Leaderboard

On the odd time I’ve found someone wearing something in poor taste I’ve always made sure they were left with no doubt that they were hit Thankfully it’s been years since I’ve seen anyone being silly. Don’t chuck the sport in. Are there other sites you could try that have a better vibe?

Play to play. The "sport" is full of assholes, weekend warriors and wannabes, I just ignore them and wear my "I'M A SPACEMAN" patches, because we're playing cowboys and Indians in the woods (hey, I said bang and you didn't fall down!). Play for the fun and don't let dickheads stop your enjoyment of something.

When talking about civilians, you’re probably correct. This does not, however, account for any kind of preventative protection, or cops, who are also “Good Guys With Guns”. In many areas, a large percentage of people carry. Half my coworkers carry, and their wives. And my bosses. And their wives. And their parents. (Not their children 😂) I’m in Central Texas, which is both a very gun-rich area, and a very safe area. This is not a hard fact, but cities and areas with stricter gun laws tend to be far less safe. I have been to every state and almost every major city in the USA—the areas that make it hard for citizens to defend themselves experience more violent crime. This is what I’ve seen from personal experience. Anyone can twist numbers to say what they want. Obviously there are people in the world and even in my city that I wouldn’t hand a loaded handgun to. But, who am I to arbitrarily make that decision? What if someone else arbitrarily decided that I shouldn’t be allowed to own a firearm? It’s a slippery slope, deciding who should be allowed to do what. I think I’ll agree with Colin; my view on these things is extremely simplistic. However, I see nothing wrong with that. I’m not an extremist of any wing trying to either set the 2nd amendment into iron, or to tear it down. I’m just an ordinary Joe who wants the ability to defend his family, and for his family to be able to defend themselves. I also don’t have any kind of political agenda—this is just an engaging discussion with me and a bunch of Brits on an online forum dedicated to shooting plastic balls at each other l. 😂

Definitely the latter👎 But don't rush to quit, the dickheads rarely last....... Only to be replaced by a whole new kinda twat lol🤣

"Bad news from the Colonies, your majesty."

Popcorn.gif

Kinell The end times are upon us.

Popcorn intensifies.

I don’t think any of y’all Brits need to be getting angry over a discussion about American legislature for any reason… if anything I should be the angry one. 😂 …no point to having this discussion if it’s just going to make people go nuts…

I'm not having a go at anyone in particular, just disappointed a discussion has got personal. This is typically a happy place

I'd say both. They know exactly what they're doing and are only doing it for a reaction so can play the internet big man later, complaining about how snowflakes are upset by a bit of cloth. Imo the best way to deal with them is make sure the only attention they get is from a few extra bbs (especially to the more sensitive body parts). They're nothing more than attention whores who thrive on creating drama

The rest of the world, except maybe south Africa disagrees with you.😉

Yeah well I gotta invisdible sheeld an, an, anyway my fingers were crossed so it don't count😋

If they're shit, we'll go round to that Colin bloke's house and sort him ahhhhhhhhhhhhht!

There are two key points there …. “A few legitimate reasons” and “need” There is only ever a “need” for anything due to a “few legitimate reasons” There are valid “needs” for firearms, and there are also valid “wants” for firearms. Those are what the licencing process look at, and under the wider umbrella of firearms as defined by legislation there are those that do not require any licence/certificate/membership

At risk of seeming pedantic, the logic of the saying is apparent when one remembers that 'prove' and 'test' are synonyms e.g. proving ground/test ground meaning the same thing.

Honduras has a terrible murder rate and zero legal civilian gun ownership. Anyhow, whatever we discuss, be it cars, drugs, guns, or anything else; the simplist thing is that responsible nonviolent people pose no problem with them. I don't dick about with my controlled meds, wave rifs around where unsuitable or drive pissed. Same for the rest of us on here I'm sure. We collectively, through govts, regulate things because socialy regulating ourselves is impossible whilst the instrumental logic of our social relations and the resulting adherence to functionalism trumps the objective study of actual material conditions. Alienation is the result. Alienated people act in alienated ways. How it seems around the campfire two scotchs in anyhow. It also strikes me that concern with producing socialy healthy citizens is at least 2400 years old and we're not there yet by some measure. Not sure we'll solve it in this thread anyhow. 'Behave in a socialy responsible way, chin the cunts that don't.' Ghandi

Just not taking things seriously. This topic inevitably leads to disagreement, and we're on a forum for big kids. 🤪

If you didn't earn it, don't wear it.

