Prohibited Bore calibres & firearms

[amk]

The latest news doing the rounds is that Mumbai Police has stopped endorsing .45acp weapons on licenses. Apparently the folks who already have them can keep them. This whole PB-NPB issue is madness. I'm keeping mine until I'm made to give it up.

[goodboy_mentor]

Going by SCHEDULE -I category I(c) of Arm Rules 1962, is .45 ACP really a PB? Isn't it a NPB? This question arose in my mind yesterday while answering a query at http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 69#p160209

[amk]

This matter is already discussed in detail at http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 80&start=0 Arms mentioned in Arms Rules 1962 SCHEDULE -I category I(b) and I(c) fall in prohibited bore arms. As a thumb rule you can use the logic that if a bore is not a PB it is NPB. .40 S&W is NPB and .45 ACP is said to be PB. If I read Arm Rules 1962 SCHEDULE -I category I(c), .45 ACP is not mentioned. I also need clarity if .45 ACP is PB then on what legal basis?. Where is the law that says so? In Mumbai it is considered as NPB. I produce SCHEDULE -I category I(c) of Arm Rules 1962 below:

(c) Blot action or semi-automatic rifles of “.303" or 7.62 mm. bore or any other bore which can chamber and fire service ammunition of .303" or 7.62 mm. calibre; muskets of .410"
bore of any other bore which can fire .410" musket ammunition ; pistols, revolvers or carbines of any bore which can chamber .380" or .455" rimmed cartridges or service 9mm. or “.445" rimless cartridges.

Where it is saying above that any service ammunition is automatically PB? Am I reading it incorrectly? If I have not missed reading something in Arms Act 1959, the central government does not have power to make changes to Arms Rules by merely issuing a notification. Arms Rules have to be approved by Parliament as mentioned in Section 44(3) of Arms Act 1959.

Perhaps due to this .45acp is PB? Can .45acp weapons chamber .455 rimmed carts?

[goodboy_mentor]

Bullet diameter, neck diameter, base diameter, rim diameter, case length and overall length are different for both the cartridges. Will it be safe to fire .455 cartridge in .45 ACP pistol or .45 ACP is equal to PB is just because of some imagination of babus?

.455 Webley
Case type Straight rimmed
Bullet diameter .454 in (11.5 mm)
Neck diameter .476 in (12.1 mm)
Base diameter .480 in (12.2 mm)
Rim diameter .535 in (13.6 mm)
Case length .770 in (19.6 mm)
Overall length 1.230 in (31.2 mm)

.45 ACP
Case type Rimless straight
Bullet diameter .452 in (11.5 mm)
Neck diameter .473 in (12.0 mm)
Base diameter .476 in (12.1 mm)
Rim diameter .480 in (12.2 mm)
Case length .898 in (22.8 mm)
Overall length 1.260 in (32.0 mm)

[amk]

I don't know, that's why I ask Can we chamber and fire .455 in a .45acp firearm? Experts?

[Kittu]

hi you cannot fire .455 in a pistol chambered for .45acp.here we have cofuson about .455 rimmed round and .45 acp.but there is one onother cartridge .455 semi rimmed used in .455 pistols and ae pistols made by colt to chamber this round

[goodboy_mentor]

Are the dimensions of .455 semi rimmed same as .455 rimmed? If yes then can .455 semi rimmed be fired safely in .45 acp pistol?

[Kittu]

the answer is no you cant fire 455 semi rimmed in .45 pistol bpecause it headspaces on its rim like .z
32acp where as .45 headspases on case mouth and dimensions are also diffrent then 45 acp

[amk]

So why is .45 acp PB then?

[goodboy_mentor]

Yes a valid question. If it is true that .455 semi rimmed cannot be fired in .45 acp then going by definition of PB in SCHEDULE -I category I(c) of Arm Rules 1962 .45 acp should be NPB.

[Vikram]

So why is .45 acp PB then?

It is/was used in service.I have seen a good few .45 Tommy guns with the Armed Reserve Police.


Best-
Vikram

[goodboy_mentor]

If we see it from the legal perspective, the criteria to decide if a bore is PB or NPB is not whether it is or was used in government services. The legal criteria to decide if a bore is PB or NPB is what is being said by the SCHEDULE -I category I(c) of Arm Rules 1962. And the SCHEDULE -I category I(c) of Arm Rules 1962 is very clear and very specific about the bores in this matter.

[mundaire]

This matter is already discussed in detail at http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 80&start=0 Arms mentioned in Arms Rules 1962 SCHEDULE -I category I(b) and I(c) fall in prohibited bore arms. As a thumb rule you can use the logic that if a bore is not a PB it is NPB. .40 S&W is NPB and .45 ACP is said to be PB. If I read Arm Rules 1962 SCHEDULE -I category I(c), .45 ACP is not mentioned. I also need clarity if .45 ACP is PB then on what legal basis?. Where is the law that says so? In Mumbai it is considered as NPB. I produce SCHEDULE -I category I(c) of Arm Rules 1962 below:

(c) Blot action or semi-automatic rifles of “.303" or 7.62 mm. bore or any other bore which can chamber and fire service ammunition of .303" or 7.62 mm. calibre; muskets of .410"
bore of any other bore which can fire .410" musket ammunition ; pistols, revolvers or carbines of any bore which can chamber .380" or .455" rimmed cartridges or service 9mm. or “.445" rimless cartridges.

Where it is saying above that any service ammunition is automatically PB? Am I reading it incorrectly? If I have not missed reading something in Arms Act 1959, the central government does not have power to make changes to Arms Rules by merely issuing a notification. Arms Rules have to be approved by Parliament as mentioned in Section 44(3) of Arms Act 1959.

The following is a typo in the above post or “.445" rimless cartridges, it should in stead read or “.45" rimless cartridges - i.e. it directly refers to .45 ACP.

HTH

Cheers!
Abhijeet

[goodboy_mentor]

It does not appear to be a typing mistake in the post. I have checked Arms Rules 1962 from multiple sources including from various government websites. Also checked a scanned copy of the original document downloaded from this link {http://aasc.nic.in/Acts%20and%20Rules%2 ... 201962.pdf}. All say the same thing. If the Parliament has approved Arms Rules 1962 the way it is i.e. stating .445" rimless cartridges, it means the Parliament precisely meant what it exactly says. Cannot be legally said to be a typing mistake. A typing mistake in an Act of Parliament going on since for around 50 years and not corrected by government? I don't think any court will listen to this.

[mundaire]

My latest copy of the Arms Act 1959 & Arms Rules 1962 (Bare Act), 2012 edition - lists it as ".45 rimless". The previous copy I had was vintage 1990's and had used that edition as the source of the data posted on http://www.abhijeetsingh.com and in that it was written as ".445 rimless" (reminds me I really do need to update the info on that website) - maybe the other sources you mention were using (the same old edition) and the printers devil got propagated? I have also checked someone's 2009 (bare act) edition and it too mentions ".45 rimless".

Cheers!
Abhijeet