The future of airsoft law.

[Finius]

I've decided to open this thread up as a general interest discussion, thus it's not under the UK Law section.

 

We're still now, five years after the commencement of S.36 of the VCRA finding that people don't know the rules or are constantly striving to try and avoid them. Airsoft hasn't caused any major upset in Britain and as a sport is growing both in player numbers, business numbers and by extension of both of the former, taxable income for the Government to get hold of. We've gotten on fairly well despite the VCRA, which many decried as the death of airsoft.

 

My question is this then, where are we going? How can we improve the law? How are the government likely to change the law in the future? What do we think?

 

In terms of my own personal opinion, I think we're fairly strongly on the right course and I think the system we've adopted now is good. I see no need for any further restriction or freedom with regards legislation. Under eighteens must be gifted their guns full stop, thus preventing many eye-poking-outs etc, over eighteens must prove they're a skirmisher; nobody who cannot within reason be trusted with an RIF can get one without somehow circumventing the law and only persons over eighteen can buy one at all, whether RIF or IF (which can in turn be gifted by parents to children who wish to take up the sport quite easily). All in all, a good thing.

 

Where do I see room for improvement?

 

The UKARA system needs to be rolled out as an official national scheme, preferably government supported, in my eyes, more like a license. You play your three times and then become licensed, every year when your expiry comes due, you're sent a letter to remind you that you're coming up to having to renew and asked to resubmit evidence to prove you're a skirmisher. Sites need to be advertising and educating on the issue a lot more too, all new players should have to have a ten minute or so induction on their first day to outline how the sport works etc, which should touch on the issue of UKARA and registration, thus opening the floor for them to do their own research and hopefully reducing the number of "how can I get a black gun" type threads the more experience among us have to deal with.

 

A lot of you will probably vomit a little at the sheer sight of the phrase "government supported". Why the hell do we want anything to do with the government you ask?

 

Legitimacy. If we managed to create a licensing scheme run or assisted by the government, they would be much more hard pressed to go back on themselves and take our rights away, they could also be held accountable and lobbied directly concerning issues with the system etc; in theory UKARA too can be held accountable or lobbied, but as a private and mostly charitable organisation, they're entirely within their rights to just tell individuals to sod off. The government on the other hand are terrified of niche groups who tend to vote in force if even a few of their members are upset and when we're talking thousands of persons, often in concentrated areas (read that as constituencies), it could be quite a concern for unstable seats.

 

The other bonus to a government scheme would be police cooperation, every person who could legally buy an airsoft gun could be found easily by the police meaning that if your house gets raided or you get stopped on public transport etc, it's as simple as looking you up on the database and a quick look over the RIF to confirm that it is indeed an airsoft replica and you more than likely have a good reason as to why you're carrying it around because you went to the effort of getting yourself registered in the first place.

 

What don't we need? A move towards blaze tips. I feel that once you've gone to the effort of getting registered you should be left alone to do whatever you feel with your RIF and IF within the realms of the law at the time of purchase. A chef doesn't blunt his knives during transit, and they're far more lethal and equally likely to cause a stir if produced in public. Moreover, introducing blaze tips would be retroactive law and would contravene European law, so it's off the cards. It would be entirely fair for NEW RIF and IF to require blaze tips, but then you have the issue of distinguishing between those purchase before the law and those after, it would also require the reorganizing of the VCRA to some degree which would only lead to a disadvantage to us as a sport (in my opinion). Another major grip of mine with the concept of blaze tips is that there would be massive issues with guns that do not have removable flashiders, like the VSR series, shotguns or many vintage weapons and pistols.

 

I do however think we should be educating players, sites and the police on the transport of RIFs, and these may well include promoting the purchase of a spare flashider that was bright orange for use in transit, or even something as simple as orange tape.

 

Where are we going? Nowhere, for the time being, there's no central body to airsoft, no official representation, no pressure group, only UKARA and UKAPU and apart they are both too weak to do anything major in terms of progress. As for the government, there's not enough attention on guns or election issues at the moment for airsoft to come up in law again anytime soon - it's going to take something like Dunblane or a series of armed robberies or something first, until then, I feel that if we as a sporting community continue to grow and keep out of trouble, we're not going to bring down the wrath of parliament anytime soon, and if we wait politely, when it does happen, we'll be prepared and as a community may have enough oomph to get our way for a change...

 

So AFUK, care to share your opinions?