You do realise that law abiding citizens carrying guns isn't the deterrent you think it is. Infact it's going to make the criminal more likely to carry and use a gun in crimes

You're correct it's not a hard fact. It's not even a soft and squishy fact, when you look at gun deaths per capita by state and compared to the level of firearm legislation it's a very different picture https://www.criminalattorneycincinnati.com/comparing-gun-control-measures-to-gun-related-homicides-by-state/ Yes, lies, damned lies and statistics, but when there is such an overwhelming volume of evidence in support of better gun control I'm still gobsmacked how many people say more gun laws make places LESS safe. As to your other point, from what I've gathered it seems that most of the people in favour of tighter gun control want just this; to stop that guy getting his hands on a gun. This pretty much sums it up:

Have you seen the requirements in Switzerland? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_regulation_in_Switzerland despite being one of the most liberal sets of legislation, they have much tighter control on the sale of ammunition and the actual use of guns. The issue in the US isn't the guns, it's the fetishisation of gun culture among a relatively small section of society and the huge number of guns in the hands of criminals. Add to that a lobbying movement with huge coffers that has a vested interest in maintaining a multi-billion dollar industry and you end up with a country that offers little more than hopes and prayers when school kids get shot but woe betide you if you're not a straight, white, conservative. I think the most telling stories about guns come from people that have left the US for other countries and then one day suddenly realised that actually, maybe the rest of the world was right after all!

👆 This. I can't think of a single scenario that successfully moves the US away from tens of thousands of innocent people giving their life every year just so that others can have the right to own a gun on the off-chance they need to overthrow the government - let's not get into the debate that when they had the chance they opted to fight to keep a corrupt government in power, the exact opposite of what the second amendment is all about.

True. But in the preceding 27 years to Dunblane there were 17. 3 were terrorism. 1 was in Northern Ireland, where the law remains the same. So arguably, 12. The removal of access to pistols has reduced the occurrance by 3 in a nearly thirty year period. Don't get me wrong, three fewer is good. BUT People who are going to do bad things are going to do bad things. If you are of a mind to kill people, you are willing to break the law. Therefore the legality of access to firearms is irrelevant to you. In the UK nearly all gun crime is committed with illegally held firearms. The process of obtaining and keeping firearms in the UK is amongst the most stringent in the world, when applied correctly. There are failures, as in Plymouth, where the shooter should not have had a firearm. Even his own mother had pleaded with the Police to not return his gun. Failure to apply the law will not be changed by changing the law. Of course, you could outlaw all firearms. That means bye bye RIFS too. So long to air rifles, catapults, bows, crossbows.... stones? Screwdrivers? Chainsaws... The list is endless. If it's dangerous, it should be banned. There is more chance of you dying in the UK by crossing the road than there is of you being shot. If it's dangerous, should it be banned? Should we live our lives in cotton wool? No. That would be boring. As the philosopher DMX once said "Guns don't kill people. People kill people." p.s. apologies for the ramble, three kids and 4 dogs impeding concentration. p.p.s dogs kill people sometimes. They should probably all be banned. p.p.s kids kill people. They should probably be banned too. p.p.p.s Grown ups kill people... oh ffs

They see it as giving more ground to people who aren't really seeking gun registration, but whose end goal is eventually banning all private firearm ownership.

Careful now. Many people would apply the same argument to realistic imitation firearms. And would not consider "running around in the woods dressed up as a pretend soldier going 'Pew! Pew! Pew!'" to be a legitimate reason. We were only granted that as an afterthought, on a Ministerial whim that could be withdrawn at any time. Back on topic, I do agree that this looks like a lot of doom-mongering over a tiny orange band, when airsoft toys seem to come fitted with full orange muzzle devices in the Colonies right now. On a strict reading, you could even paint a bit of orange on the barrel of a pistol that's fully recessed inside the slide, since there's no requirement for it to be visible. However, the kicker might be the interpretation of "manufacture", if it's interpreted to meaning removing or covering up the day-glo. The lawyers will win, as always.

That is neither a ban on imports nor a requirement for them to be either transparent plastic or non-real looking colours. A 6mm orange band on the muzzle meets the requirements. As for the testing regime, a "reasonable testing program" is required but what constitutes reasonable is not defined. It is up to the manufacturer or "private labeler" to certify that the product meets the requirement of having the required marking. This would probably not be an onerous requirement.

Most of the developed world moved way beyond that incredibly simplistic view a long time ago. Unfortunately, I suspect that there are so many guns in circulation in the USA that you are truly fucked. You have created an armed, aggressive and fearful society with appallingly poor education and mental health provision, resulting in a situation where a reasonably large number of schoolchildren are going to be killed in mass shootings every year. But hey, that's a price worth paying for Billy Bob to own his penis extension.

