What's new
British Ordnance Collectors Network

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Police raid collector ?

When you talk about residue that is another subject entirely, and would need careful definition if it were being used legally. I have grenades which were emptied over 20 years ago and contain no visible residue. After transporting them wrapped in towels inside of a ziplock bag inside of my backpack, you will still hit hot on a wipe test of the inside of the backpack a week later. So as for the ordnance itself - you would have to be very careful how you defined residue or you could deal yourself out of collecting.
 
We have no legislation in the UK directly relating to explosive residue. However our Control Of Explosives Regulations require certification of the individual to acquire certain explosive articles and substances. The regulations are silent on the matter of quantities so there is no lower limit whether it is a few microgrammes or an upper limit that may be tonnes. So yes - any residue found in what is determined to be an "inert" item may be deemed to be subject of an explosives certificate.
I was recently involved in a project with a UK based mine clearance organisation looking at new concepts in detection. In one trial nealry all of the supposedly "inert" "ffe" mines gave positive readings on certain equipment.

And finally - a previous post talked about AP rounds. I dont think that this has been aired on BOCN before but apologies if it has.
(section 5(1A)(g) of the 1968 Firearms Act prohibits the possession etc of -
anything which is designed to be
projected as a missile from any weapon
and is designed to be, or has been
incorporated in, any ammunition falling​

within any of the preceding paragraphs etc etc.

the preceding paragraphs mentioned above capture AP ammunition!

An interpretation of this might be that anything that has ever been part of a round of AP ammunition might still be determined to be prohibited ammunition.

there appears to be no stated case law in the UK at present that would give a steer on this.

Any suggestions???
 
Here in the states, it is NFA (National Firearms Act) of 1968; illegal full auto M/G's. Then that grows even bigger when they find the Ordnance also. It even goes lower than that, for example, when your wife is going to divorce you and she is really going to rip your life for ever she will call the local police and it will work its way up to BATFE. Then you have cameras and reporters at the scene that don't even know the laws or for the fact that they are so stupid and you're alleged AK-47 is a gun that will shoot all day on automatic. Bingo! she just played you as the biggest criminal if that there was ever was one.

I worked with and asked some of the BATFE (which have some agents that are really cool and understanding.) how they get their leads on some "Live Ordnance" in your basement is 90% of how it works as I have stated above. Directly from their own mouths.

The other 10% is because of the idiot braggging to the wrong person(s) or goes to the firing range either open or inclosed and blasts rounds down range on full automatic and without a license to own. The idiosicnrocy just gets bigger all the time here.
 
We also have issues in the UK when couples split up. If there is any allegation or suggestion of violent or disruptive conduct then any certificated weapons on the premises will be removed. This generally holds true even if the aggrieved party is the certificate holder. It comes from a common law duty of care that the police have towards all members of the public.
Quite often the instigator will use the issue of weapons/ammunition on the premises as a lever to get a more robust police response even though there has never been a suggestion that they will be used. But we still come back to our duty of care!
 
Interesting!
It sounds like a sensible definition in Law needs to be made regarding:

1) How much explosive constitutes an illegal amount to hold without a relevant certificate/licence - the answer surely should be at least "trace elements" dont count. A sensible scientific definition of "trace" must be easy enough to define.

2) A clear definition of what an AP round is - i.e this should refer to Small Arms ammunition perhaps upto a certain calibre (clearly excluding artillery ammunition & cannon shells)

I guess at the obvious risk of opening cans of worms, the problem here in the UK is:

For collectors - without these clear definitions an open question remains about the legality of owning specific items

For law enforcers - If this is unclear, a difficult postion exists when encountering items that may be in these unclear catagories and the added risk of potentially criminalising huge numbers of people who had no idea that they may have been breaking a very unclear law!

I wonder how many 25pdr AP rounds are used as doorstops around the country!!


:tinysmile_shy_t:
 
khanmak said:
Interesting!
It sounds like a sensible definition in Law needs to be made regarding:

1) How much explosive constitutes an illegal amount to hold without a relevant certificate/licence - the answer surely should be at least "trace elements" dont count. A sensible scientific definition of "trace" must be easy enough to define.

2) A clear definition of what an AP round is - i.e this should refer to Small Arms ammunition perhaps upto a certain calibre (clearly excluding artillery ammunition & cannon shells)

I guess at the obvious risk of opening cans of worms, the problem here in the UK is:

For collectors - without these clear definitions an open question remains about the legality of owning specific items

For law enforcers - If this is unclear, a difficult postion exists when encountering items that may be in these unclear catagories and the added risk of potentially criminalising huge numbers of people who had no idea that they may have been breaking a very unclear law!

I wonder how many 25pdr AP rounds are used as doorstops around the country!!


:tinysmile_shy_t:
Click to expand...
You are absolutely correct in what you say.
The issue of trace samples of explosives has been raised as a point for debate in the current HSE Explosive Legislation Review. The people most affected by the lack of a lower limit are researchers and students who may only have in their possession a microscopic amount of explosive for sometimes only a few seconds during an experiment. However any change in this legislation must accomodate the lawful possession of trace elements in "inert" ordnance. It would be a sad day if a collector was charged with unlawful possession of RDX or TNT etc based upon a swab test!

The AP issue may be more far ranging than just considering solid AP shot. The Sect 5 definition that I quoted earlier uses the phrase " or has been incorporated in..." Does this capture sabots, or perhaps soft metal jackets that surround AP cores,or tracer pots? As I stated previously there is no case law on this matter to provide a definitive guide. It is possibly one of those questions that is best not asked!
 
Hi exat808,

Interesting info regarding explosive traces. Hopefully this will lead to some form of guidance. This appears to be being driven from another angle (i.e non ordnance collecting) so hopefully will have proper un-biased scrutiny, & not be subject to often the very politically negativel biased approach taken to anything firearms related. Ordnance collectors may beneifit from this collaterally as it were.
Regarding AP, a question best left I guess!
 
I'm in trouble every time I go home from work. I work with empty boxes and expended cases on a daily basis. If there is no lower limit which defines a "trace amount" then no amount of protective clothing and washing facilities will be adequate to keep me out of jail. I know I'm being extreme by saying this but it shows that a degree of common sense would be required when referring to "trace elements" and hearing about some cases in the news, this doesn't seem to be forthcoming in some courts of law.
 
LCplCombat said:
I'm in trouble every time I go home from work. I work with empty boxes and expended cases on a daily basis. If there is no lower limit which defines a "trace amount" then no amount of protective clothing and washing facilities will be adequate to keep me out of jail./quote]

On the other hand, earlier this year I was in possession of a considerable quantity of explosive material in the form of fireworks for my daughter's birthday party. All perfecty legal and no permit required.
Click to expand...
 
F0031 said:
LCplCombat said:
I'm in trouble every time I go home from work. I work with empty boxes and expended cases on a daily basis. If there is no lower limit which defines a "trace amount" then no amount of protective clothing and washing facilities will be adequate to keep me out of jail./quote]

On the other hand, earlier this year I was in possession of a considerable quantity of explosive material in the form of fireworks for my daughter's birthday party. All perfecty legal and no permit required.
Click to expand...

For clarity - the only explosives that require a certificate for acquisition are those articles and substances that do not appear in Schedule1 to the Control of Explosives Regulations, so SAA, Fireworks, most pyrotechnics are not subject to control. It is only those articles and substances that are deemed to be criminally attractive require control.
Click to expand...
 
Ap/he.

As I understand it the law is made in a way to TRY and cover most scenarios, so this is why it is hard to make sense of some of the legislation. I have 2pdr tank AP shot in my shrinking collection, I dont have a 2 pdr A/T gun to go with it,and if I did I cant imagine using it to rob the local post office. The current firearm and ammo legislation is in place to prevent the wrong people using the above against the public,police and military etc,not to entrap innocent people collecting as we do. In 20 years of collecting ordnance,i have NEVER EVER,bought an item of ordnance which was in any way live,ie,gains,exploders,HE filling etc,so why the continual issue of FFE. I have collected for a long time,i work,pay tax,and have no criminal record,so why do i feel like a bloody criminal? I also find the comment by Exat808, ref AP unbelievable,quote. "It is probably one of those questions that is not best not asked"!!! It would be interesting to know what position in authority you hold making comments like that! After my recent brush with the law,i want clarification of the situation,not more supposition and scaremongering. Also i would like to see a proper process to allow people who have had problems and who are innocent,like me,get there items of ordnance back. In MY case Dorset police were excellent. Unfortunately I have no idea how to get my Bofors round back,it is apparently at Chilwell barracks in the hands of EOD,or in someones personal collection now?? Who knows?? I dont. So for all the Bocn members with large collections, bury your heads in the sand at your peril,remember its EOD who will take your collection away,not the police. How do you get it back then?? Perhaps someone in EOD will take the time to answer this? or not as has been the case. I would like some serious answers to the above from UK members please,as this is a UK issue. ANYBODY???Tig:tinysmile_cry_t::tinysmile_angry2_t:
 
