Someone doesn't like UKARA, or here we go again

[Tommikka]

The lack of a clear standard is annoying. My active MOD90 isn't enough to buy a RIF from a retailer, so I need to spend £55 x 3 for the matches and another £30 x 3 for transport which for a spring chicken such as myself is quite a lot of money, all to run around with a AEG that couldn't hit a barn door from 15m away.

On the other hand it's completely up to a seller on a classified as to if my MOD90 is a valid defence for them and completely unknown as to if he could be hypothetically dragged to court for it one day...

Click to shrink...

A MoD 90 is not a VCRA Defence.
The “crown servant defence” is in “the performance of their duties” - as a member of the forces you get given your firearms, and where applicable alternatives
If a soldier etc wants an SA80 to practice drill in their room then a coloured IF would do

If buying RIFs/IFs as a practice piece then coloured IFs might be a better option than a RIF as it is clearly distinguished from the real thing, but if tasked to buy RIFs then a purchase order complete with site delivery address MoD email address etc would have more standing than your MoD90

(PS If tasked to purchase then local purchase procedures apply, which start with ensuring that there is no contract in place - if there is then you fill in a demand form or purchase order against the call off contract, so no need to provide a VCRA defence, just fulfil the demand / purchase authority criteria. There have been Airsoft / replicas on call off contracts every now and then, and there are plenty of companies that turn up to trade days ready to sell to units)

 

[Cannonfodder]

The lack of a clear standard is annoying. My active MOD90 isn't enough to buy a RIF from a retailer, so I need to spend £55 x 3 for the matches and another £30 x 3 for transport which for a spring chicken such as myself is quite a lot of money, all to run around with a AEG that couldn't hit a barn door from 15m

Click to shrink...

While I agree that it's a bit of a faff to get a defence via ukara it's a feature, not a bug. Making buyers put a little effort into being eligible puts off all the chavy turds who just want a rif to do dumb shit with. As for retailers not accepting things like a MoD issued ID or FAC, neither of them show that the owner plays the game so it shouldn't be surprising that so many shops won't accept them, afterall they're the one who'll end up in court if something goes wrong

 

[Cannonfodder]

To add to what @Tommikka posted

In the civil service if an imitation weapon is needed then they will buy a brightly coloured IF specifically so it can't be mistaken for the real thing. I'd image that crown servants would have the same policy

 

[Adolf Hamster]

its only us law abiding people that have more hoops.

Click to shrink...

i suspect the main issue you have is expecting uk law to be logical in its purpose, consistent in its application and clear in its intent.

unfortunately as much as you are not alone in being annoyed by this fact, it remains that is not, never has been, and almost certainly never will be the case.

 

[Shotround]

i suspect the main issue you have is expecting uk law to be logical in its purpose, consistent in its application and clear in its intent.

unfortunately as much as you are not alone in being annoyed by this fact, it remains that is not, never has been, and almost certainly never will be the case.

Click to shrink...

Indeed. FAC is bad enough with each force basically adding or making up its own rules!
asking far too much for anything else! ( i mean theres also bigger things id wish they'd fix)

 

[ak2m4]

I came across this via the Platoon Stores FB post last week. Whilst I'm all for a more versatile way to prove defence, I did point out a number of concerns.

There was no mention of pricing on the website (it's there now), you had to sign up in order to find out how much it would cost. Just odd not to be transparent up front.

It appears vibe coded, I've been out of programming for a while and not saying it's not water-tight but I'd like to see some evidence of testing and especially security testing. Yearly audits by an external opsec IT company would go a long way.

Needs more in transparency as I mentioned before. I was told it's by the owner of Empire Airsoft (how true I don't know).

Ideally I'd prefer a defence scheme to be run by players and sites on a not for profit basis, but it's a large amount of work and financial investment.

 

[BigAl]

With no proof of a "certain" policing system in the UK, this is a practical example of the two-tier legislation system. Airguns were protected because there were enthusiasts who happened to also be lobbyists making sizeable party donations. Airsoft had no such lobbying so sales of airsoft toys were controlled more strictly

Click to shrink...

You are completely wrong on this. First of all, the Police enforce the law, they do not write it.

Second, your theory about a "two-tier system" driven by wealthy airgun donors makes no sense. Airguns were already heavily regulated under existing UK Firearms Law, meaning they were never in the scope of the VCRA to begin with. The VCRA's imitation clauses were created specifically to handle realistic replicas being used in crime, primarily targeting blank-firers and cheap marketplace springers.

However, airsoft absolutely did have a massive lobbying effort. The original bill drafted by the Home Office used blanket language that would have effectively banned the sport. The only reason airsoft survived is because the UK airsoft industry and community mobilized at the eleventh hour, lobbied the government, and successfully argued for the "Skirmisher Defence" that allows the UKARA system to exist today.

MODS CAN WE NOW PLEASE CLOSE THIS DOWN. THE FACTS HAVE BEEN COVERED AND WE ARE JUST GOING ROUN IN CIRCLES.