Rumoured EU gun ban text causes unease

4 Feb 2016 – A purported draft amendment to the EU gun ban plan’s text is causing considerable unease amongst Continental shooters – but nobody appears sure where it has come from.

The draft text appears to have surfaced via one of campaign group Firearms United’s non-English-language pages. Despite this, its provenance remains unknown.

The supposed amendment text reads:

Category B7 includes:

1. Clone war weapons and their spin-off provided that they are not suitable for containing the release devices of the original weapon;

2. Semi-automatic weapons that have two or more of the following characteristics:

a) Folding or telescopic butt;

(b) Gun Grip [1]

c) Presence of two or more optics supports (Piccatinny rail);

d) Bayonet connection or bayonet if fixed;

e) Weapons with length less than 830 mm[2];

3. Weapons with barrel length less than 450 mm[3];

4. Semi-automatic weapons suitable to fire the same ammunition as war weapons which have one or more of the characteristics indicated in the above point 2)[4]

[1] It is not considered as gun grip the one obtained from the butt and having a hole for the housing of the thumb (thumbhole);

[2] Length is to be considered with close butt, excluding any flash eliminators.

[3] Barrel length measured without attachments as flash eliminators, mouth brakes, compensators;

[4] Following you will find a non-exhaustive list of the more common calibres suitable for war ammunition: i.e. 5.45 mm x 36; 7.62 mm x 39; 7.62 mm x 54; .223 Remington; .308 Winchester; .30-06

UK Shooting News thinks that this text, if passed into law, would outlaw the vast majority of semi-automatic firearms in current production, and represents no real change from the first draft’s position of banning firearms that “resemble” full auto ones.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Rumoured EU gun ban text causes unease

  1. A.J.P.

    From the Firearms-UK Facebook page were this information was first posted:

    Pierangelo Tendas
    This is the truth about this list — the guidelines you quoted come indeed from Italy, but not as an official proposal.

    Here’s the story: a few weeks ago the director of the National Proofing House, pressured by the Ministry of Interior, outlined a non-complete and very at-large list of some features that, in some cases and by no means always, would help classifying a firearm as a B7 — be advised, that means CLASSIFYING as a B7, by no means “prohibiting” or “banning”. B7s are (so far) perfectly legal to own and shoot in Italy with any kind of gun license, as gun licenses in this Country don’t differentiate between types of firearms that the holder can obtain.

    Of course some European or Italian bureaucrat couldn’t help but make himself/herself a hero at the eyes of the European Commission by proposing them to adopt those guidelines to save their faces!

    As a matter of fact, indeed, rumors are that the European Commission may be preparing to back off from the total ban proposal, “settling” itself for a “better definition” of what is a Category B7 firearm and what is not. This is not yet certain, however, and even if it was, relief should only be intended as temporary: they will never give up their ban plans, they’ll only agree to retry later.

    Needless to say, news of this list of features being at the European Commission’s attention caused a shitstorm within the Italian industry and shooters’ associations; the most common opinion here is that all Category B7 firearms that were civilian-grade (semi-automatic only) right from the very get go should be moved to the B4 category, and that only demilitarized firearms (full-autos converted to semi-auto only) should be B7s. Unfortunately the Ministry of Interior is (unofficially, in order not to cause a public outrage of Italian shooters) pretty much wanting to ban all military-lookalike firearms, and in Italy there is no legal way to oppose such guidelines from being adopted. Only the above-mentioned director of the National Proofing House can do so by changing his mind; unfortunately that would be too little and too late, since the guidelines were already brought to the EC’s attention.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s