Hi Tig,
did the Dorset police give you a reason as to why it has gone to Chilwell?,I'm sure they didn't come all the way down here to deal with it when there are EOD a lot nearer to yours(and mine) neck of the woods.

Regards
Tony
 
hmmm, look guys at 1st pict in this topic ,cops carrying projectiles, ring on the 1st round is cut...So nothing forbiden inside ( i guess ) ,we have the same problems, each day ,with police in Poland...

regards tomek
 
I asked, on another forum, the EOD lads what they did with items seized on Police raids and the one common answer was "they've never given anything back once it's been seized"

FFE certs really don't stop the Police from taking inert items.

An FAC doesn't stop the Police taking Licensed Firearms

Take the original raid that started this post....He was raided by the Police looking for an illegal firearm, but they took everything. What was the point in taking inert Ordnance which is legal to have, what was the point in taking his licensed Firearms.

Lets say the guy has 10 Licensed firearms on his FAC, all the Police needed to have done was checked the registered numbers on the firearms against the registered numbers shown on the FAC.

Many many years ago, after I had moved into a new location a neighbour who I hadn't met , phoned the Police because he saw me carrying a rifle from my car to the house. The Policeman who was given the task of sorting out what I was doing, asked the Firearms Department if I had an FAC and as I had he and the Firearms Licensing guy, drove down to my house and had a quick look round checked my FAC against the contents of my Gun Cabinet, had a cup of tea and a chat and then went. This common-sense approach just does not happen any more.

I have to be honest all this stuff "grips my sh*t"

I'm not having a dig at EOD guys or the Front line Policemen/women.
 
Ap/he.

Hi SMLE, the item was seized at East Midlands airport on route to Bournemouth. I would like to add as per spudguns comment that my comments are not a slur on the authorities, I want to see the situation clarified including the legalities of my item not being returned,the police said it is my property and there was no reason why i should not have it back. This is why i think all members should be worried,especially after reading Spudguns comments. Im very concerned indeed.
 
tigbrand said:
Hi SMLE, the item was seized at East Midlands airport on route to Bournemouth. I would like to add as per spudguns comment that my comments are not a slur on the authorities, I want to see the situation clarified including the legalities of my item not being returned,the police said it is my property and there was no reason why i should not have it back. This is why i think all members should be worried,especially after reading Spudguns comments. Im very concerned indeed.
Click to expand...

Surely the onus is on the Police to get the item back, they caused it to be taken away, it was in their possession they gave it to EOD.

As I see it the Police took your lawful, legal property and have given it away.
 
Last edited:
I dont know how you would go about getting it back Tig but i do know that there have been seized items that have been returned in the past for example. although we did retain 2 rifle grenades for subsequent disposal, we also returned a glass mine and some other grenades once they were found to be free from explosives. Not saying this happens all the time though.

If you cant get the items back its because they are being held as safe keep for the police due to ongoing investigations or they have already been entered into their register and are awaiting/have been disposed of.

Not going to go into details of why things would be taken to chilwell but suffice it to say that it isnt perculiar.

i'd say your best bet would be to go through the police though tigbrand.
 
When the British EOD take your items you can get some back even if they still contain traces of explosive you really need a good solicitor, I got back about 95% of my collection 5% I just could not afford to keep paying the solicitor to get them back and the remainder they stole.
 
I understand Exat808's comment regarding AP. Although at first glance the legislation appears clear cut, when one starts reading further and consulting associated documents there are additional sections and conflicting definitions. All in all, that aspect of the act is a nightmare. I have spoken to one of the FSS (Forensic Science Service) scientists regarding the matter and he even agrees there is confusion. Some time back I undertook to try and get some clarification from the FSS, but for numerous reasons kept being placed to the bottom of the pile, in light of renewed concerns I'll redouble my efforts to obtain official clarification.

TimG
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top