Everything that you read or are told regarding legislation is subject to interpretation, even reading the words directly from legislation is subject to your personal interpretation …. And you need more than just the legislation itself….. if you read the VCRA itself there is no defence that permits airsofters to have RIFs, but there is a provision for additional defences via statutory instrument and one such document exists for airsoft skirmishing On a fine point myself and @Rogerborghave agreed to disagree for some considerable time, but a case has occurred, the results of the case match his interpretation therefore we can still happily disagree on our personal interpretations but the case disagrees with me. My interpretation is now wrong - unless a subsequent case occurs and the lawyers can prove that the circusmtances differ sufficiently to tip the interpretation over The black belt barrister is a barrister, and whenever he interprets the law he makes the statement that he is making a general interpretation on the basis of his opinion and not giving legal advice. If you employ him and provide your circumstances then he will give legal advice (unless he does not feel able to) In my subject area of paintball I do own guns that would meet the definition of RIF, and I have both bought & modified them. Back in the day that the VCRA was a bill the airsoft industry got involved and the UKARA was born, paintballs UKPSF were well established as a body dealing with the Home Office. Justifying paintball RIFs were not something worth fighting for and the Home Office, police etc were not interested. Paintball never gained a defence, but it was put in writing that air / co2 propelled paintball guns were air weapons, which meant they were firearms, but with energy below 12 ft lbs (or 6 ft lbs where applicable) they were low power air weapons which provided they were used with frangible paintballs their ‘lethality’ is fine for shooting each other. As air weapons are firearms then they aren’t imitation firearms, and therefore can neither be an IF or a RIF. (But as mentioned above where I and Rogerborg agree to disagree - case law now shows that a firearm can now be interpreted as an imitation firearm) All fine and nothing to worry about ….. except for a little hiccup when a company received a study visit from the Association of Chief Police officers - the company were told it’s fine, but word for word interpretation might cover black paintball guns as RIFs, and there is no defence for paintball. The study group gave feedback that they were not going to act upon that interpretation, but recommended the company should ‘do something about it’ like VCRA. So they did, and produced a short lived membership scheme. No action ever occurred I used my UKPSF membership as part of an import declaration - I declared that the package was not a RIF, but here are my UKPSF details and it’s my intent to use the contents at scenario paintball events - who knows if they accepted my ‘defence’ or just stopped at ‘no it’s not a RIF’? Now to the last few years. People are trying to buy ‘self defence’ / ‘home defence’ versions of paintball guns, which are over powered and get used with non frangible balls. Some are flagged by retailers / importers and sales are refused, others try for direct import and are found by customs and/or incidents occur and the police find them on the street, in beside drawers etc loaded and aired up etc (some threads on here may reflect some of these occurrences) The UKPSF get contacted by the Home Office/ police / border force & customs They remain content with paintball but are not happy with these items - the UKPSF have a rethink on relying on the old Home Office interpretation on the frangible / lethality clause and commissions legal review - this recommends not relying on the clause but does come up with arguments that the ‘intention’ of the law could go for UKPSF membership and ‘skirmishing’ albeit that the special instrument covers airsoft skirmishing Things are afoot in the UK paintball industry and sphincters twitch - a case would give us the answer, but may or may not give the answer we want The non compliance of two tone colours fits in ( or just the amount of cover but also the colours themselves which should be bright) - but they’ve not followed the spirit of the law but just paid it lip service (whereas JustCos is just a made up situation with no intent to comply - the comicon that tied to the JustCos insurance does not permit RIFs with cosplay) Again a case would answer, but no one wants to be the test case As a general rule in life always treat advice / information on its own merits The legal areas on this forum have good information, but they are the opinion/interpretation of the poster at that time Direct legislation quotes are just that - direct quotes, which still needs interpretation against circumstances and also is very likely to miss out the other sections, other pieces of legislation and any case law Don’t be a dick, don’t get caught being a dick and don’t be a test case

To some, yes, which is almost what this is about really isn’t it? 😆

Mr Chewer plainly angling for most positive feedback of the day 😋😆🤣

I’m not upset in the slightest. I was simply attempting to lighten the mood—these discussions can make people angry, sometimes understandably, and when everyone’s angry, the discussion becomes pointless. We can have a good discussion with point and counterpoint, or we can have folks getting mad at each other and getting nowhere. Tackle mentioned the American firearm situation first. Skullchewer has the right idea. He’s clearly the smartest one here.

By that "logic", I don't think you should be assuming it's only Brits responding 😂 ... and you're the one who effectively brought gun control / 2A into an airsoft discussion... Can't do a thing like that then cry when people respond to it 🙄

I do theme games at a club that has a great vibe but they're few and far between. Maybe I should do more there and a change of gear from cqb based to outdoor is on the cards.

