new european law

Well, its been talked about for some time but now it looks like it is being pushed forward, the European law on deactivated weapons is not yet in play but is now being seriously pushed for next year. This would mean deacts would be completely welded up even the mag would be welded to the gun, obviously this makes it more of a lump of metal than they already are.
Now this does not effect airsoft or modelguns YET! but what is the next step do you think? Now i dont have any deacts but it worries me this law is being this seriously considered as i just know that in the end the models i collect will come under the hammer.
So anyone interested in airsoft, modelguns or deacts you need to play your part, sign the petition talk to you MP whatever it takes to stop another law designed to only punish and effect the innocent collector and as we all know have no effect whatsoever on terrorism, if you dont then our hobby will be next as there is not much left for them to target next.

The anti gun lobby within the EU have been looking for any excuse to ban as much as they can, as quickly as they can for a long time now. In their eyes, it will be 'one in the eye' to anyone with even a modicum interest in weaponry and the history of such - because of course, anybody with such interests, must also harbor malevolent intent toward society, mustn't they... That's how the mawkish, brainwashed, leftie thinking works within the EU and the sooner we leave, the better imo...

The saddest thing of all though, is that these bonkers bureaucrats genuinely believe imposing further, ridiculous gun laws, will prevent another Daesh style attack and somehow cease the aquiring and flow of guns from ex-war zones such as the Balkans. Utterly preposterous!

Don,t most other countries in EU have open access to real weapons anyway ?
Why would they be concerned about deacts ?
The Paris attacks were nothing to do with deactivated weapons and I presume the AKs used were sourced from Eastern Europe where such are easily acquired cheaply .
I just don,t get how some bureaucrats  can seriously believe that welding up deacts ( further ) will in any way reduce the risk of further attacks - has, nt the reverse been true from what we have seen with increasingly restrictive gun laws here in the UK ?
Carl.

Years ago I used to go on regular Aid Convoys down to the Balkans area and other places. I remember on one (more than one actually) where we were told through an interpreter that the whole area was awash with weaponry and an AK47 could be purchased on the streets for as little as 20 pounds equivalent. This was around 1995/6, but the six million+ AK type weaponry that found itself largely redundant after that conflict is still floating around on the black market of course.

As for deacts and bureaucrats - don't get me started!! 😒😠

Hi,
The French government and the European authorities know that there is no link between terrorists and sports shooters.
They also know that the number of deaths by firearms is not exclusively the fact of sports shooters and other legal owners

But that is not the problem.
Their real concern everyday is how to drastically reduce the number of weapons in the territory before a collapse of the system (economical, political) takes place.
They do not want to have to be accountable to people who would be able to ask them

Hello, I've been reading the comments regarding the ever increasing pressures placed on model gun enthusiasts and of course, those who enjoy the history associated with a deactivated combat weapon.
If I can add my two cents, the ever vigilant Asian, Australian, and European lawmakers continue to impose more restrictive policies that are slowly governing pfc model guns out of existence.

I live in the United States. In theory, I can go into the local hardware store and purchase a variety of firearms and a card board box filled with all sorts of cartridges. I can then drive to one of three WalMart superstores-all within a 30 mile radius of my home and purchase additional firearms and cartridges. Life is so good here, that after I finish off a pizza with my grandkids we can do some family bonding at a store next to the pizza place. Newly opened, at "Buck's", if you can't find your favorite handgun,rifle, or shotgun the'll get it for you. If you have the cash and the ATF&E clearance, you can own your favorite machine gun(s)!

Am I bragging? No way. It make me so sad. I can buy a thousand dollars worth of bullets anywhere in the United States but; if I need to get my hands on a few boxes of 7mm pfc caps there's only one vendor in the entire country that stocks them!

I suspect that as the legal/illegal flow of weapons at least here in the US has become impossible to control,why not turn the screws on the harmless few. You know guys like you and me. History buffs, war re enactors, collectors who might like the look and feel of a zinc MP40 or Thompson. I guess our controllers embrace the notion that if you have no real desire to kill the rattlesnakes then why not make the world a better place by eliminating the harmless garden snake.

Not every one is crazy over here, I've never had a gun and have no desire to own one. Well maybe just one Thompson in the after life. Thanks, Chris

Hi,
You mean that PFC replicas are more difficult to purchase than real weapons? OMG! Our lawmakers are walking on the head!!!

A new example :
New european deactivation specifications will be effective on April 8 2016, those specification are worst than british specification=> no more moving parts, no more stripping, even partial. No moving magazines, and magazines deactivations(already effective in France since 2013) And, registration!!!

Thank god, it's not retroactive, you can keep your "old spec" as they are, but if you want to sell, to give, or transmit by legacy, a deactivated weapon, you have to send  it to the proofhouse to deactivate you deactivated weapon, it's not only vandalism, but in addition it's deeply stupid.


There is maybe one positive point => PFC replicas manufacturers will have maybe a new market?

