Verification of RIF buyers as private seller

[Aiden Chen]

Hey folks,

I've been airsofting for 2+ years but I'm new to selling used RIFs because I'm a collector that doesn't sell my stuff until recently I need to fund some other purchases.

My question is that, as a private seller, if a buyer provides me with his UKARA, how do I verify the UKARA is valid and registered with the correct postcode?

And if a buyer is registered with a club but not UKARA registered, how can I verify the buyer is an airsoft player?

Cheers

 

[Cannonfodder]

Some shops will check it for you (I can't remember which right now, but I'm sure someone will post soon). If they're a site member then try contacting the site

 

[Rogerborg]

Since UKARA is just a central register of site membership (all UKARA numbers are created by sites) I'd be minded to contact the site directly, if for no other reason than that they might come back with "Joe Bloggs?  We punted him for being a mental case."

Are you really that bothered though?  I can point at several retailers who accept bogus "defences", or none at all, without consequence for them.

 

[novioman]

Even Firesupport who I believe who were one of the main organisers of UKARA, except many different defences as do most shops, Shooters Rights Association, Sportsman Association to name a couple. 

 

[Rogerborg]

Shooters Rights Association, Sportsman Association to name a couple

Those... uh.. those aren't defences for selling a RIF.

But I repeat myself.  Some-to-many retailers just don't care.

 

[Tommikka]

….., Shooters Rights Association, Sportsman Association to name a couple. 

Those could be valid shooters, but not VCRA defences 

You can go target shooting with an IF just as well as with a RIF - the law does not recognise the ‘immersion’ for target shooting 

@aiden

UKARA / site membership ought to be verifiable with the site

Legally you don’t need any evidence, but you as seller become liable to a major fine if the RIF you sell comes to the attention of the law and they wonder how Joe chavvie got hold of it

You need to reasonably satisfy yourself that the buyer intends to use it for airsoft, and may need to prove that in court 

UKARA or site membership are winners

Photos of them playing or a history of forum contribution* could be usable 

You could paint it into an IF and legitimise a sale - but if a RIF is worth selling then somebody will turn up who can show a defence 

*Note that I’m a regular forum contributor, but I don’t have a Defence, don’t play & don’t intend to play - and many of my posts say so - so don’t sell a RIF to me

Most people on here are interested in playing 

But also beware of underage buyers - the reason they can’t show a defence might be because they are not eligible to a defence 

 

[novioman]

As I said, most shops except these defences now, the only one I found who don’t is patrol base. 

 

[Rogerborg]

And as I said, those aren't defences.

This is relevant because the OP is asking how he'd verify a real one.  Credible, but I'd suggest not actually needed.

It's also pretty irksome for the shrinking number of retailers, like PatrolBase, who do actually care about staying on the right side of the law, because if the winds do change regarding toy guns, they're going to get punished as much as the rogues, and we'll all suffer for it.

 

[novioman]

You can’t say these aren’t defences when so many shops say they are. That’s only your personal opinion. 

 

[Asomodai]

You can’t say these aren’t defences when so many shops say they are. That’s only your personal opinion. 

Retailers don't create the law and are certainly not above the law.

Just because they regularly flout the law, doesn't make it right. Only takes one noticeable incident to screw it up for everyone. 

 

[Tackle]

You can’t say these aren’t defences when so many shops say they are. That’s only your personal opinion. 

Those weren't legitimate defences, but I suspect given the historical lack of prosecutions with regards to airsoft vs vcra, some retailers have chosen to move their own goalposts to suit themselves, likely they feel it's an acceptable risk given the economic pressures most are facing.

 

[Tommikka]

You can’t say these aren’t defences when so many shops say they are. That’s only your personal opinion. 

