Private sales Question

[Biggie-Banana264]

I'm jusrt wondering if anyone has heard of the word "appropriate" if and this a is BIG if. I was to sale my airsoft wepon and it was non two tone. Would i have to make sure the person has a UKARA serial no ?. Is that legal ?

 

[Tackle]

While ukara isn't mandatory,  there is a "responsibility" placed upon a seller to potentially ensure they are convinced that the buyer is either a genuine airsofter or at the very least will show commonsense in the ownership of said rif.

BUT

This is all inferred in the case of a private sale, technically retailers are the only sellers who legally have a duty of care, which to the best of my knowledge hasn't yet been tested in a court of law ?.

 

[heroshark]

While ukara isn't mandatory,  there is a "responsibility" 

"Hello is this the ukara police? I have something to report"

 

[Tommikka]

I'm jusrt wondering if anyone has heard of the word "appropriate" if and this a is BIG if. I was to sale my airsoft wepon and it was non two tone. Would i have to make sure the person has a UKARA serial no ?. Is that legal ?

You do not need to valid UKARA in particular.  But the relevant offence places the onus on the seller to only sell a RIF to a person (or organisation) with a defence under the VCRA

In the context of this forum that defence is Airsoft skirmishing and the most commonly recognised scheme is the UKARA

You can accept anything that you are willing to accept as a VCRA defence.  If you end up facing the justice system as a result of an idiot could you reasonably back up your decision ?

 

[Pseudotectonic]

The law is very clear, selling an RIF is illegal unless you have sufficient evidence of defence.

It does not matter if you are a retailer or a private seller on a forum, the law is exactly the same.

UKARA is just one example of evidence of defence. You can choose to use something else other than UKARA to be your evidence of defence. But UKARA is most commonly used.

(It has absolutely nothing to do with any duty of care / negligence, which is a civil matter. Meanwhile the VCRA offence is a criminal matter.)

 

[Tackle]

The law is very clear, selling an RIF is illegal unless you have sufficient evidence of defence.

It does not matter if you are a retailer or a private seller on a forum, the law is exactly the same.

UKARA is just one example of evidence of defence. You can choose to use something else other than UKARA to be your evidence of defence. But UKARA is most commonly used.

(It has absolutely nothing to do with any duty of care / negligence, which is a civil matter. Meanwhile the VCRA offence is a criminal matter.)

Pardon me for not quoting verbatim, I tend to try to use more layman's terms I'm sure anyone reading it got the gist of it.

Yes, the law is explicit on requiring a defence in both retailers & private sales, the difference being that a retailer could expect harsher punishments & has potentially much more to lose.

Whereas a private seller could get away with being convinced that following a verbal conversation, or  written text on a forum or similar sales site, that the buyer is a bona fide airsofter with the best intentions for the use of the rif.

But everything is hearsay until it ever gets to court (?never), we've got retailers that cut corners & accept all sorts of bullshit schemes as a defence, & private sellers that do their utmost due diligence to ensure thing stay legal, & everybody that operates in between. 

 

[Pseudotectonic]

Why would a retailer expect harsher punishment?

VCRA does not discriminate

 

[Chev Chelios]

If it ever gets tested I have always wondered how the VCRA and the act of selling a RIF to someone over the age of 18 without a defence would hold up when the same person can purchase in some cases an identical looking Air Rifle without one. 

 

[Tommikka]

Yes, the law is explicit on requiring a defence in both retailers & private sales, the difference being that a retailer could expect harsher punishments & has potentially much more to lose.

Why would a retailer expect harsher punishment?

VCRA does not discriminate

The VCRA fine is the same whether it’s an individual or retailer.

& has potentially much more to lose.

A retailer could get multiple incidents brought in and potentially a total of more fines on scale of transactions 

Whereas a private seller could get away with being convinced that following a verbal conversation, or  written text on a forum or similar sales site, that the buyer is a bona fide airsofter with the best intentions for the use of the rif.

Both private seller and retailer could use any of those, there’s no legally required record under the VCRA, just the potential risk that it may be necessary to defend your sales in court as to reasonably believing the buyer had a defence as defined 

But everything is hearsay until it ever gets to court (?never), we've got retailers that cut corners & accept all sorts of bullshit schemes as a defence, & private sellers that do their utmost due diligence to ensure thing stay legal, & everybody that operates in between. 

Exactly 

If it ever gets tested I have always wondered how the VCRA and the act of selling a RIF to someone over the age of 18 without a defence would hold up when the same person can purchase in some cases an identical looking Air Rifle without one. 

Different beasts and different laws 

I would say that an air rifle is a low powered air weapon, which is within firearms legislation and therefore a firearm.  An identical air rifle to a RIF would not be an IF or RIF in my interpretaton (because it’s not an imitation if it’s already a firearm)

But case law has happened.  An air rifle that had the look of a ‘real’ firearm has been found in court to be a RIF

@Rogerborgand I have have discussed our differing interpretations on this many times. Case law took place placing the interpretation on that side

There is no longer any irony in this, and based on that case law lookalike / replica air weapon sales ought to take into account the VCRA as well 

 

[Pseudotectonic]

[...] there’s no legally required record under the VCRA [...]

Ackchually VCRA specifies "sufficient evidence to raise an issue" to be the standard for testing

So you would need some sort of evidence

 

[Tackle]

Like I said, for airsoft it's still hearsay, but until it happens..........

View attachment 132833

 

[Pseudotectonic]

I am just saying, you definitely need "evidence", because that is what VCRA says

The wording "sufficient evidence [...]" is that of the concept of evidential burden of proof which is not exclusive to VCRA and there are tests for "evidential sufficiency" in other areas of law that we can triangulate with

If you don't try to interpret the law yourself, you are at mercy of judges making wrong interpretations

 

[Rogerborg]

@Rogerborgand I have have discussed our differing interpretations

Ohhhh no we haven't.  

The law is an ass.  Spot the firearm, the firearm-but-different, and the not-a-firearm-but-only-for-the-purpose-of-the-firearms-act firearm here.

View attachment 78995

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a used air-gun sale (outside of Scotchland) is not covered by statute or regulation, right?  So you could bump the power up to airgun levels and sell without a defence?

2.5J single/semi = airsoft RIF, offence to sell

2.6J single/semi = air-gun, age restricted only

(But of course 1.31J auto = machine gun)

Make it make sense.

 

[Mint]

A UKARA registration number by itself will mean little to you as a private seller. Unless you are an airsoft retailer registered with UKARA, you cannot use the lookup feature to check that a number hasn't expired or that it is registered to the person you're speaking to. It is just a random number to you. Edit: You may be able to request information about a number by directly contacting the UKARA admin at [email protected] but this isn't certain.

If you want to stay on the right side of the law, you'd be better off asking for a photo of the purchaser playing at an airsoft site or to provide the name and contact details of an airsoft site that is willing to act as a reference to confirm that they are a skirmisher