej wrote: »

Well you can call it whatever you like,as long as i can shoot with it:D
Thats what i like to do;)

session savage

plain and simple its a firearm until its used as a weapon same as a hammer is a tool until its used to crack someones skull!!

Alan 1990

My super on my grant letter called my .22 a weapon I was very surprised because I thought it was counted as a firearm.

Galway Elvis

This may be slightly off topic but somewhat relevent to the discussion. The extendable ASP batton and incapacitent (pepper) spray that all opperational Gardai are issued with and carry while on duty, are classed and defined as weapons.
Any use of either requires being reported on the same form that is used when firearms are discharged.

The term weapon is a nice tidy catch-all word for the powers that be.

Longranger

More circles than a box of cheerios!

Glensman

The PSNI firearms branch sent me a letter a few months back refferring to my rifle as a weapon. It jumped out of the page at me...

kildare.17hmr

i say 'my guns' most of the time, never weapons. A few people i know say i have weapons but their into the airsoft so i dont pay much attention

Hunter21

"Weapons" of mass destruction as we all have endlessly heard about the past number of years makes the mind of an ordinary Joe Soap refer back to killing machines. So to save the hysteria I call my guns - firearms and the guard in the station is called a "Firearms Officer" so propaganda brainwashed folk wont think he's issuing big "weapons" that will cause massive amounts of devastation.

Its all in the state of mind! propaganda is to blame in my view

Hibrion

It all depends on what you use it for. If you are using it to attack a person, by definition it becomes a weapon. Otherwise, a firearm is a tool.

Certain items can only be described as weapons because they have been created to be used as such and for nothing else; a sword, for example.

johngalway

No one here applied for a "weapon", if ya did you'd be refused, and rightly so.

Cass

Going a little off topic, and i think this has been dealt with sufficiently so closing thread.