We can say they aren’t legitimate defences 

Under legislation the only defences are :

Museums

theatrical performance

Film making / TV (proper filmmaking not being a YouTuber) 

Crown service (For real duties, not just being a civil servant or soldier)

Note that airsoft is not one of them.  It’s an additional provision by ‘statutory instrument’ and covers ‘airsoft skirmishing on insured sites’

General shooting, collecting & wall displays are not approved in the law

(You can do them with airsoft guns once in your possession but they are not defences under the VCRA)

For general shooting you could in theory have no defence required - just sell an airsoft gun with the velocity too high and sell it as an air weapon, for which no defence or licence are required (at least in England & Wales) 

In which case a shooters membership isn’t needed to validate the sale, but shows the shooter to be a bit responsible 

Cosplay is also not a valid defence - this is compounded by the retailer who offers it partnering with s comicon that bans entry with RIFs (just like every UK comicon / cosplay event) 

Note that ‘professional cosplayers’ come under the theatrical defence

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/38/section/37

 

37Specific defense applying to the offence under s. 36

(1)It shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under section 36 in respect of any conduct to show that the conduct was for the purpose only of making the imitation firearm in question available for one or more of the purposes specified in subsection (2).

(2)Those purposes are—

(a)the purposes of a museum or gallery;

(b)the purposes of theatrical performances and of rehearsals for such performances;

(c)the production of films (within the meaning of Part 1 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (c. 48)_see section 5B of that Act);

(d)the production of television programmes (within the meaning of the Communications Act 2003 (c. 21)_see section 405(1) of that Act);

(e)the organisation and holding of historical re-enactments organised and held by persons specified or described for the purposes of this section by regulations made by the Secretary of State;

(f)the purposes of functions that a person has in his capacity as a person in the service of Her Majesty.

 

[Rogerborg]

You can’t say these aren’t defences when so many shops say they are. That’s only your personal opinion. 

Ignorantia juris non excusat, as the Klingons say.

I can say it, I am saying it, I'm right, they're wrong, and I'm sure they know that they're wrong.

The real question is whether there will ever be any consequences for it.

Actually, my real real question is why they even bother.  One retailer just makes you tick a "for airsoft and that" box, which I actually respect more than the non-defences.

For general shooting you could in theory have no defence required - just sell an airsoft gun with the velocity too high and sell it as an air weapon, for which no defence or licence are required (at least in England & Wales

Noooo, not the "why can't real airgun firearms that are realistic imitations of real non-airgun firearms also be realistic imitation firearms" hand-bag fight again! ?

But yes, this highlights that nobody really cares.  You can buy a much higher powered CO2 steel-BB airgun that looks identical to either the airsoft RIF or real steel version over the counter with nothing more than ID (in principle), and nobody blinks an eye, much less loses it.  The State clearly doesn't care, and it won't until some Daily Rant muckraker writes a BOMBSHELL article about how easy is to to get your hands on RIFs.

We're actually quite fortunate that investigative journalism is a dying art.

 

[Cannonfodder]

until some Daily Rant muckraker writes a BOMBSHELL article about how easy is to to get your hands on RIFs.

Or who's chav baiting "talk" show has been axed for causing a suicide 

Those weren't legitimate defences, but I suspect given the historical lack of prosecutions with regards to airsoft vs vcra, some retailers have chosen to move their own goalposts to suit themselves, likely they feel it's an acceptable risk given the economic pressures most are facing.

This. Remember two tones weren't a thing till the vcra and were first launched by the shops behind UKARA 

 

[novioman]

Am I mistaken, but don’t the owners of Firesupport actually run the UKARA system. 

 

[Asomodai]

Am I mistaken, but don’t the owners of Firesupport actually run the UKARA system. 

The big three of FS, Wolf Armouries and ZeroOne did. FS I think have the database. 

 

[Rogerborg]

It bothers me a bit that UKARA is run by... never you mind.

I can't see anything on ukara.org.uk, no general contact information, no phone number.

The best I can find from what they're required to publish appears to be a farmhouse in Cornwall.

https://ico.org.uk/ESDWebPages/Entry/ZA031959

 

[Tackle]

The best I can find from what they're required to publish appears to be a farmhouse in Cornwall.

https://ico.org.uk/ESDWebPages/Entry/ZA031959

View attachment 86726

 

[Asomodai]

It bothers me a bit that UKARA is run by... never you mind.

I can't see anything on ukara.org.uk, no general contact information, no phone number.

The best I can find from what they're required to publish appears to be a farmhouse in Cornwall.

https://ico.org.uk/ESDWebPages/Entry/ZA031959

Practically GCHQ Bude. I hiked through that area last year. 

View attachment 86728

 

[novioman]

The big three of FS, Wolf Armouries and ZeroOne did. FS I think have the database. 

Not sure about ZeroOne, but FIresupport & Wolf accept other defences for certain