need advice on fac

[paulus 26]

when my first ticket was issues it stated 22rf and 22cf. the same for the mods the only calibre specific was the 17hmr, even after various one for one variation it always comes back the same. infact last week i had my ticket back for a fac air rifle it stated .22, i found a .20 i wanted. rang them up and asked whot i had to do they said no problem just buy it and write in with the details as normal and they would sort it thier end.

[JonathanL 4]

.22Rimfire is a very unspecific listing and leads to posts like this.

 

I have to disagree. From a legal point of view it is very specific. If they prosecute you they have to show that you have acquired something for which you do not have an FAC. If you have an FAC which says ".22Rim-Fire" the court will ask only two questions; "Is this a .22?" and; "is this a rimfire?". If you are possessing a .22WMR on a .22RF authority then how could you possibly be convicted of unlawful possession as it's a .22 cal and is a rim-fire?

 

In fact, if it's an offence to possess a .22WMR on a .22RF authority, then surely so would it be to possess a .22LR, or a .22 Short, or a .22Long on that authority? Ergo, a .22RF authority would be useless as you coudn't possess anything on it.

 

J.

 

J

 

I take your point and see your argument but the rimfire term is still very unspecific as it covers so many possibilities. On the basis you have to justify every tool in the cabinet it should not be used in my view. The paperwork should be specific, ie .22lr or .22WMR or whatever.

 

The legalities of the term is irrelevant and I have no issue with what it means, the problem is interpretation in the eyes of RFD, etc.

 

There should be no debate and no discussion on what terms on your FAC mean!

 

But you justified it if they give you the slot.

 

There may be a good case for making the paperwork more specific but this isn't what the current state of the law is. If you have a cert which authorises a "22RF" I can't see how it would be unlawful to acquire a .22WMR on that authority. There may well be some RFD's who wouldn't sell you one on a .22RF slot but don't think that there would be many. Is it a .22?; is it a rimfire? If the answer is yes to both then what offence are you committing? I don't think there is any debate there.

 

This isn't actually anything new. Back in the day if you had an authority for a .44 revolver you could buy a .44Mag, a .44Spec or a .44Russian. A slot for a .45 would allow you to get a .45ACP or a .45 Long Colt. Also if you had a slot allowing your to acquire a "pistol" you could get a revolver, single-shot or a semi auto; if the slot said revolver then you could only get a revolver.

 

J.

Edited July 9, 2010 by JonathanL

[Deker 3,478]

.22Rimfire is a very unspecific listing and leads to posts like this.

 

I have to disagree. From a legal point of view it is very specific. If they prosecute you they have to show that you have acquired something for which you do not have an FAC. If you have an FAC which says ".22Rim-Fire" the court will ask only two questions; "Is this a .22?" and; "is this a rimfire?". If you are possessing a .22WMR on a .22RF authority then how could you possibly be convicted of unlawful possession as it's a .22 cal and is a rim-fire?

 

In fact, if it's an offence to possess a .22WMR on a .22RF authority, then surely so would it be to possess a .22LR, or a .22 Short, or a .22Long on that authority? Ergo, a .22RF authority would be useless as you coudn't possess anything on it.

 

J.

 

J

 

I take your point and see your argument but the rimfire term is still very unspecific as it covers so many possibilities. On the basis you have to justify every tool in the cabinet it should not be used in my view. The paperwork should be specific, ie .22lr or .22WMR or whatever.

 

The legalities of the term is irrelevant and I have no issue with what it means, the problem is interpretation in the eyes of RFD, etc.

 

There should be no debate and no discussion on what terms on your FAC mean!

 

But you justified it if they give you the slot.

 

There may be a good case for making the paperwork more specific but this isn't what the current state of the law is. If you have a cert which authorises a "22RF" I can't see how it would be unlawful to acquire a .22WMR on that authority. There may well be some RFD's who wouldn't sell you one on a .22RF slot but don't think that there would be many. Is it a .22?; is it a rimfire? If the answer is yes to both then what offence are you committing? I don't think there is any debate there.

 

This isn't actually anything new. Back in the day if you had an authority for a .44 revolver you could buy a .44Mag, a .44Spec or a .44Russian. A slot for a .45 would allow you to get a .45ACP or a .45 Long Colt. Also if you had a slot allowing your to acquire a "pistol" you could get a revolver, single-shot or a semi auto; if the slot said revolver then you could only get a revolver.

 

J.

 

J...It's nothing to do with a legal definition and I'm not arguing a legal case and have no specific issue with what a .22 Rimfire is in law, the fact is the AUTHORITIES deal with this differently in different regions, so to do RFD. The point I am making is that this should not happen, either list .22 Rimire EVERYWHERE (which frankly I do not support), or be specific and list lr or WMR etc Everywhere.

 

It should not be treated differently in different regions and we should not be debating what it means!