☝️

I'm trying not to criticise the US too much because I know the UK system is far from perfect.... FFS my dad is safety officer for his Clay shoot and he can't tell the teals from the specs in his vision 🤣. But at the same time I was genuinely emotional when I saw a video of a parent teaching her 5 year old what to do in the event of a school shooting and which way round to the put the body armour panel into her backpack. I mean - how fucked is a society where this is the norm and people think that having every Tom Dick and Harry armed to the teeth is anything other than a bad idea. Australia sorted their shit after Port Arthur and all their subsequent half dozen or so "mass shootings", bar one, have been people going nuts and shooting family members. Switzerland is a bit of an anomaly in that they still have conscription, which I think is a good idea, but are also a neutral country - their take on potential invasions is fairly unique. However, they average less than one mass shooting per year. We have only had nine since Dunblane and of those some didn't have any fatalities. They see the registration process as some form of infringement of their rights - not considering that they have to register and insure their cars. Well the non sov-cits anyway.

Honestly I think it was easier to get a shotgun certificate, I certainly didn't have to join a shooting ground or prove I'd been to one to be able to buy a gun. I still find it weird I have to jump through hoops to get something that looks like a gun when I have a cabinet full of actual guns but then the UK's licensing system is an absolute mess littered with knee jerk legislation that often makes no sense at all.

That's the dirt cheap bag of dicks range. Released quite a while later to give an even more "budget" range.

To be fair, cheap doesn't have to be cheerful (aka mediocre), many of the so called "cheap" brands do a great job of flinging bb's, often with spec & results quite close to those of their ridiculously expensive brethren, as long as the budget brand has a reasonable reputation & not full of proprietary parts, you can't go wrong.

The fit, finish and realism (if that's your 'thing'). The Cyma CM035 and CM045 look nearly identical (metal receivers etc), but the '35 is TM-Based, and the '45 VFC-based. Little things just off the top of my head - there's no little screws holding the front of the gun on to the receiver ('35), instead there is a front trunnion actually riveted to the receiver - a stout through-pin (and retaining grub screw) holds it all together. CM045 uses a legit stamped steel lower receiver, whereas the CM035 uses cast potmetal (Zamak/Mazak).

THE VFC clones are MUCH better made. The TM clones are as creaky and plastic as the TM originals. (for reference I owned a Cyma 045 for a while and it was built like a tank, had to fix my friends 028 and it was horrible).

The question is, how long until our nodding-dog political peers follow suit and update VCRA to mandate that all RIFs must now be transparent, pink or shaped like a banana irrespective of your UKARA status. Would be a very easy and lazy win in this climate of being tough-on-crime-whilst not-actually-being-tough-on-crime.

Alright y’all. I’m a born and raised American, so here’s my perspective. Other Americans would probably disagree with me here, but I’m a decent representative of the airsoft-playing demographic. In recent times, there have NOT been a lot of police deaths related to airsoft replicas. The danger is when misguided and deluded people (often teenagers), brandish airsoft guns as weapons. When a teenager has what appears to be a fully loaded AR-15 and starts coming towards the cops brandishing the weapon, they have no choice but to shoot. If they don’t, the individual could be a prospective neighborhood/school shooter. I.E. People are literally being shot for pretending airsoft replicas are real guns, and refusing to put them down when asked by the cops—there’s plenty of footage. In one recent example, a teen called 911 and asked for police help at his home because of domestic violence. The teen then answered the door with an airsoft M4 with the mag in and walked out at the cops with the gun pointed at them. There was no evidence of domestic violence. Everyone will have a different perspective on gun laws, but in America, guns laws primarily serve to remove the rights or privileges of law abiding citizens. Why on earth would the criminal obey gun laws? There are more guns in America than people—any criminal can get his hands on a gun through a private sale. In America, and in Texas in particular, concealed carry firearms (and open carry) is legal. A criminal or shooter’s WORST fear is not the cops catching him. It’s that the old lady in the diner or the kid’s baseball coach will pull out a concealed 9mm and shoot them from ten feet. This has happened repeatedly. School shootings are popular in part because staff are not allowed to carry weapons, as opposed to public places where shooters can be taken down by anyone. All that to say, the attempted restrictions/bans on airsoft weapons are likely attempts to remove freedoms rather than based in actual fact. Real weapons can be purchased in private or under the table sales by both legal and illegal owners extremely easily. Weapons are bought and sold at garage sales and over forums. Restricting sale and ownership of replicas and real weapons only harms and hinders legal buyers and owners because those with malicious intent will simply buy illegally.

Just treated myself to a Ferro Slickster, cannot recommend Ferro enough tbh. (Bonus patch pic below)

Latest purchase, Zoxna V2 mini launcher. The barrel diameter is pretty much spot on for the pulse rifle underslung. I'll need to mount the front part of the underslung differently as at the moment it opens to allow battery fitting. Then mount the Zoxna . Will require some faffing about but will be worth it to have the pulse rifle launcher working.