Thread: Bolt security

Originally Posted by Bagheera

The wording of required security refers to "firearm" .
But many owners,like me, feel that a rifle without the bolt is not dangerous and may warrant few security precautions.

In particular, preventing a firearm from being stolen from a vehicle while popping in to pay for petrol or at the public convenience could be achieved 100% by taking the bolt with you. Yet somehow I feel the police may not be sympathetic.


Is a person guilty of incorrect storage if an unsecured rifle is stolen but not the bolt ?

Yes. Because a firearm is still a firearm even if it doesn't have the bolt in it. Read the Arms Act.

Thanks for that systolic:

Arms act 1983:

firearm—
(a) means anything from which any shot, bullet, missile, or other projectile
can be discharged by force of explosive; and
(b) includes—
anything that has been adapted so that it can be used to discharge a shot, bullet, missile, or other projectile by force of explosive; and
anything which is not for the time being capable of discharging any shot, bullet, missile, or other projectile but which, by its com- pletion or the replacement of any component part or parts or the correction or repair of any defect or defects, would be a firearm within the meaning of paragraph (a) or subparagraph (i); and
anything (being a firearm within the meaning of paragraph (a) or subparagraph (i)) which is for the time being dismantled or parti- ally dismantled; and
any specially dangerous airgun

Since a replacement bolt often can be obtained, even if it's an expensive and long winded process, removing the bolt is, in principle, only a temporary means of inactivating a firearm.

Sorted.