Modifying a firearm/making parts BAD NEWS 2/12/20

[Wm.Traynor]

I'm stumped! I cannot find anything on Qld Weapons Licencing, in Enough Gun's search engine or on the web. Googling gives me other states. So, I am getting the runaround.
I want to know if I can make parts for a rifle to improve them in certain ways. Can anyone point me to the relevant legislation or even the whole legislation and I will go through it all myself, 'til I find something. The reason I want to do it myself, is to save money on a gunsmith.

According to a Senior Constable today, Section 62 of the Weapons Act 1990, applies. In particular, part b says that I must not, without reasonable excuse, possess a firearm the construction or action of which has been modified. He goes on to say that I might like to seek legal advice and threin lies the problem.
I can imagine this costing $$$, whereas I wanted to do things cheaply

[LawrenceA]

That is a prickly subject and very open to interpretation.
I suggest that you contact weapons licensing and ask. The fact you have not seems to indicate that what you are considering is not clear cut.

Firstly you cannot manufacture a firearm (Note a major component is a firearm by law), also you cannot make repairs as a business but in theory can make parts and repairs for yourself as long as it does not materially alter the weapon.
Just think sawn off shotgun versus fitting a Boyd's stock.
However I think that shortening a barrel within the legal limit would be fine.
I would suggest you need to consider the finished product and intent versus the parts involved. If the finished product is for your use and would be able to be purchased as modified from your local shop then it is likely OK.

Seriously just ask the people who make the decision.

DON"T do something stupid for all our sakes!

[Oldbloke]

That is a prickly subject and very open to interpretation.
I suggest that you contact weapons licensing and ask. The fact you have not seems to indicate that what you are considering is not clear cut.

Firstly you cannot manufacture a firearm (Note a major component is a firearm by law), also you cannot make repairs as a business but in theory can make parts and repairs for yourself as long as it does not materially alter the weapon.
Just think sawn off shotgun versus fitting a Boyd's stock.
However I think that shortening a barrel within the legal limit would be fine.
I would suggest you need to consider the finished product and intent versus the parts involved. If the finished product is for your use and would be able to be purchased as modified from your local shop then it is likely OK.

Seriously just ask the people who make the decision.

DON"T do something stupid for all our sakes!

Sounds like good advice to me. Or maybe ask a Gun Smith. But he will likely just say no.

[Ziege]

dont ask the gunsmith, ask the police, and get it in writing.

[Farmerpete]

Make sure to ask by email so the response comes in writing, also try to get clarification on what is considered a "major firearm part" so you can figure out if you'll breach that section by making the part

Oh and can you please post the response

[bladeracer]

I'm stumped! I cannot find anything on Qld Weapons Licencing, in Enough Gun's search engine or on the web. Googling gives me other states. So, I am getting the runaround.
I want to know if I can make parts for a rifle to improve them in certain ways. Can anyone point me to the relevant legislation or even the whole legislation and I will go through it all myself, 'til I find something. The reason I want to do it myself, is to save money on a gunsmith.

You'll need to be more specific. Unless something is specifically proscribed or prescribed in law then it is legal.
Making a stock, chassis, brake, scope mount, pistol grip, sling swivels, bolt knob, etc is unregulated in all states as far as I'm aware. Making a receiver is regulated in all states and some states regulate barrels also.

In Victoria I wrote and asked about a bullpup chassis for a bolt-action rifle and the response was succinct, provided overall length remains more than 750mm and barrel length remains longer than 450mm (or was it 400mm?) it's fine. Only the receiver is a "firearm".

I can't see any restrictions in the Qld Regs except when modifying firearms as your business.
https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/pdf/inforce/2018-03-01/sl-2016-0131
Section 69 of the Act requires an Armourer's Licence to modify or manufacture a firearm as a business. Section 70A requires an armourer to notify authorities when changing the category of a firearm.
https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/pdf/inforce/current/act-1990-071

[Farmerpete]

Br i was sure I read something in the qld regs about not being allowed to manufacture a "major firearm part" from memory (its sketchy at times) the description was if the gun wouldn't function (fire a bullet) without it, it was a major firearm part. Again this is all from memory so forgive me if I'm wrong.

