Interesting Andy – I had exactly the same experience when asking re a V1 site a few years ago – the JCCC initially insisted a licence was required, but then backed down – though they did say if the project developed into a full excavation (unlikely!) they would probably insist on a licence – However the fact it was an air launched V1 seemed to muddy the waters a bit.

It also seems that under certain circumstances dumped aircraft could raise a problem – I was looking for a Hurricane that crashed, was recovered, but then was apparently disposed of locally in a nearby dump by the recovery crew! The requirement that licence would be needed could not be ruled out.

Sometimes I feel that by asking the question, you simply give the opportunity……….

Don’t you just love a well researched article !!! 😮

Just shows the dangers of talking to journalists – you never know what utter s#*te they will turn whatever you might say into 🙁

Get well soon Tony – was looking at the Mossie earlier this year and it certainly looked like you had been busy!

Not really, see Firearms Law Guidance to the Police 2002 s2.16 :p

Thanks Smirky – I am well aware of the law and notes of guidance – Have you ever used this in dealings with the police? I have.

2.16 Section 8 of the 1988 Act is an
evidential provision and does not preclude
the possibility that a firearm which has
been de-activated in some other manner
may also have ceased to be a firearm within
the meaning of the 1968 Act. For example,
guns held by museums that were recovered
from wrecked ships and aircraft may be
corroded to the point that they cannot be
fired. This should not be confused with
wear or missing parts that can be replaced.
The final arbiter of whether the article fulfils
the definition of a firearm at section 57(1)
is a Court.

When it first came out, I thought -“thank goodness common-sense at last” – but NO – the first time I approached the police, quoting this, they listened, but I then had to get direct Home Office approval via having the gun inspected by the National Forensic Science Laboraotories, following which they accepted the report and I asked for and received written confirmation that the weapon was now outside the terms of the firearms act and could be put on public display. Following this, I had several weapons signed off by the local Police Firearms Inspector (written confirmation again), but now it seems there are no longer any local inspectors due to government cuts and the police definitely are no longer prepared to inspect and sign off weapons.

If you look at the new guidance on deactivation of weapons – sorry I don’t have it to hand to cite properly – there is, since 2010, provision for the proof houses to issue a deactivation certificate based solely on their inspection of the damage / corrosion to a relic weapon – this is the route that the police recently advised me to take with a very badly damaged MG15 – However the response from the proof house was very negative to say the least 🙁

At the end of the day we are still in the same position where retention of a weapon is down to the attitude of the local police at the time they become aware of your ownership – often due to other circumstance – ( a la Mr Ward).

If you want this or any other Section 5 weapon, I still say you either need documentatry evidence it is not a viable firearm or a section 5 licence.

Unless you want to take your chances with the last sentence of the guidance you quote :p

Mods – Sorry for the thread creep, but think this is relevant and of interest to quite a few on here.

Holts who are firearms specialists consider it to be deactivated (possibly on account of condition) as they have listed it under the deactivated section in their catalogue.

That was the inference I took from the listing too, as all other weapons listed seem to have proof details – However, as firearms specialists they should know better, as documentary evidence of suitable inspection is still required for ALL relic firearms for them to be considered as outside the terms of the Firearms Act – i.e. deactivated.

flash suppressor looked odd to me on a supposedly wing mounted fighter weapon – perhaps someone with more expert knowledge could comment on this listing – guide price looks pretty realistic if provenance bears out though.

Look like classic car handbrake pins to me – My Triumph has ones that look just like that – True they are not numbered though 😉

Looking at his other items, this format seems to be something this seller regularly sells – connected with all sorts of historical figures and events, IMO these items are being created purely for this purpose and are to me are obviously completely spurious – yet sadly there is little anyone can do about such activity – reporting via the online auction host requires going through pre-set forms that probably don’t cover this type of activity – and in any case this host doesn’t seem to take much action these days – perhaps it is not financially in there interests to do so? Witness the recent unopposed listing of a machine gun on their site – despite numerous reports and obvious contravention of their own rules it was allowed to run.