i was under the impression RIF was pretty much anything covid karen would look at and think "that's a gun", except pre 1875 designs (ie not very good guns)
The Firearms Act 1968 definition of "imitation firearm" is broad, but the VCRA 2006 definition of "realistic imitation firearm" is narrower. It also has a clanger that doesn't prevent a real firearm (e.g. an air gun) from also being a realistic imitation firearm.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/38/section/38
38 Meaning of “realistic imitation firearm”
(1) In sections 36 and 37 “realistic imitation firearm” means an imitation firearm which—
(a) has an appearance that is so realistic as to make it indistinguishable, for all practical purposes, from a real firearm; and
(b) is neither a de-activated firearm nor itself an antique.
(7) In this section —
“real firearm” means—
(a) a firearm of an actual make or model of modern firearm (whether existing or discontinued); or
(b) something falling within a description which could be used for identifying, by reference to their appearance, the firearms falling within a category of actual modern firearms which, even though they include firearms of different makes or models (whether existing or discontinued) or both, all have the same or a similar appearance.
Now, someone applying common sense would think that it's obvious that a real firearm can't be an imitation, but a pedant - i.e. Border Farce - would say "Ah, but if Parliament had
meant that, they've have
said it. Look, they excluded
de-activated firearms, but not live ones."
as for air guns, surely their defence for being an RIF is by dint of being firearms, ie it's not imitating it simply is.
This is an airgun firearm. It's also - by a Man on the Clapham Omnibus standard - a realistic imitation of a real non-airgun firearm.
Why can't it be both? There's nothing in the strict letter of the law that prevents it, and the spirit of the law is that selling something that looks like needs a better reason than "They want it." - which is all that's required for air guns in England and Wales.
Yes, I know, ID required. But that doesn't speak to the purpose which they intend to put it to.
Where did Border Force state it was a firearm?
They didn't. As above, just because it is a firearm doesn't mean that it can't also be a realistic imitation firearm. Opinions on this vary, but the reality is that Border Farce are in the position to make it stick.
I'm not saying this is fair, having to jump through two hoops at once, but when have bureaucrats ever cared about that?
To channel Ayn Rand, the question is not who is going to let them; it's who is going to stop them.