The definition is very broad

MY interpretation of this is that since the gun wouldn't fire without pretty much any part of the action or trigger group missing then all parts apart from the stock and maybe the barrel (at a stretch) and maybe the bolt handle couldn't be manufactured. But that's only MY interpretation and I'm certainly no lawyer

[Oldbloke]

Br i was sure I read something in the qld regs about not being allowed to manufacture a "major firearm part" from memory (its sketchy at times) the description was if the gun wouldn't function (fire a bullet) without it, it was a major firearm part. Again this is all from memory so forgive me if I'm wrong.

The definition is very broad

MY interpretation of this is that since the gun wouldn't fire without pretty much any part of the action or trigger group missing then all parts apart from the stock and maybe the barrel (at a stretch) and maybe the bolt handle couldn't be manufactured. But that's only MY interpretation and I'm certainly no lawyer

That's my understanding to.

But he is in QLD and states often vary. Needs to talk to someone from QLD. e.g. coppers

[Wm.Traynor]

Thank you everyone. I am taking all this in

[Wm.Traynor]

Well, I've written to the cops. So we'll see what they say. I hope it goes well as it will be a lot cheaper than buying an after market guard and having a smith make the ejector I had in mind.

UPDATE
And it might take them a month to respond. but I hear they're busy.

[rc42]

Out of curiosity, what is the firearm and what are the improvements you are looking for and changes that you want to make to it?

There may be other options and ideas from forum members.

[Wm.Traynor]

It is a CZ455 and I do not like the trigger guard (TG) or the ejector.
The TG is flimsy, bendy and twisty and IMO, difficult to bed. I thought that if it was stiffer that it would be an improvement at least. You can get 3mm flat aluminium that could be bent in a vice to make the bow. Another long piece would fit in the mortice for the magazine and trigger. I could drill it to make spaces for the mag and trigger. Would have to do some filing. Screw it to the bow. Hey Presto...............TG!
The ejector rubs against the cleaning rod causing wear issues with the chamber and possibly the leade. Why CZ ever made it this way doG only knows. My bright idea was to epoxy a bit of Aluminium the the rear/butt end of the mag and do away with the ejector/bolt guide #34 altogether, by filing the ejector post. Remove the mag to use the rod unobstructed. However, this could be a bit flimsy and my epoxy, JB Weld, is pretty old. I don't wany to buy another tube$$$! just for this, sooooo I had another idea another idea Where's the light bulb emoji!? Any way You could make an ejector out of paddle pop sticks, glued together with craft glue and slip it behind the mag, so that it fitted over the loose pin #13 in the mag. You could make a curved nut to replace #34 again out of aluminium. It is easier to bend than steel. I can imagine a 'smith charging a small fortune for this, which is why I wanted to do it myself and I could be making a rod for my own back. As they say, the devil will be in the detail. I have checked the paddle pop theory though. Five or six would fit neatly, side by side in the space behind the mag. One would have to stick up a bit to act as the ejector. To remove, take out the mag ang push the new ejector up and out through the bottom of the receiver. That's that theory anyway

Well, there you have it. I have told the cops all this in my email and await their pleasure as well as that of this forum

[rc42]

You can replace or reshape external parts like stocks and trigger guards with no issues, as long as you don't shorten the stock to the point where it reduces the overall length of the rifle below the limit and no longer fits into your shoulder so it becomes like a pistol. Replacing or even making your own trigger guard is also not a concern under any legislation in QLD, although it might be soon in NSW with their proposed over reaching and vague new laws. The only concern I'd have is that it might look like crap if you don't have the necessary metal working tools and skills.

Changes to the ejector parts are also not a concern as long as you're not changing the function of the bolt action, there are after market parts available that might meet your needs, maybe something like this:
https://www.rebelgunworks.com.au/produc ... ector-pn34
I'd always suggest getting a replacement part to test modifications so you can always put the firearm back to its original state.