Dronne wrote:

Hi,
You mean that PFC replicas are more difficult to purchase than real weapons? OMG! Our lawmakers are walking on the head!!!

A new example :
New european deactivation specifications will be effective on April 8 2016, those specification are worst than british specification=> no more moving parts, no more stripping, even partial. No moving magazines, and magazines deactivations(already effective in France since 2013) And, registration!!!

Thank god, it's not retroactive, you can keep your "old spec" as they are, but if you want to sell, to give, or transmit by legacy, a deactivated weapon, you have to send  it to the proofhouse to deactivate you deactivated weapon, it's not only vandalism, but in addition it's deeply stupid.


There is maybe one positive point => PFC replicas manufacturers will have maybe a new market?

Post 'new spec' deactivations, they are pretty much lumps of dead metal at twice the cost of a pfc or gbb Airsoft. I will certainly be sticking to the latter, though I can see anything with a moving bolt, pretty soon needing at minimum a gun cabinet - it wouldn't surprise me!!

I see there are now over 300,000 signatures on the petition - that should be 'one in the eye' for the EU 'over-legislators' I should hope. Meantime bring on the EU referendum here in the UK...

7mm caps are difficult to find in the US, there is no law concerning their purchase of ownership.

Replica guns, other than Denix hood ornaments, are tricky to find, as the demand for an expensive quality item is very low, you can buy the real firearm, or a .22 caliber version of it, comparatively easily, so, selling a non-firing version is just not money making making endeavor.
Look at the auctions on GB for expensive high end replica guns, they have been recycling for three to four years, it is sort of sad.

In the US we are looking at the arrival of quite a few new firearms ownership laws in the near future.  It has been happening slowly but VERY surely, and where states like AZ, NM, TX maintain a very diligent and healthy opposition to them, the more liberal states have already enacted laws that do show a frightening similarity to what has happened in the UK and other countries.

The US is definitely not immune to the wave of firearms laws that are spreading across Europe -

To do my job in CA, requires that I have five different Sate and Federal permits, all the state permits require yearly renewal, the Federal FFL is renewed every three years. My car (transport) and my house (storage) can be checked by DOJ (or BATF) at any time, with a phone call schedule, or not.

Certain other States gun-owners point to CA and laugh - but, they would be wise to recall an old political saying: "...So goes California, so goes the country..."

California is where these laws are started, and they spread, this is history, not supposition.

Even airsoft is getting it, it seems now they are going to set legal standards for the amount of energy (jouls) airsoft can have to legally be airsoft. So far it only mentions 6mm as being allowed to be called airsoft so will that mean that an 8mm will become a firearm and illegal? god knows

Hi!
Here you can see and listen the meeting of the commission today
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/news-room/20160218IPR14978/Committee-on-the-Internal-Market-and-Consumer-Protection

Here you can read a working document written by Vicky Ford :

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fNONSGML%2bCOMPARL%2bPE-577.045%2b01%2bDOC%2bPDF%2bV0%2f%2fEN

Thank you for the new info!

Working document breaths a tiny bit of hope and reason.
I did not have time to watch the meeting unfortunately.

Hi!
Some news :

http://www.face.eu/about-us/resources/events/conference-on-the-european-firearms-directive

Policy-makers and citizens criticize the proposed revision of the European Firearms Directive

The European Commission proposals are considered “rushed” and “unacceptable” according to MEPs who met yesterday to discuss the European Firearms Directive with citizens, hunters and sport shooters.

PRESS RELEASE

Brussels, 2 March 2016 – The Firearms Directive sparked yet another heated discussion yesterday amongst policy-makers and citizens. The proposals, tabled by the European Commission only five days after the tragic terror attacks in Paris last November, have been since targeted from several sides. Harsh criticism is not only coming from stakeholders directly involved in the legal use of firearms, such as hunters and sport shooters, but also from a vast front of Members of the European Parliament, who expressed doubts about the proposals and highlighted areas in serious need of improvement.

Although some points are generally thought to be acceptable, such as the better tracing of firearms and improved transboundary cooperation between police forces, the most recurring and shared critique is the absence of an impact assessment, which makes it impossible to estimate the consequences of the proposed amendments on criminal activities, as well as on the lawful use of firearms.

Representatives from the European Parliament, the European Commission and the Council of the EU exchanged views during the conference, which was organised with the support of FACE (the European Federation of Associations for Hunting and Conservation). The panel was composed of Mrs. Vicky FORD MEP, Rapporteur for the Firearms Directive, Tomasz HUSAK, Head of Cabinet of Commissioner Bieńkowska (Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs), Torbjörn LARSSON, Vice President, Nordic Hunters’ Alliance, Jürgen KOHLHEIM, European Shooting Confederation, Günther SABLATTNIG, Advisor to the Counter-Terrorism Coordinator, Council of the EU.
MEP Karl-Heinz FLORENZ, President of the Parliamentary Intergroup Biodiversity, Hunting, Countryside, who chaired the conference, commented that “the Commission proposal is rushed and drafted under time pressure. There is no relationship between the legal possession of civilian firearms, such as those used for hunting or target shooting, and the risk of terrorist attacks. I consider it unacceptable to hinder law-abiding citizens with unnecessary or even disproportionate restrictions, which would bring no gain in security in areas that are already subject to sufficient regulations at the national level.” It was clear that the absence of an impact assessment on the proposed measures could have a disproportionate impact on legal users of firearms.

