VCRA/UKARA - we're doing it wrong!!

[two_zero]

I would argue that we misinterprete this on a regular basis, and that just having a UKARA number does not automatically mean one can legally buy a RIF. The exceptions on RIF ownership given to airsofters is so that we can use RIF while skirmishing, you need to be an airsofter to buy a RIF. The intention being to enable airsoft games to be played with RIFs.

Now the usual advice is generally 3 months + 3 games minimum (or whatever the exact wording is) then get UKARA number. However, if your only intention with the games are to acquire a UKARA number and you stop going to games after you have acquired it you can not legally buy a RIF, as you are no longer play airsoft.

As always, I'm not responsible for your actions, read the law for yourself and make your own mind up.


Opinions?

 

[Sacarathe]

Opinions?

Do you know what 'untested in court' means?

...and you stop going to games after you have acquired it

We all stop going to games: after every game... until the next one.

Three games in not less than 56 days!

 

[Sitting Duck]

I think it is perfectly fine the way it all is.....

Ireland - no ukara required - quite a bit of Europe don't need checks

Australia - no airsoft at all

Germany - lower and stricter guidelines

US - sod it buy a firearm at Walmart in some states like Texas but Wine has to be bought in liquor store or seperate liquor dept ???

Yup - think UK's not doing too bad I think

 

[Longshot]

I think you've misinterpreted the entire thing, since if you're over 18 you can legally buy a RIF at any point and for any reason. The onus is on the seller, not the buyer.

Therefore the seller needs to establish that you 'intend' to use the RIF for recreation at a site with third party liability insurance. Any law based on a person working out the other person's 'intentions' is obviously a bit dodgy, so UKARA is there so that the seller can say: "well, I figured if he was a member of a site with third party liability insurance and that they vouch that he's been playing there with them for months now it was safe to assume he was buying the RIF to play there with it." Silly hoop jumped through.

 

[Sacarathe]

I think you've misinterpreted the entire thing, since if you're over 18 you can legally buy a RIF at any point and for any reason. The onus is on the seller, not the buyer.

Therefore the seller needs to establish that you 'intend' to use the RIF for recreation at a site with third party liability insurance. Any law based on a person working out the other person's 'intentions' is obviously a bit dodgy, so UKARA is there so that the seller can say: "well, I figured if he was a member of a site with third party liability insurance and that they vouch that he's been playing there with them for months now it was safe to assume he was buying the RIF to play there with it." Silly hoop jumped through.

Don't forget import and manufacture.

 

[lafta]

Just for clarity, it's three games in no less than two months. Might be worth updating the OP, already enough misinformation everywhere!

 

[BigAl]

On the whole mis information point why not delete the whole pointless thread?

 

[GunmanAirsoft]

Actual wording of the airsoft defence in UK law :

"3.(1) It shall be a defence in proceedings for an offence under section 36 of the 2006 Act or under paragraph 4 of Schedule 2 to that Act for the person charged with the offence to show that his conduct was for the purpose only of making the imitation firearm in question available for one or more of the purposes specified in paragraph (2).

(2) Those purposes are

(a)the organisation and holding of permitted activities for which public liability insurance is held in relation to liabilities to third parties arising from or in connection with the organisation and holding of those activities;

(b)the purposes of display at a permitted event."

If the RIF is sold to be used at one game no offense has been committed, the law says nothing about how many times or how often you have to play.

 

[Longshot]

The above is what I'm always trying to get across.

Imagine I have a mate who's never played airsoft before. I convince him to come to a game with me by saying I'll even give him a lift there and lend him a gun. We book the game online. The morning of the game I'm driving to the site and he asks about the gun I'm lending him. When I tell all about the RIF he says: "mate, I don't want to be worried about damaging your gun, can I just buy it off you?"

Am I (theoretically of course, since this is all theoretical until it's tested) allowed to sell him the RIF?