If the cleaning rod is rubbing on the ejector then look at a bore guide for it, that might be a better solution:
http://www.hss.net.au/product_info.php?products_id=802

I wouldn't consider anything that includes words like 'paddle pop stick', 'epoxy' or 'JB Weld' unless you're just talking about re-shaping the inside of the stock which is essentially glass bedding and is OK to do.

WLB will likely take a long time to get back to you and may just send some vague link to legislation without actually answering your questions but you don't seem to be planning anything that would cause concern.

[Wm.Traynor]

rc42
Thanks for those links mate. I have to admit to being impressed by my own cleverness regarding these mods; especially the paddle pop stick-idea. If it doesn't work out then it will be good to be able to get replacement parts. Doing it all on the cheap impressed the heck out of me too.
But...............it could all go pear shaped and I am now thinking about new take-down bolts. These will be necessary because the 3mm flat aluminium is much thicker (and stiffer) than the original TG; a little detail that escaped me in my initial enthusiasm.
No matter. It will all work out in the end

[bladeracer]

I'm working on a new bullpup, but it's going slow.
Building it around an MDT LSS chassis this time so a lot less fabrication. Basically just a pistol grip mount under the forend, a butt plate, a barrel shroud to mount sights, and extending the trigger mechanism.

[Wm.Traynor]

I'm working on a new bullpup, but it's going slow.
Building it around an MDT LSS chassis this time so a lot less fabrication. Basically just a pistol grip mount under the fore end, a butt plate, a barrel shroud to mount sights, and extending the trigger mechanism.

rc42's concern that I don't have the necessary tools and skills is well founded. All I have is a hacksaw, a fairly heavy hammer, an electric drill a vice and some files. So, I fully expect bladeracer's project to be much handsomer than mine but that's OK. It just has to work and until it is completed, we will have his to ogle

[bladeracer]

I'm working on a new bullpup, but it's going slow.
Building it around an MDT LSS chassis this time so a lot less fabrication. Basically just a pistol grip mount under the fore end, a butt plate, a barrel shroud to mount sights, and extending the trigger mechanism.

rc42's concern that I don't have the necessary tools and skills is well founded. All I have is a hacksaw, a fairly heavy hammer, an electric drill a vice and some files. So, I fully expect bladeracer's project to be much handsomer than mine but that's OK. It just has to work and until it is completed, we will have his to ogle

That's all I used to build my first bullpup chassis, and all I'm using for this one also.
I really only build to a practical stage, once it works I generally stop, doesn't have to look pretty

[Wm.Traynor]

I thought that I posted the Bad News referred to in the new heading but it seems to be missing, so here it is again, below.

Section 62 of the Weapons Act 1990 says that I must not posses a firearm, the construction or action of which has been modified. To do so I need a reasonable excuse and there is the hitch because I need to see a lawyer, which costs $$$. It's that or take it to an armourer=more bucks. I originally explained to them that the idea of DIY was to avoid expense but that has fallen on deaf ears. The improvements expected were also pointed out with like treatment.
So that is that.

[LawrenceA]

Hmmm
Have you looked at the definition of Modified?
Adjusting the trigger position or stock is a modification so is bedding the action.

[bladeracer]

I thought that I posted the Bad News referred to in the new heading but it seems to be missing, so here it is again, below.

Section 62 of the Weapons Act 1990 says that I must not posses a firearm, the construction or action of which has been modified. To do so I need a reasonable excuse and there is the hitch because I need to see a lawyer, which costs $$$. It's that or take it to an armourer=more bucks. I originally explained to them that the idea of DIY was to avoid expense but that has fallen on deaf ears. The improvements expected were also pointed out with like treatment.
So that is that.

That makes no sense.
Buy a rifle, fit a sling, a Boyds stock, muzzle brake, recoil pad, or a scope and its construction is now modified according to them.
I think you'll find making it fit for purpose is sufficient "reasonable excuse".

In your specific instance, did you ask them if you can legally put an aftermarket "bottom metal" kit on it because you don't like the OEM trigger guard?