One of the most controversial points is the proposed ban of firearms based on their resemblance to military firearms. While the Commission is not offering any justification for this measure, there is widespread agreement that restricting legal use will have no effect on the black market as legal and illicit markets are not complementary. Concerns were also expressed that common target shooting firearms used for Olympic shooting disciplines and World Championships could be considered as “military firearms”.

On issues concerning minimum age, storage, the time-limited validity of licences and medical tests, MEPs rejected the Commission’s proposal recalling the subsidiarity principle, which enables Member States to adopt legislation tailored to national requirements.

Existing best practices put in place by countries such as Sweden, which guarantee the continuous strict control of authorities over the sale of firearms by means of distance communication, namely the Internet, make a ban unnecessary. MEPs urged the European Commission to avoid discrimination towards specific user groups, such as hunters and sport shooters, by preventing individual owners to sell their firearms on-line, a tool which is otherwise fostered by EU policies.

MEP Vicky FORD, voiced the concerns of many MEPs stating that the Commission did not respond directly to the question asked by her committee. Mrs. FORD stated that the Commission had planned to protect the interests of sport shooters and hunters, but nonetheless the written text was not a reflection of their initial plan.

In his statement, Mr HUSAK, reiterated the intention of the Commission to improve the security of citizens declaring its willingness to constructively cooperate with stakeholders in view of finding common solutions, while denying widespread allegations whereby hunters and sport shooters would be the real target of the restrictions.

“From a hunters’ perspective, it has been a shocking and demeaning experience to be at the center of the discussion surrounding terrorism and illegal trafficking of firearms”, said Torbjörn LARSSON. “Hunters are nature-loving, law-abiding citizens that take great pleasure in the conservation of our natural resources for generations to come. We do not cause trouble. On the contrary, hunters actively invest their time and money in activities that directly benefit society, such as habitat and species management, tracking down game involved in traffic accidents, pest control and mitigating the effects of invasive alien species. Apart from some useful improvements on the traceability of firearms, the Commission’s proposals appear to respond to a non-existing problem.” Mr. LARSSON also explained how banning semi-automatic rifles would negatively impact both disabled and female hunters as well as restrict the hunting and tracking of certain species of large game.

“The European Commission’s proposals are unfortunately a good example of bad law-making” stated MEP Bendt BENDTSEN, Vice-President of the Intergroup Biodiversity, Hunting, Countryside. “This is a case of symbolic politics! The proposed revision is irrelevant for the fight against terrorism, which was presented to be its main objective. Instead, the proposal will affect a lot of hunters and sport shooters who simply exercise their hobby. Hunters and sport shooters are not the ones committing acts of terrorism in Europe, and no legal firearm has been used in the terrorist activities we have seen - only illegal weapons have.” Mr BENDTSEN also stated that it should still be possible for private persons to legally trade firearms between themselves. However, with this proposal, he stated “the Commission is shooting sparrows with cannons.”

source :

https://www.facebook.com/FirearmsUnited ... 6717726336

At first, Thank you Dronne for upgrades...

phobus wrote:

Don,t most other countries in EU have open access to real weapons anyway ?
Why would they be concerned about deacts ?
The Paris attacks were nothing to do with deactivated weapons and I presume the AKs used were sourced from Eastern Europe where such are easily acquired cheaply .
I just don,t get how some bureaucrats  can seriously believe that welding up deacts ( further ) will in any way reduce the risk of further attacks - has, nt the reverse been true from what we have seen with increasingly restrictive gun laws here in the UK ?
Carl.

Unfortunately in first Paris attack was used reactivated blank firing asault rifles from Slovakia. Those blank firing guns are made from real steel weapons with simple mods ( 2 pins in barrel ) which can be reactivated easily by skilled armourer.
Problem is, Slovakia is only one country with legislation which allow this kind of weapons. Even Czech republic have much more strict law regarding blank firing guns.
EU should focus on Slovak law and force Change it to level with other countries....

Should, sadly every possible thing is used as an excuse, instead of focusing on real reasons :-/

Hi!
New talks today :
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/news-room/20160310IPR18692/Committee-on-the-Internal-Market-and-Consumer-Protection

Hi,
Some news :

http://www.europarltv.europa.eu/fr/player.aspx?pid=f147136d-c7f1-4e23-9aa7-a5c600f63fcc

Hi!
EU gun ban: GENVAL and EC insist, Firearms United calls to action

https://www.all4shooters.com/en/mobile/Shooting/law/EU-Gun-Ban-European-Commission-Council-GENVAL-Firearms-United/