Thread: Anti-tamper
View Single Post
Old 7th January 2015, 07:44 AM
raygun's Avatar
raygun raygun is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Member of: Rivington Riflemen
Location: Bolton
Posts: 951

Originally Posted by Yorkshiretea View Post
Ray, have you ever asked say Air Arms or BSA why they fit the AT?

It's an interesting debate but I can understand why it's there, whether I agree with it isn't the point really, I just can't see anyone making something that is "capable" of being FAC at the turn of a screw.

I can't really comment on the cases mentioned as there's not much evidence beyond "I know a bloke". It's not that I even disagree with Ray 100%, he does have a point but I'm not sure how big a problem it even is.
None of the members of AMTA will discuss the reasons for fitting AT. They will not even give instructions on what you should do to remain safe from prosecution if you find your AT gun over power. Terry Doe was, so he said, willing to meet a group of us to discuss AT. We had a problem in trying to find a time/date that all could make.
We then found out that the terms of the meeting was such that we would not be allowed to record or even report what was discussed. Not much point then in the meeting so it never happened.

The "Turn of a screw".

Air Arms rifles, from the S300, S200 series through to the FTP900 have had a power adjustment screw that was accessible up to 1997. I have personal experience of two FTP900's where it was possible to turn the screw and put them over power, hence capable.

If there are very few people prosecuted for over power rifles then it demonstrates that a problem doesn't exist and AT is not required. It an over power problem does exist it means that the law abiding with their AT fitted rifles are placed in jeopardy of prosecution without being able to do anything about it.

Personally I do not like the position of having to comply to legislation that a third party has precluded myself from doing so. There is no scenario where that is acceptable.

Reply With Quote