Hello,

Try consulting:  BASC  Tel; 01244 573 000

© 2025 British Association for Shooting and Conservation. Registered Office: Marford Mill, Rossett, Wrexham,

LL12 0HL

Good luck……..

I’m no lawer but firearms law is a complex area in UK.
It is certainly illegal to manufacture firarms or ammunition without correct licences and or permits. People have been locked up for this. Making a determination on legality of accessories and parts is complex. When we have laws that say you can own a functional antique cap and ball revolver without any licence but can’t have a realistic plastic model of the same gun unless you are a registered member of a historical re-enactment group you can get some idea how difficult it is.

I don’t think publishing information on gunsmithing is controlled per se but in addition to firearms law there is anti terrorism law. Some of this is quite broad for example “..possessing a document containing information likely to be useful to a person preparing or committing an act of terrorism.” so depending on circumstances gunsmithing information could get you locked up.
I’d guess most publishers would pass based on a risk reward basis. Not much market in UK and potentially getting locked up.

Robert.

Gunsmithing books per se are not banned. But books containing “Incitement to violence” are. Ergo books describing how to make guns and how to use them for terrorism are banned.

Specific example is The Anarchists Cookbook, containing instructions on making and using weapons for terrorism. It’s  publication and possession are banned. Downloading a PDF online is a criminal offence.

No First Amendment here.

I switched TV channel to BBC Two by mistake last night and caught a bit of “Highland Cops” (fly on the wall type programme) that got my attention. They wer tlking about a possible terrorist and electronics. There followed pictures of a failry basic and tidy hobby electrical / electronics bench. A few hand tools, basic components and a 9V battery. continuing to watch the place also had a “chemestry lab” this was more advanced with professional glassware for exampla a large round bottomed flask with electric heating mantle. Also a collection of chemical in labelled containers. They said there were unidentified chemicals. A picture of a beaker with bright blue liquid an a bar of some sort across the top looked like a copper sulphate crystal growing to me.
The person was arrested and charged with terrorism offences. A jury found it “not proven” (odd Scottish law) and they were released. What wasn’t mentioned was what impact all that had on their life and work.
While I fully support anti-terror work this does seem like over-kill just because something wasn’t “normal”. Terrorists and drug makers tend not use lab grade equipment they are more likely to improvise with large cooking equipment or similar.

Trouble is hobbies like ours can seem strange to some and attract the wrong sort of attention.

Robert.

A verdict of “not proven” seems hardly proper justice, almost as potentially destructive to the defendant as “guilty”; due to an unfortunate human tendency to see any doubt as automatically negative. Legally it might be equivalent to acquittal in English law: effectively the accusation of “We think you did it and you can’t prove you didn’t, but we can’t prove you did”.

“unidentified chemicals”… they said. Which I doubt very much. It probably meant refusal to read labels or to ask, as knowledge could have weakened their case.

.

Some years ago a few barristers seeking yet more ways to enrich themselves from others’ problems (if necessary inventing the problems), wanted amateur engineering licenced, with the Police given supervisory powers.

They had been “inspired” by one of those (thankfully) extremely rare cases of someone re-activating disabled guns or making new ones, un-licensed, in his home workshop, for criminal ends.  That was genuinely a criminal matter, but to such barristers any amateur act or “unusual” hobby they cannot understand must by default be suspect, deviant, even malevolent.

Besides, more laws mean more money to barristers and solicitors, so desperately lowly-paid they are.

Their call was rightly rejected, but I do not by whom, how or on what grounds.

Even before this though, Model Engineer stopped featuring replica hand-guns years ago. I think the last I recall seeing on a front cover was a replica of an early revolver. The only armament models we see now are of heavy artillery: 18C ships’ guns, tanks, WW1 howitzers and the like. Even those, if they can be fired, have to be licenced. I think that can be done, but I am not sure. Most are purely display-case models.

.

There is a very significant social rather than legal point, though, and I think it is reflected in our hobby by that paucity of even inactive models of Georgian naval guns.

This is that on the whole, Britons do not worship guns!

We see them as a necessity militarily and for very carefully-limited Police use, and professional agricultural / animal-management purposes. We allow sports shooting (and game-shooting is highly contentious), historical re-enactments and antique firearms; but generally we neither need nor want guns as some sort of household appliance.

Actually by no means all Americans see guns as normal household objects, either, though the country has given us a very dark and nasty stereotype of that, and of a gun lobby puzzled why we Limeys don’t want guns and can’t buy them in Tescos!

On 2 November 2025 at 10:21 Nick Hulme Said:

On 1 October 2025 at 20:07 Robert Atkinson 2 Said:

When we have laws that say you can own a functional antique cap and ball revolver without any licence but can’t have a realistic plastic model of the same gun unless you are a registered member of a historical re-enactment group you can get some idea how difficult it is.

