Swapping guns?

[UberDemon]

This may seem a stupid question but do you need a ukara license to swap a gun with another person? I don't have a license yet because they weren't about when I first started and I'm now getting back into it! As I already own 4 guns would swapping one be able problem? I have looked online but can't seem to find the answer! Cheers peeps!

[Deva]

I think you might have to, a swap is not a gift, as you are giving them something in return.

 

PM Finius and draw his attention to this thread if you'd like a more definitive answer.

[Finius]

Yes you do.

 

This comes down to contract law, as opposed to firearms law and is all about what defines a sale.

 

In effect, a "swap" or any exchange for goods or services, equal in value or otherwise, is still a sale.

 

For those who will dispute me and thus need to know why; In Britain, any transaction creates a contract, from property right down to buying a mars bar from your local corner shop, these range from 100+ page business contracts to simply implied contracts such as knowing that if you buy a mars bar from your local shop, you will not open it to find a small brick or something.

 

A contract is based on "consideration", which is in effect something of value, this can actually be anything, for example, if you promise to give up smoking and someone promises to reward you with something if they do, and they don't reward you, you could sue them for breach of contract, though there are exceptions, for example if you did not intend to be legally bound, or if the value of the consideration is actually legally negligible, or where the considerations is only of value to the person who currently holds it etc.

 

In this context, you are after X RIF, which is the other parties consideration, your consideration is one of your own. Thus, a contractual transaction takes place and you ARE bound by the VCRA.

 

How long have you been out of the sport? UKARA is NOT the only option for availing yourself of the defense.

[ScoobySnacks]

My understanding of the legislation is this. Please feel free to correct any errors in my thinking.

 

It is up to the person supplying the RIF to assure themselves that you are a person who has a good reason to purchase an RIF, as their defence against a charge under S36 of the VCRA.

 

It is not an offence simply to possess an RIF.

 

(this is the bit where the reasoning might get a bit sticky) If you are offering an RIF to swap, you already possess one, thus it is reasonable for the supplier to believe that you have a legitimate reason for possession, which is their defence against a charge under S36 of the VCRA.

 

You would also need to assure yourself that the person you are swapping with has a legitimate excuse for obtaining an RIF, as your defence against a prosecution.

 

Being a pedant, UKARA registration is NOT a "licence". It is merely a registration that shows you have turned up on the minimum number of occasions required by that scheme, and gives the seller (whose responsibility in law it is, and who stands to be prosecuted for selling (or swapping) you an RIF if you don't have a valid reason to buy one) a reassurance that they will not be prosecuted. If you can prove that you are a skirmisher, to the satisfaction of the seller, without UKARA registration then UKARA is not necessary.

[Deva]

(this is the bit where the reasoning might get a bit sticky) If you are offering an RIF to swap, you already possess one, thus it is reasonable for the supplier to believe that you have a legitimate reason for possession, which is their defence against a charge under S36 of the VCRA.

 

They could have gained possession illegally in the first place, so that would be a bad assumption to make.

[Finius]

They could also have obtained the RIF before the roll out of the VCRA or have been given it as a gift, neither of which are relevant to current law or require proof of entitlement in any capacity. No judge would let you have that as a defense.

[ScoobySnacks]

Fin and Devastator, yes, I agree that it's a marginal defence at best. I would go along with the final paragraph though, in that you need to satisfy yourself that a legitimate defence is extant. How you go about finding that out is a different matter, and what level of proof a court would require is something of a moot point.

 

The UKARA requires three visits, but I'm not sure if this is laid down in law, or is just their interpretation of reasonable proof. Anybody got chapter and verse on the regulation?

 

Edited to add, just found the relevant regulation and it states...

 

The Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 (Realistic Imitation Firearms) Regulations 2007

 

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.

 

 

 

4. For the purposes of regulation 3 a person shall be taken to have shown a matter specified in that regulation if—

 

 

(a)sufficient evidence of that matter is adduced to raise an issue with respect to it; and

(b)the contrary is not proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

So effectively you only need someone to prove to you that they have some connection to legitimate use of an airsoft weapon at an event that is covered by third party liability, and then only to a level where the lack of involvement cannot be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

 

There is no basis in law for the "3 events and two months" that the UKARA ask for, being a cynic it suggests to me that they might want to get more people to come along to airsoft events to gather their evidence.

[Deva]

The 3 in 2 was set by UKARA. It's nothing to do with the law, although UKARA is an accepted defence. There isn't much else which acts as a 'get out jail free card'. I could be wrong, but as far as I'm aware there was a fair amount of liaising between UKARA and relevant authorities about what might be suitable. 3 in 2 was what resulted from this.

[Wo1f]

surely if you both have a RIF and swap how can there be a problem. the police arnt gonna boot your door in and stick an mp5 in your face because you want to swap gun's with somebody. for a start how would they ever know and secondly it isnt a crime to own a rif just buy or sell one without a defence (i understand swaping is buying/selling). but the fact that you getting back into the sport and your on an airsoft forum is surely good enough proof without a ukara number. For example i dont have ukara but i have a RIF, if the police came knocking there isnt a great deal they can do as i havnt commited any crime with it, there is no law on owning a RIF and even if they were being funny whats to stop anybody saying " i bought it before the vcra act" good luck with them trying to prove when you bought it.

[M_P]

If you can't prove you are or were an airsofter when you aqquired it, you shouldn't have it.

Anyone can join an airsoft forum, it doesn't prove anything.

[ScoobySnacks]

However, as wolf has said, possession is NOT an offence. It is the SELLING of an RIF that is an offence. Just owning one is not illegal.

 

I had RIF's, long before the VCRA. If I still had them then I would be under no compunction to prove that I had a defence for holding them.

 

As for swapping, to stick to the letter of the law you'd want to be sure that the person had a defence, but that does NOT have to be UKARA, as long as you show due dilligence in ensuring that they have a legitimate use for the RIF.

[Wo1f]

Shouldn't have one and legally not allowed one are two different things. Unless the police physically see you exchanging guns they have no proof and therefore no grounds to take them off you/ fine/ charge you with anything

[TPI]

but then if they stumble upon this they can then use it against what you said (I'm Confused as to who we are talking about now)

[ScoobySnacks]

Frankly, the only way this is likely to become an issue is if either of you commits an offence with the RIF, such as having it in a public place without good reason, or using it to commit a crime. Then the plod are likely to want to know where you got the weapon from.

 

That's not saying that it's ok to break the law. Of course it's not. "I'm not going to get caught" is not a moral defence!

[Richard65]

There is no basis in law for the "3 events and two months" that the UKARA ask for, being a cynic it suggests to me that they might want to get more people to come along to airsoft events to gather their evidence.

 

As the law sates that no one under 18 can but a RIF without a valid defence then shops selling airsoft guns needed a method of protecting themselves. The "3 events and two months" rule therefore seems sensible as you have to show a minimum commitment to the sport before being allowed to buy the RIFs.

 

It does seem a bit daft to have a law that allows ownership (even for those under 18) but stops buying/selling as that could lead to people finding ways round the rules. Thinking here more about parents who have no interest in the sport but have kids that love it and want a RIF. But then look at all the tax laws and the industry in finding ways of avoiding (not evading) tax.

 

I suppose the bottom line is what would happen if you did find yourself in front of a judge - would the line "given it by a friend when he emigrated to Australia" work or would they insist on proof? But ... if ownership is not illegal and you are sensible then why would you end up in front of a judge :rolleyes: