Painting an IF

[Sacarathe]

Why oh why oh why do folk keep talking about "manufacturing" when there's a specific offence of modifying?

My reply was based upon section 37. Not sure what your problem with me agreeing with you is.

Besides, I would imagine that specific line is more orientated at taking store bought toy guns and painting them black maliciously. Not so much for people which are making RIFs which became IFs back into RIFs.

In any case, if you were prosecuting would you pick manufacturing or modifying? There's no doubt that manufacturing also includes literal manufacturing and assembly in a factory but in any case, does it really matter.

If you were prosecuting, wouldn't you see holes in going after someone that is undoing a prior modification?

 

[Duff]

My reply was based upon section 37. Not sure what your problem with me agreeing with you is.

Besides, I would imagine that specific line is more orientated at taking store bought toy guns and painting them black maliciously. Not so much for people which are making RIFs which became IFs back into RIFs.

In any case, if you were prosecuting would you pick manufacturing or modifying? There's no doubt that manufacturing also includes literal manufacturing and assembly in a factory but in any case, does it really matter.

If you were prosecuting, wouldn't you see holes in going after someone that is undoing a prior modification?

Modifying comes under manufacture. We've had this argument ten times over.

No it doesn't make sense but it is what it is.

 

[Sacarathe]

Modifying comes under manufacture. We've had this argument ten times over.

No it doesn't make sense but it is what it is.

Bah, I didn't start this, I was trying to agree with someone!

 

[Duff]

Bah, I didn't start this, I was trying to agree with someone!

You bumped a 2 month old thread and started the exact same argument we'd already had. Not getting shitty it's not even 8am mate, come on there's no need. 

 

[Sacarathe]

I didn't post to argue. I must be missing something (I've checked the thread and I didn't miss something) and you guys must have a lot of baggage on this because I really don't see an argument, I was literally just agreeing with the guy.

Not getting shitty it's not even 8am mate, come on there's no need. 

.... for?

EDIT2:

I've read the thread again and you must be thinking of a different thread, I don't see an argument about modifying versus manufacturing which you're both referring to.

 

[Duff]

Enough of the sweeping statements. Insulting people is the worst form of come back when losing an argument/debate. If anyone has baggage here it's you mate, rather on the sensitive side methinks.... are we snowflake? I don't think so. No one should be as aggro as you this early on a Sunday. 

 

[Sacarathe]

Enough of the sweeping statements. Insulting people is the worst form of come back when losing an argument/debate. If anyone has baggage here it's you mate, rather on the sensitive side methinks.... are we snowflake? I don't think so. No one should be as aggro as you this early on a Sunday. 

WTF? I'm not insulting anyone, I'm not losing an argument or debate because I'm not having either! I'm trying to make sense of your comments, I've read the thread again to make sure I'm not mistaken and nothing I wrote suggests this comment is questionable or a problem (minor necro aside).

Rogerborg noted that he didn't like something I said - in an apparent sarcastic tone I might add; I replied with why I think what I think. 

I admit that I didn't see the need for his comment given that I was ostensibly posting because I agreed with him and thought his post was well articulated.

There's no argument/debate mate, it's all in your head. I'm happy to listen to both sides of the modifying supersedes manufacturing when removing two-tone discussion but that can't happen if you refuse to engage and drop accusations this easily.

To clarify, the baggage is this:

We've had this argument ten times over.

Why oh why oh why do folk keep talking about "manufacturing" when there's a specific offence of modifying?

You both effectively said the same thing, that "this argument comes up a lot and has been done to death", that's baggage if ever there was.

So lets not have an argument. I'm certainly not having one. Be nice, play nice and stop dropping accusations.

 

[Prisce]

To be honest, I usually don’t agree with @Sacarathe, (when I first joined here I was a complete noob, rather than a slight noob, and I asked/ stated some things I didn’t have a full grasp on, and I got roasted for it)

I haven’t seen him reply to a thread in about 8months(?), but he is not arguing here, he’s making a point and agreeing with Roger, just going about it in a long winded, detailed response rather than “I agree”.

Think you fellas are making an argument out of nothing here, as @Duff stated, it’s sunday morning, we should all chill a little.

 

[Duff]

....you guys must have a lot of baggage.....

This is my problem, casting aspersions and half arsed passive-aggresive insults.

Back OT:

Modifying is the same as manufacture, that is something I previously disagreed on then realised I was wrong and that in essence it didn't matter anyway.

