Jump to content

Welcome to Airsoft Forums UK
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Unclear Law or Topic


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#21
GiantKiwi

GiantKiwi

    AF-UK Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 655 posts

  • Guns: G&G Wildhog 9" | G&P M7A1 | A&K Mk12 MOD 0

  • Loadouts: OD

 

Reasonable, lol. How can you call any checks "reasonable" without a frame of reference. It's like you didn't even read my post. I was talking about the home office's approval of UKARA's rules! Not the existence of UKARA. Without UKARA there would be no context for a "reasonable check".

 

I can see we're talking across each other here (rather than disagreeing). You want to bash UKARA and I want to point out that without it we'd have no approved frame of reference for how to demonstrate the defence in VCRA s.37 (2)(e).

 

Seriously, Sacarathe. Drop it. You're digging into an never ending argument, that is ultimately founded on many layers of misinformation.



#22
Loki7491

Loki7491

    AF-UK Starter

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 52 posts
I'm not out to bash UKARA, but knowing it's history from inception to current day I can safely say I'm not impressed with how they conducted business.

UKARA is recognized but not as a legal entity. It is recognized as good practice.

In terms of legal representation it is no more recognized than any other means of checking. It is simply the house hold name that people believe to be the only method.

Similarly, almost everybody in the U.K. Will "Hoover" their carpets when in actual fact they are vacuuming. Hoover was the most popular vacuum cleaner and became synonymous and a household name.

But, back on topic - yes the op can paint his gun colour scheme he like.

#23
Sacarathe

Sacarathe

    AF-UK Addict

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2819 posts

Seriously, Sacarathe. Drop it. You're digging into an never ending argument, that is ultimately founded on many layers of misinformation.

 
You're funny. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Thread title police.


#24
sokar666

sokar666

    AF-UK Starter

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 36 posts

  • Guns: ICS CXP TransforM4 UK1R
    ASG CZ Scorpion Evo 3 A1

The major problem with UKARA and the whole proof of defense is it's badly thought out and spectacularly badly implemented.  The only thing UKARA help's and serves is retailers so they can put a nice check mark next to a sale to proove they have asked if the sale is for airsofting purposes.  In reality  i can buy a two toned gun, remove the paint or easier replace the parts and if anyone questioned me which to be honest will never happen as no one really cares the answer would be i was given it.  But in regards to proof of defense, site membership, UKARA alternatives, receipts from fields, pictures, video footage, signed diary are all perfectly fine for sale of RIF's, this misconception that UKARA is the be all and end all of defenses is perpetuated by retailers as it's easier for them for sale's.  The whole situation needs completely overhauling and clear guideline's put in place.  For example if i was a hardened criminal i could spray paint my real steel gun a stupid bright colour and now have an IF as most airsoft guns externally look identical to there real steel counterpart's, also could by a two toned plastic gun, remove the paint and use it to commit a crime.  I'm exaggerating slightly but the points are valid, this whole spray painting helps and protects no one, absolutely no one as the poof of defense can be ignored if you so wish. Now i'm not sure how to resolve the whole issue but at present it doesn't work, the reason people argue for it is because they are law abiding citizens and so follow the rules and they would still do it if no defense was required as you already know that using your RIF for anything else but airsoft is wrong and so you wouldn't do it, everybody else really doesn't care.

 

I'm sure i'll be disagreed with, that's of course your opinion which i respect, that's my take on the whole situation.

 

As a final note which i just thought of, I would be curious to see the crime statistics that involved airsoft gun's before and after the inception of UKARA or proof of defence and see what effect if any it has had.



#25
Jam_Man

Jam_Man

    AF-UK Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 123 posts

  • Guns: Kryrtac Trident CRB Mk2
    G&G Predator
    TM M&P9

Having been in the industry for over 20 years, having run a shop and a site and having lobbied the government when all this was proposed prior to it coming into force and living through the change, I can assure you my information is correct.

My very Liberty depended on me knowing this to prevent jail time.

I am not disagreeing with Spoon (entirely). His post a #2 if factually correct. I am merely disagreeing with what he considers to be a defence.

Retailers (and private sales for that matter) need to show due diligence. They need to be satisfied the buyer is over 18 and the purchase is INTENEDED for use as per one of the legal defences.

A few years ago at the NAE Zero One sold a RIF to anybody attending the weekender who was over 18. They felt they could reasonably argue in court that buying a RIF at the UKs largest event was proof enough they wanted a RIF for airsofting purposes and that here in lies the crux of it.

The seller needs to be satisfied that if called in to court to face the beach they can prove they believed the purchaser was over 18 and wanted the RIF for purposes allowed by a defence. There are many shops today who help propagate the myth that UKARA is law and refuse to sell without a membership. Some do this because even 10 years since the introduction of the laws they are ignorant to it and others because it is protection for them. They can prove they checked the database.

 

Patrolbase themselves are happy to sell a RIF to someone as long as they have played just one game at their site. Play at the site, get a form signed at the game, go to the shop and pay a membership fee there and they will sell anyone a RIF on the first day they have played. No historical history of playing required there.

 

Its understandable some retailers will only sell to UKARA registered players because its the path of least resistance and they can do it safe in the knowledge its a legit sale without having to prove the defence themselves.

 

I was questioned on here about how I had managed to get my RIFS after only playing a few times in under 2 months so just shows how ingrained UKARA is in peoples minds (I got them about  a week or so before my 56 days from first game). The fact I had played a few times was a legitimate defence and accepted by the retailer after I provided ID and my two membership cards for sites which I had attended even though the cards were still in their probation periods. Funnily enough though the two sites that I attended would not sell until the 56 days, even though they were the  ones that saw me playing.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users