Originally Posted by Yorkshiretea
Probably a way to keep the wolf from the door Bri
Looking at the law then yes.
Legally I think it could be seen as offering instruction, the same the problem those lads had making 3D parts available to print a gun.
I see we're now at the invention stage
1. The Airgun and Manufacturers Trade Association (AMTA) took the independent decision to fit AT.
They have their own test criteria and stated tool kit and the gun has to withstand "attack" for 30 to 60 minutes.
There is no drill or bits in the tool kit and why the 30 or 60 minutes. Surely once the 30 has passed so has the gun
There is however a tape measure in the kit so you can measure how long the gun is
It was said that they had been leaned on by the Home Office but strangely this is denied by the Home Office.
After 35 years could it be possible that the manufacturers had been caught with their finger in the pie. Their solution, to make their customer the fall guy.
2. Fitting AT does not make the gun any less capable as those who remove the AT will happily tell you. Also there has been a number of cases of over power rifles leaving manufacturers/gunshops with the AT fitted. Not much use there then. If a test lab can strip a rifle down to remove the firing valve return spring (taking off a fixed bottle) to ensure it fired from 3 to 30 FPE then I'm pretty sure a bit of AT won't stop them.
3. Offering instruction in this case is not a Criminal Offence. Acting on that instruction may well be. There are countless video's and instruction throughout the web. Most could be used to lower the power of the gun as well as raise it.