Sorry TT
By nature of the defence clause which clearly states that :-
Specific defences applying to the offence under Section 32
(1) It shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under section 32 in respect of any conduct to show that the conduct was for the purpose only of making the imitation firearm in question available for one or more of the purposes specified in subsection (2).
(2) Those purposes are—
a) the purposes of a museum or gallery that does not distribute any profits it makes;
b) the purposes of theatrical performances and of rehearsals for such performances;
c) the production of films (within the meaning of Part 1 of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (c.48) – see section 5B of that Act);
d) the production of television programmes (within the meaning of the Communications Act 2003 (c. 21) – see section 405(1) of that act)
e) the organisations and holding of historical re-enactments organised and held by persons specified ir described for the purposes of this section by regulations made by the Secretary of State.
Personally I think any genuine re-enactors would be exonerated by this clause.
Sorry am I missing the point here, where does it say that re-enactors are prohibited from walking around with Bren Guns etc…. ?
I think that Section 32 shows that museums and re-enactors will be able to carry on plying their trade, unaffected by this law.
Specific defences applying to the offence under Section 32
(1) It shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under section 32 in respect of any conduct to show that the conduct was for the purpose only of making the imitation firearm in question available for one or more of the purposes specified in subsection (2).
(2) Those purposes are—
a) the purposes of a museum or gallery that does not distribute any profits it makes;
b) the purposes of theatrical performances and of rehearsals for such performances;
c) the production of films (within the meaning of Part 1 of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (c.48) – see section 5B of that Act);
d) the production of television programmes (within the meaning of the Communications Act 2003 (c. 21) – see section 405(1) of that act)
e) the organisations and holding of historical re-enactments organised and held by persons specified ir described for the purposes of this section by regulations made by the Secretary of State.
Section 34 defines the meaning of a realistic imitation as such:-
34 Meaning of “realistic imitation firearm”
(1) In section 32 “realistic imitation firearm” means an imitation firearm which-
a) Has an appearance that is so realistic as to make it indistinguishable, for all practical purposes, from a real firearm; and
b) Is neither a de-activated firearm nor itself an antique.
I’ve read through this proposed law several times now and must be missing something everyone else can see. To me, among laws to do with drink related crimes, it prevents the manfacture, modification, selling and importation of realistic imitation firearms and also licenses the use, sale and purchase of air guns, primers and ammunition loading presses. I doubt any of which affects warbirds and their operation.
However if it did, would it be such a big deal if the warbirds were not fitted with their original weapons. As many are not today !!!!
I get the feeling some people are jumping on somesort of band wagon.
I’ve just had a brief scan through the bill, the relevant article is article 32, the only other reference that I can find is in relation to air guns, I don’t know of many warbirds fitted with air guns.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldbills/041/06041.29-35.html#j8008
Yeah whatever Anne
Spitfire pilot here’s something that may help as well:-
http://www.angelfire.com/hi5/spitfiremk2a/stat-disp-unit-k9789replica.html
Yeah whatever Anne
Spitfire pilot here’s something that may help as well:-
http://www.angelfire.com/hi5/spitfiremk2a/stat-disp-unit-k9789replica.html
DazDaMan is your best bet, he is building one himself.
DazDaMan is your best bet, he is building one himself.
A taxiable/airworthy Spitfire F22 at a Duxford show? Which one is that?
And there was me thinking that you were the font of all aviation knowledge. 😉
The ‘Blue Spitfire’ which flew at the Malta Celebrations was BM597 MkVb belonging to the Historic Aircraft Collection and kept at Duxford.
It was painted in U.S.Navy Blue to represent U2 (one of 18 Spitfires on board) which was flown off USS Wasp, for delivery to Malta.
Thanks for the info bgrose, I don’t think many of us were aware of the facts.
Have a great day John, whats left of it.
Thanks,
The photos certainly have the date 23 July 1947 and “Gloomy Sunday” written on the back of them, come to think of it the PP6 serial number could be from a Firefly rather than a Seafire.
I am passing the album onto a third party to take scanned copies for their records, they have a better knowledge and data base than I have and will hopefully be able to shed some light on the incident.
If I can get our scanner to work I’ll post at least one shot here before I send the album off.
Spitfire Pilot you missed out the Hurricane !!!!
In the official account of the Battle of Britain released about 12 months after the event, all reference to Dowdings contribution was left out.
Thank you. I thought it was something like Indian. My knowledge of markings is limited.
FYI, that would be a wigwam.
Whos roundel is that on the side of the Super mystaire?
Being a French aircraft I would hazard a guess at France, but I maybe wrong :rolleyes:
Yak 11 Fan
The forums resident Yak fondler and P51 chaser is 36 today.
A some what late in the day Happy Birthday Chris.