• Hi Guest. Welcome to the new forums. All of your posts and personal messages have been migrated. Attachments (i.e. images) and The (Old) Classifieds have been wiped.

    The old forums will be available for a couple of weeks should you wish to grab old images or classifieds listings content. Go Here

    If you have any issues please post about them in the Forum Feedback thread: Go Here

People’s view of how the sport of airsoft skirmishing will fair if Labour win the election

@Asomodai While I do not doubt your credibility, is there an "official source" where this info can be checked?

BTW I just noticed a fun fact, UKARA charges a £300 annual fee from each of their retailer members, there are 64 retailers on their website so this is a ~£19k fund annually for maintaining the database. So I assume this is all going to Fire Support?

 
@Asomodai While I do not doubt your credibility, is there an "official source" where this info can be checked?

BTW I just noticed a fun fact, UKARA charges a £300 annual fee from each of their retailer members, there are 64 retailers on their website so this is a ~£19k fund annually for maintaining the database. So I assume this is all going to Fire Support?
It's not on the UKARA website. But it's well known that Frank from FS is the chair of UKARA. He doesn't have to be transparent about it. The idea is that the player asks the site for UKARA info, if it was transparent that Frank was the Chairmen, imagine the idiotic questions that would be sent to him from the average player? 

Search for Frank and UKARA and you'll get lots of references to him being the chair. 

View attachment 131029

https://arniesairsoft.co.uk/news2/85557

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It appears to me that UKARA has a monopoly of lobbying power because they hold the secret sauce data of the airsoft market. However because they are not really an airsoft association they do not have the capacity to take on the role of one. A full fledged airsoft association should really be doing a number of stuff even during "peace time", e.g. PR and promoting safety and improving the hobby etc (see suggestions from GPT above). So that the public perception of our hobby does not depend entirely on external factors such as whichever party is in charge.

In other words, the toy gun illuminati might be too good at being secretive it is unintentionally trapping the hobby in the fringe zone it originated from.

 
Make Airsoft Great Again

3e1fef66d6957719bce3fb99dfd0e3a1


 
I'll be that guy again, and ask: if you feel strongly that UKAPU isn't doing what you want, what's stopping you from volunteering to join it, and changing that? 
Which one would you join? The Popular Front for Airsoft,  the People's Airsoft Front,  the People's Front for Airsoft? Or perhaps the Airsoft Peoples Popular Front?

 
Which one would you join? The Popular Front for Airsoft,  the People's Airsoft Front,  the People's Front for Airsoft? Or perhaps the Airsoft Peoples Popular Front?
UKAPU; that was what the discussion was about.

 
I was looking at another forum recently and they noted an intention within the Labour manifesto to increase firearms licensing to cover the full costs involved. Now I know that's not airsoft but shooters of ALL disciplines should be aware that if one group is targeted successfully then you can bet your last BB that they will look elsewhere to do something similar.

Get more money in from our sport, maybe ban it, or more difficult to access. Who knows.

You can never trust these politicians........ 

 
I was looking at another forum recently and they noted an intention within the Labour manifesto to increase firearms licensing to cover the full costs involved. Now I know that's not airsoft but shooters of ALL disciplines should be aware that if one group is targeted successfully then you can bet your last BB that they will look elsewhere to do something similar.

Get more money in from our sport, maybe ban it, or more difficult to access. Who knows.

You can never trust these politicians........ 
Increasing the fee to cover costs seems perfectly reasonable; it is not really targeting anyone.

 
Increasing the fee to cover costs seems perfectly reasonable; it is not really targeting anyone.
I agree to the increased fee but the service is woefully understaffed and undertrained at the moment in a good few areas and people have waited 2 years for a grant or renewal. I fear that it could be a "you get to hit them once so hit them hard" increase in fees. 

Also that it does not follow onto air powered and airsoft shooting.

Fingers crossed.

 
Then what incentive is there for them to limit costs?  "My department is over-staffed and much of what we do is pointless busywork," said no bureaucrat, ever.
Which is an utterly irrelevant argument.  The principle that those seeking licensing should bear the costs of that licensing is a legitimate one.

 
The fee is to cover the grant of a license, not the checking of a person's suitability to possess a firearm.  The right is a statutory one, the existing fee pays for the actual grant (printing the license, getting it signed, posting it to you).  The public safety aspect/home visit, checking medical records etc is already within the standing remit of the police and thus comes from their general funding.

That is how the law was framed to fit our long existing constitution.  

TBH I'm straining memories of a module on policing from the last millennium, however neither the original legislation that introduced licensing or the Bill of Rights 1689 have changed of course.  Bill Harriman's book on shooting law gives a full account if one is very interested.  

 
Which is an utterly irrelevant argument.


It's an observation, not an argument.

The principle that those seeking licensing should bear the costs of that licensing is a legitimate one.


The practice is that if a monopoly provider can bill you the "cost" for a service, they can - and will - name any "cost" that they want.

For example, the £70 fee to switch a vehicle registration mark, which is a take-it-or-leave-it fee for a few keystrokes.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Met released their gun crime figures this morning and interestingly stated that 46% of the 386 firearms recovered last year were converted blank firers.

Note that they have specifically said Blank Firers so hopefully we have moved away from the bollocks about "replica guns converted with tools bought from B&Q" that was being spouted back in 2006. I would be curious as to wether these were UK Spec or illegally imported European Spec front venting - I suspect the latter as that was the finding of Merseyside police a few years ago. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/articles/cxee411r07xo.amp

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You had to go and tempt fate there didn't you 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clmm78j3jjno.amp


Rage.jpg


Yes, utter spacktads, but the arrest is nonsense.  Highways Act 1980, Section 131 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/66/section/131 "If a person, without lawful authority or excuse discharges any firearm within 50 feet from the centre of a highway which consists of or comprises a carriageway, and in consequence thereof the highway is damaged, he is guilty of an offence."

Whether an airsoft gun is a firearm for the purposes of the Highways Act is neither here not there.

Still, the process is the punishment, and I'd expect the charge will be changed to Firearms Act 1968 S19, or something else that they can make stick.

 
Back
Top