[Wm.Traynor]

LawrenceA
I am guessing it depends on the interpretation of the Officer.
It could be that there is a definition in print somewhere but I don't know where to find it. Bear in mind that I could not even find this legislation in the first place. So I am not hopeful of finding anything authoritative, to contradict this person's email. And I take your point about triggers and bedding. It is so broad in scope, so all-encompassing that it would make almost everyone in breach, if it was applied without discretion, dare I say it, commonsense.

[Wm.Traynor]

bladeracer,
That specific question was not asked. It was pointed out that I could do it cheaper than aftermarket and the deficiencies of the OEM was also noted. The officer remarked that what was described appeared to require the "services of a qualified and approved armourer". In fact, he recommended it.

[bladeracer]

bladeracer,
That specific question was not asked. It was pointed out that I could do it cheaper than aftermarket and the deficiencies of the OEM was also noted. The officer remarked that what was described appeared to require the "services of a qualified and approved armourer". In fact, he recommended it.

But you can buy a standard Howa1500 and drop it into an MDT chassis, with pistol grip, collapsible butt stock and 10rd magazines?

[Wm.Traynor]

bladeracer
Yes. All of that. But I did not say they were using their common sense. Quite apart from that, the officer might have been in an obstructive frame of mind; making it difficult deliberately.

[LawrenceA]

bladeracer
Yes. All of that. But I did not say they were using their common sense. Quite apart from that, the officer might have been in an obstructive frame of mind; making it difficult deliberately.

Probably just ignorant. I don't mean stupid I mean limited knowledge.

[boingk]

Modify the thing as much as you want, provided overall length and actuation are not changed. I would advise to make any modifications easily reversible.

If you've ever had an inspection you'll likely find that all they want to do is count the rifles and tick a few serial numbers off - they don't have pictures of the rifles or descriptions beyond something like:

"RIFLE, BOLT, CENTREFIRE, RUGER AMERICAN, 308 WINCHESTER, SERIAL #12345678"

They see a boltaction in 308 with that serial, you're good to go. My stock answer if anyone asks where the work was done is "I bought it like that, no idea."

- boingk

[rc42]

A written response from WLB will always be ultra conservative as if something goes wrong the officer may be called to read his letter aloud in court and justify every point in it showing how clear and legally justified they each were.

In terms of modifications that would result in prosecutions you'd have to be changing serialized parts, shortening barrels, changing bolt actions into lever actions or making a lever release or straight pull into a semi or full auto. Changing or adjusting the stock, glass bedding, fitting slings, bipods, scopes, trigger guards, lighter triggers or just about any third party add-on you can think of is not going to be a concern during any inspection.

From the point of view of the quality and neatness of any modifications, the more professional it looks the better but as long as you're happy with it go for it, at the end of the day any damaged part can be replaced if you want it back to 'as new' condition.

[Wm.Traynor]

Thank you boingk and rc42

[Oldbloke]

A written response from WLB will always be ultra conservative as if something goes wrong the officer may be called to read his letter aloud in court and justify every point in it showing how clear and legally justified they each were.

In terms of modifications that would result in prosecutions you'd have to be changing serialized parts, shortening barrels, changing bolt actions into lever actions or making a lever release or straight pull into a semi or full auto. Changing or adjusting the stock, glass bedding, fitting slings, bipods, scopes, trigger guards, lighter triggers or just about any third party add-on you can think of is not going to be a concern during any inspection.

From the point of view of the quality and neatness of any modifications, the more professional it looks the better but as long as you're happy with it go for it, at the end of the day any damaged part can be replaced if you want it back to 'as new' condition.

IMHO pretty right.

[Wm.Traynor]

Now that I have thought about it, I think rc42 is right about the copper being conservative instead of obstructive, as I originally thought. Oldbloke's post above has helped bring me to conclusion, as has that of boingk.
I am going to forget that side of things for a while. Meanwhile I am hoping for a DIP Adjustable Sear to become available. There's no way I could make something like that!