Jelliffe99

Thought I would post an updated photo of my now wrapped M40A5 Gas Rifle. The camouflage tape is Jack Pyke Tough Tape, it's velvety to the touch and works incredibly well as many a time I've laid my rifle when pulling the pistol and been unable to spot it 😂. I am also now using a scope extender and honeycomb kill-flash as well as ANT Supplies one piece scope mount.

no, even real magazines aren't restricted.

Real KAC rail covers arrived (with a nice little bag) and a guarder stock pad, thanks Jeliffe

Mayflower assault back panel
 

UKSF ordered 500 CPC's in multicam

pretty much everyone with any kind of budget is using the CPC now.

UKSF ordered 500 CPC's in multicam

yawn, not true, yet another airsoft myth perpetuated by those who have no actually read the law:
 
An air weapon is defined, under section 1(3)( and 57(4) of the Firearms Act 1968 as:

"an air rifle, air gun or air pistol which does not fall within section 5 (1) (a) and which is not of a type declared by rules made by the Secretary of State under section 53 of the Firearms Act to be specially dangerous".
Any air rifle, air gun or air pistol which uses or is designed or adapted for use with, a self-contained gas cartridge system is a prohibited weapon: section 5(1)(af) Firearms Act 1968 e.g. a Brocock
An air rifle is "specially dangerous" if it is capable of discharging a missile so that the missile has, on being discharged from the muzzle of the weapon, kinetic energy in excess in the case of a pistol of 6 ft lbs or, in the case of an air weapon other than an air pistol, 12 ft lbs: Firearms (Dangerous Air Weapons) Rules 1969 rr. 2, 3 (Archbold 24-8a.)
Paintball guns are a type of air weapon. The Home Office regard self-loading or pump action rifled airguns (including paintball guns) as outside the scope of the Firearms Act, unless they are sufficiently powerful to fall within the category of a "specially dangerous" air weapon (Archbold 24.8a). Paintball guns could be considered imitation firearms.
Unless an air weapon falls within one of the above exceptions, it is not subject to section 1 Firearms Act 1968.

copied and pasted directly from the CPS website. At no point is any power limit other than the standard 6/12 ft/lb which makes an air weapon section 1.
on the subject of whether an airsoft gun over a certain (1.1j? srsly? my M4 is 1.1 joules and it's full auto!) power is no longer classed as in IF or RIF...

An imitation firearm means "any thing which has the appearance of being a firearm (other than such a weapon as is mentioned in section 5(1) ( of this Act), whether or not it is capable of discharging any shot, bullet or other missile." section 57(4). This means that an offence requiring "possession" or "having with him/her" a firearm or imitation firearm requires a "thing" which is separate and distinct from a person. Putting a hand inside a jacket and using fingers to force out the material to give the impression of a firearm falls outside the scope of such offences, as a person's bodily parts is not a "thing". (R v Bentham [2005] UKHL18.) R v Morris and King, 79 Cr App R 104, CA: when considering whether a thing has the appearance of being a firearm the jury should consider its appearance at the time of the offence and should also be assisted by the evidence of the witness who saw the thing at the time of the offence.
Unlike with "Realistic Imitation Firearms", it is not always necessary to obtain evidence from the FSP on whether the thing is an imitation firearm. Evidence of the Firearms Officer will usually be sufficient expert evidence.
An imitation firearm will be treated as a firearm to which section 1 Firearms Act 1968 applies if:
it has the appearance of such a weapon and it can be readily convertible into a weapon from which a shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged (section 1 (1) and 1 (2) Firearms Act 1968). See readily convertible imitations elsewhere in this guidance

I don't know where this word 'legal' is cropping up from, the law has absolutely nothing to do with it.
 
If this helmet looks the way I'm imagining it does, DO NOT use it for skirmishing. It'll be literally the opposite of full-seal eye protection, the gap underneath and around the lower side that BBs could get in unopposed would be cavernous, you're guaranteeing a lost eye (or two) in a bloody short space of time.
 
If you want to wear shooting glasses or low-pro goggles and use the helmets' face shield as an overall face protector to give your teeth some coverage then sure, it'd probably work fine. However a visor like that is not suitable eye protection, not at all.