I'd say I am, as the law stands, since I'm reasonably sure that he's buying it to play with it at the first airsoft game I'm taking him to and as such I'm supplying it for the purposes of playing a "permitted activity" (in this case "the acting out of military or law enforcement scenarios for the purposes of recreation") at a site with the correct insurance.

 

[proffrink]

Yes, you are. We're a common law country so until there's legal precedent most new laws stay somewhat grey anyway. In the case of VCRA though RIFs were tacked on as an afterthought and don't even take up one quarter of a page.

Just don't be stupid and you'll be fine. Remember, the court had to prove you bought it for the purposes of wanting it for some reason other than 2 a) or B) . The whole thing is basically just to give additional persecutory powers for people holding up post offices with toy guns.

 

[Greg4513]

You could just charge him petrol money then give him the gun as a gift which is perfectly legal.

 

[proffrink]

Not really. It's about intent - legally it's not as simple as just bartering without money, but in practice this whole thing is silly anyway so I can't see why not.

 

[ImTriggerHappy]

The above is what I'm always trying to get across.

Imagine I have a mate who's never played airsoft before. I convince him to come to a game with me by saying I'll even give him a lift there and lend him a gun. We book the game online. The morning of the game I'm driving to the site and he asks about the gun I'm lending him. When I tell all about the RIF he says: "mate, I don't want to be worried about damaging your gun, can I just buy it off you?"

Am I (theoretically of course, since this is all theoretical until it's tested) allowed to sell him the RIF?

I'd say I am, as the law stands, since I'm reasonably sure that he's buying it to play with it at the first airsoft game I'm taking him to and as such I'm supplying it for the purposes of playing a "permitted activity" (in this case "the acting out of military or law enforcement scenarios for the purposes of recreation") at a site with the correct insurance.

That would be totally legal.He is buying it for the purpose of playing airsoft so his defence is covered. You know thats what he wants it for and you are satisfied as the seller that he has a reasonable defence.

 

[Rock-climby-Dave]

There isn't a definition of the lowest capacity to which a skirmisher is defined.

UKARA is a very good system for retailers, it leaves a papertrail with no single person being capable of adding a random person to the database (requires both site and retailer to add a player) This is why retailers use it. Yes, it's not a LEGAL obligation to have UKARA but it is the accepted 'standard'.

If YOU, the seller, are happy that the buyer is a skirmisher then all is legal. If you're onsite I'd say anything goes (over 18) because only skirmishers would be onsite.

If you're in a closed facestupid group, I'd probably argue the same.

On here? Although I wouldn't use it alone as a proof of skirmisherness, I'd feel comfortable selling to a regular on here if their UKARA had expired recently or they had photo evidence of them on-site.

 

[proffrink]

Exactly that: UKARA just makes it easy for retailers. I thought this thread was about VCRA though?

Does anyone with half a brain cell think UKARA is rubbish anyway? It's just making the best of the poorly written bits of the 2007 amendment. It amazes me that people still lump the two in together a lot of the time.

 

[Greg4513]

This loophole takes away the need to prove that he/she is a genuine skirmisher "Airsoft is not prohibited to persons under the age of 18, nor is owning a RIF, although the only way they are able to obtain a RIF or IF is by being given the item as a gift or by having parental consent". but yes in I do agree its all a pile of crap, I order stuff from Gunfire and always request for my reg number to be clearly written on box but anyone looking at it wudnt have a clue what it is or who to contact to confirm my membership.

 

[proffrink]

It's not a loophole at all. Again, you can't just dodge the law by saying 'oh he didn't indirectly buy it from me' as there was still a transaction, even if it's slightly obscure. Do you think criminals get away with saying they never bought x, y or z elicit item just because no money changed hands immediately? No.

However, like I say, it doesn't really matter. It's a grey set of hastily written laws with no legal precedent yet but please don't think that just because you didn't physically stand there and take money from someone in exchange for good that it won't be considered a transaction, because that's wrong. Again though, moot point because the whole thing is a bit dumb.