Obviously you rarely come by so to see you bump a topic we all finished with just to rehash the same argument/debate is pointless to me.

 

[Sacarathe]

You're not going to let this (the constant accusations) go are you @Duff? I can only assume you want to win this discussion, I'll save you the trouble; I concede, and he's how below.

It seems that since I last meaningfully posted (which in a cruel twist of irony was on the same subject) 10 months ago the language used has moved on in this area.

If you look carefully at what I originally wrote:

I've always been saying this and I agree completely. It is a defence to manufacturing a RIF if one is an airsofter* regardless of your age. 

In theory taking an upper from a lower and reassembling constitutes this offence.

* I do however think for safeties sake following UKARA games measurement still wise.

You will notice that it makes no difference to what I wrote to substitute manufacturing with modifying because I was talking about S.37. Sure I was talking about making a [formerly RIF] IF into a RIF, which clearly has had discussions which I've not seen either on this board or elsewhere - but not in this thread.

It seems you're getting bent out of shape by a casual word which I used in an autopilot fashion (manufacturing), there's no hidden meaning in my post, I simply wanted to agree with @Rogerborg - theres no hidden "lets have a debate about manufactuing vs modifying", there's just some dood who wanted to agree with a well articulated post.

PS @Prisce I remember that and I am sorry - I know exactly how you felt right now.

 

[Duff]

It seems you add your own vehement into words when reading them, leading me to believe the attitude you see in the written words on the screen is in fact your own mate.

Once again, it's Sunday morning. Give it a bloody rest.

 

[Prisce]

PS @Prisce I remember that and I am sorry - I know exactly how you felt right now.

No worries mate, it made me buck my ideas up and learn more before posting. Wasn’t great being a noob and feeling unwelcome, but it made me research what I thought I knew before making posts, helped me in the long run.

Good to see you back though, thought you may have left the sport.

 

[Sacarathe]

Good to see you back though, thought you may have left the sport.

I've not been to a game day since the last week of August 2017, but I've been making inroads recently (working out) towards going to the site in Oakham and a friend told me about a new site opening 10 miles away while I was still getting fit; since then I've been buying batteries and other kit to get started as soon as they start regular game days. I moved from London to (coastal) Lincolnshire.

My old emerson kits a bit busted up now though - looking back I don't know how I lived with the poor quality for so long.

EDIT: I lost all my batteries when I moved, this slowed down getting back into the sport quite a bit.

 

[Rogerborg]

My reply was based upon section 37. Not sure what your problem with me agreeing with you is.

It's a genuine question, I'm not offering you out.  S36 says:

(1)A person is guilty of an offence if—

 (a) he manufactures a realistic imitation firearm;

 (b) he modifies an imitation firearm so that it becomes a realistic imitation firearm;

I can't see that there's any ambiguity that modification is the description that best applies to stripping or painting a two-tone, and yet I see "manufacturing" used over and over again, which just kicks off these spats over who's agreeing with whom more.

 

[L3wisD]

I've been wondering when Duff and Sacarathe would meet 

The immovable object Vs the unstoppable force

 

[Sacarathe]

It's a genuine question, I'm not offering you out.

manufacturing

Why oh why oh why do folk keep talking about "manufacturing" when there's a specific offence of modifying?

That, is not a genuine question directed at me. I want to engage with you but I've kinda lost the will as I didn't post here to be disagreeable.

<snip>

I think it depends on how many things are defined by the law, in this case I think "Imitation Firearm" as defined by the law is the crux which I posit on the basis that many toy guns sold as toys to children/adolescents are in fact 'Imitation Firearms'. I think that is the original purpose of section 36(1)(b).

However if one was to assume manufacturing to only mean running a [toy] factory for lets say airsoft/paintball or whatever, this would support manufacture not applying to this instance as strongly as modifying.

Remember this law was not made because of airsoft. Whichever offence a person would be charged under will be the one most likely to secure a prosecution.

Honestly I don't want to debate this. I don't think it matters which is used, modifying nor manufacturing. In fact, going off of the replies to this thread I certainly care less about M vs M than you or a certain other person. Its actually funny when you look at it, I innocently* posted and two people jumped on me (As @Prisce points out, I'm guilty of the same) - both accusing me of something I wasn't aware of.

I guess to you guys, it looked like manufacture was all you could see in my first post here. I'll think more carefully in future when I ignore this episode completely and use that word - but I'll be ready for you!

*minor necro notwithstanding.