There are only three types of people in this world. Those that can count, and those that can't!
Thanks for the link to the above image. Wonder if they also sell that rifle with serbian or cyrilic tipp ex scribbles on it. Yes, I know, bad taste.
Anyway, best is a base guitar case, it will accommodate all rifles, even a full length Type 38, though not with its bayonet attached.
An itch ... is ... a desire to scratch
I dont read the law as being 'so specific'. I read 'proper and sufficient purpose' to mean that there is room for the Police to make a call on the situation and decide that there is 'insufficient' purpose. Where is @Sidney to please clear this up ??
Technically Lincoln was correct at the time....
There is a technical breach to not have the rifle in your possession outside of your own security provisions at your home address.
Clearly its a catch 22, the trick will always be how you manage the ambiguity. If the police feel that your have been responsible in securing your firearm, out of sight, inoperable locked inside an otherwise secure vehicle while you got to the toilet, or to obtain a meal, all whilst minimising the time away and perhaps seeking to remain in eyesight of the vehicle - then you are probably fine until you run into the arsehole who wants to get technical with you.
I guess Lincoln was being that guy... at the other end of the spectrum. I am not sure that he wasn't making a legitimate point, by pointing out the idiocy technically forced on us and the poor defensive bombastic inarticulate little policeman that day couldn't deal with it... But the willingness of the police to misrepresent, lie and fabricate evidence as a result of not liking effectively being held to account for trying to act outside of the law, is a warning to us all.
A dangerous game to play as all found out I guess...
Its very unfortunate that we have such power hungry regulators who believe that they should always hold the power but be the distributors of discretion. They want us exposed continually and therefore controllable. I am firmly of the position that society should only hold enough power to prevent disaster, not to subject individuals to punitive control.
Everywhere around me, I run into people who seem happy with the state having that power - its rather sickening, particularly when you consider that the state is supposed to be subject to the people in a democracy, not the other way around.
You, as a responsible firearms user, should plan your trip so as to minimise the likelihood of having to leave the (disabled) firearm in your vehicle. Come on guys, as John Key would say, "it's not rocket surgery"...
Actually if my firearm is in a locked vehicle and I have not been negligent in the manner it is stored or visible, then the crime is committed by the offender who breaks in and steals it. Not me.
But the way the law is at the moment, you are the criminal, you are the most likely to get prosecuted because apprehending the actual criminals is a whole lot harder. Understanding that is not rocket surgery either... and neither is it equitable.
The transference of responsiblity to those who have not acted or been negligent, or have not intended harm, to either prevent criminality, or to call to account for some unfortunate event is a fricken national sport for the emotionally affected and simple.
Someone must be held accountable is the catch cry of the stupid. We are riddled with this stuff, its pathetic, its neither preventative or remedial its simply retribution... and is about the exercise of force on otherwise compliant citizens.
Don't sanction stupidity.... the cost is more that we can understand...
AN interesting picture of Ariska 38s in British hands which initially had me pondering how it came to be, but eventually, the "little gray cells" finaly obliged. Does your source say which training troop / unit it is who appear in the your picture and when /where it was taken?
.
I doubt he is kidding, because he is right. I think you are misinterpreting what he has written. He says "minimize the liklihood", not eliminate. As in go to the toilet, get food or petrol whatever, but don't load up your car with all your hunting or competition gear then drive 5 minutes to your local supermarket and spend half an hour inside getting your groceries (or go to the movies!). Do that beforehand. Different story if you live in the wop-wops though and its not practical to do separate trips.
Picture is from this forum page: https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/...risaka-rifles/ Appears to show some territorial army soldiers during WW1.
The venerable 6.5x51SR (usually called 6.5x50 for some reason) was adopted by the British early 1900s and some 150,000 of the t-38 rifle saw rear-guard action with the British army in WW1, purchased from the Japanese via middle-men as a stop gap while more SMLEs were manufactured. Official designations were Rifle Magazine .256 inch, Pattern 1900 (Murati, Type 30) taking round nose ammo, and Pattern 1907, the T38 (an improved rifle worked over by Colonel Nambu) which was sighted in for spitzer ammo.
The adoption of these two rifles and the EXACT copying of the Pattern 1900's bayonet as the P1907 bayonet explains how the heck the British army came to adopt a samurai sword! Everything Japanese was actually cool those years after the Japanese licked the Russians. How fickle.
Another link to a PDF with details: http://www.armsregister.com/articles...sh_service.pdf
Here is an article, The .256" British, a lost opportunity. Bemoaning the British army failing to adopt a perfect calibre. Aside from being a long action cartridge, the 6.5 Jap is arguably an ideal military cartridge with muzzle energy 1.5 times the 5.56x45 NATO and would do just fine with a boat tail.
I'm waffling. (-:
An itch ... is ... a desire to scratch
Well I for one don't see an issue with leaving a firearm in your car as long as the vehicle is registered , because apparently registration is a magical anti theft barrier (sarc)
born to hunt - forced to work
Bookmarks