From Realistic Imitation Firearms legislation, as you can see this excludes firearms actually or appearing to date from before 1870.

“real firearm” means—
(a)
a firearm of an actual make or model of modern firearm (whether existing or discontinued); or
(b)
something falling within a description which could be used for identifying, by reference to their appearance, the firearms falling within a category of actual modern firearms which, even though they include firearms of different makes or models (whether existing or discontinued) or both, all have the same or a similar appearance.
(8)
In subsection (7) “modern firearm” means any firearm other than one the appearance of which would tend to identify it as having a design and mechanism of a sort first dating from before the year 1870.

Robert’s point is reinforced by Nick’s example.   What did the parliamentary draughtsman mean by the word ‘model’, and did MPs understand what he meant when they voted for it.

By ‘model’, did he mean:

1. a replica as understood by Model Engineers, or,
2. a particular type, as in “”Pistol, Webley, Mk I”

If he meant replica, making a model is potentially a firearm, and the Crown Prosecution Service might take it to court.   Then, unless already decided by precedent, the court would decide after a long legal argument!  Best to steer clear of the possibility.  Might be held in remand whilst they take months to sort it out, might be paying for an expensive legal team, and certainly don’t need the worry!

Although British firearms law is full of contradictions it discourages firearms in private ownership, which is a good thing for the reasons noted by Nigel.  Though great fun, the US pays a huge price for gun ownership.  More Americans have been killed in domestic shootings than in all America’s wars!  Despite the wars including deaths by death machines far more potent that small-arms: artillery, bombs, torpedoes, and missiles. etc  Plus disease…

Dave

On 2 November 2025 at 10:21 Nick Hulme Said:

On 1 October 2025 at 20:07 Robert Atkinson 2 Said:

When we have laws that say you can own a functional antique cap and ball revolver without any licence but can’t have a realistic plastic model of the same gun unless you are a registered member of a historical re-enactment group you can get some idea how difficult it is.

From Realistic Imitation Firearms legislation, as you can see this excludes firearms actually or appearing to date from before 1870.

“real firearm” means—
(a)
a firearm of an actual make or model of modern firearm (whether existing or discontinued); or
(b)
something falling within a description which could be used for identifying, by reference to their appearance, the firearms falling within a category of actual modern firearms which, even though they include firearms of different makes or models (whether existing or discontinued) or both, all have the same or a similar appearance.
(8)
In subsection (7) “modern firearm” means any firearm other than one the appearance of which would tend to identify it as having a design and mechanism of a sort first dating from before the year 1870.

The key word is appearance. A cap and ball revolver looks the same to the layperson as a modern revolver so would fall under realistic replica. A muzzle loading flintlock would not.
In any case you only know for sure when tested in court. The journey to that can be long and difficult.
A specfic example are “smoke dischargers”. These are short mortars typically mounted in clusters on amoured vehicles and designed to launch smoke genades. They can also launch fragmentation and phosporus grenades. The meet the definition of a prohibited firearm, their deactivation is specifically covered in the standard but the Home office has issued guidance not to tak action on them. However that does not make them legal and could still be locked up for having one if the police, CPS and court disagree with the home office.

I’s a risk – reward assessment for the individual. Personally I can’t see any reward and significant risk so don’t go there.

FWIW Tank guns on the toys you can buy ex government, are mainly deactivated, but you can still buy ex MOD tanks with active main guns –  You have to have a standard Sec1 firearms licences to own it, and the variation added for the main gun calibre. The license is then endorsed that you are not allowed to live fire it (where one would obtain such ammo if any ones guess), blanks of course ok especially if your doing reenacting and what not !!

Some really old guns, I have read somewhere can be owned if they are still active without an FAC, but only if they are so old the calibre is ‘obsolete’ wouldn’t trust it to be true, unless you are told by a firearms licensing officer.

Dan

The UK is increasingly firearms-phobic.
The official policy that recent UK governments of any colour has been and are working towards is that nobody in the UK should be able to buy, own or use any firearm at all.
The reasons for this is open to conjecture, I won’t go into that wasp’s nest.
The dichotomy between the UK and where I am in France is markedly so different, that it bears description.
As regards “cap and ball” ie black powder weapons here, it’s classed as a category D weapon, either original or replica, I can go to an armoury here, there is one within about 12 miles, and purchase a replica weapon by merely showing my French ID residence card, i’m not a French citizen, just an authorised resident.
That gets me the weapon, the ball ammunition, the percussion caps and any accessories pertaining to the weapon.
The black powder is a bit restricted in that the local armoury won’t stock it, (fire risk – insurance?) so I will have to go to their head shed depot, about 30 miles away and pick it up personally, again just showing personal ID.

Our local armourie website.
https://www.armurerie-douillet.com/?s=poudre+noir