[kungfumonkey]

i agree that the ukara scheme should be transitioned to more of a fire arms certificate sort of thing i.e you must hold a valid ukara license you purchase/own rif's the same way you would need a f.a.c to purchase/own a shotgun

 

and nice thread made for some intresting reading

[Saltyyy]

I don't really want this to go anywhere really.

 

My reasoning behind this is, if airsoft gets government backing, I'd think there'd be alot more focus on how government backing would effect airsoft. There will ALWAYS...I repeat...ALWAYS be people getting around the system and if the government were to find out the statistics of it, then there will be even more constraint.

Let's face it, the government will try and do anything to hinder the sport because of it's nature of using guns, more constraints and more constraints.

 

I don't know, I do like your ideas but feel giving more attention towards it may be more harm than help, yet I do like what e.g. ASGI is doing, having local police officers give disclaimers in their videos, and showing how families and 'normal' people play it legally and safely.

 

And the idea of giving new players an intro video would be very hard to do, as with sites there are so many players and the time for the video would mean other players are waiting etc.

 

Not bashing your ideas or anything buddy, but I dunno, could be helpful, could not, depends on how it's played by the government etc

[Airsoft-Ed]

I think if I were to share my opinion it would more or less be the same as copy and pasting all of the above.

 

I completely agree.

 

One thing I would like explained in addition though, is why air guns, which are far more dangerous than airsoft guns, don't have to be two toned, or have the owner put through a trust exercise in order to get them in their real colours. Despite the fact that there are also replica air guns just as there are airsoft ones.

 

The more dangerous weapons that are equally realistic, have less restrictions put upon them.

 

It makes no sense. It also makes no sense that some shops give some airsoft guns special treatment and sell them to people without UKARA just because they use CO2 or their fps is unusually high for the weapon type. For example, I've seen CO2 Desert Eagles sold without UKARA because they fire at 400fps and the shops decide to class them as air pistols, despite them using 6mm plastic, airsoft ammunition and not 4.5mm/.177 cal copper BBs. Interestingly, this CO2 desert eagle, as well as a few other examples, one of which is the KWC/Cybergun licensed Sig Sauer X-FIVE, actually do have an airgun variety available that does use air gun, copper BBs. Yet in some places the airsoft ones are still considered air guns as well.

I've seen the same done with airsoft, Dan Wesson revolvers and even with snipers in some cases.

 

I've also often wondered what the actual point of two toning guns is. 'Cos if you're caught with a two tone walking through the street, the repercussions are the same as if it were an R.I.F. or at least people's reactions to it always appear to be the same. It might as well have been an R.I.F.

 

Surely the point of having it two toned is so if anyone does see it in public, they know it isn't real?

 

Well then what's to stop gangs getting hold of real 9mm pistols or whatever, and just painting them half green to get away with walking through the street with them?

 

I think I'd want to push for having proof of a defence as being the only way to get a gun and to do away with two tones, but also lower the age from 18 to 14 before someone can sign up for UKARA. However, if a child of 14 plays 3 games and gets UKARA, their parent ought to be able to buy an RIF via their child's UKARA.

 

This means airsofters of all ages can get R.I.Fs but it is still always held under the responsibility of an over 18 year old.

 

If that makes sense?

 

I could let most of that slip though, since the system as it stands is working. Though it's surprising how little the police seem to actually understand about it. It seems stupid that if it's possible for the public to obtain replica weapons, that the police aren't made more properly aware of it. Or the public in general for that matter.

 

I think we just need to get airsoft out there. I think UKAPU ought to start involving itself in things more and advertising itself as well, since barely anyone seems to know about it.

 

I think UKAPU and UKARA both need to associate themselves with each other and then in turn, with every shop and site in the country that has anything to do with airsoft. The sites and shops ought to have certificates displayed in store or on site that say they are recognised by both UKARA and UKAPU and there ought to always be info on hand to explain what both those associations are and what they're present for.

 

If UKAPU just got more members then they'd be able to do more, it's just that only about 5% of the UKs airsoft population seem to have a clue who they are, since you don't hear about them anywhere unless you type UKARA wrong into google or something. I only found out about it because I was offered the spot as their student representative.

[Saltyyy]

Should have also said this which ed has mentioned above:

 

I'd like to see the age limit lowered to 16. As an under 18 airsofter myself who skirmishes every week and do tech work, helping out newbs, hiring out my guns etc. I believe that in all this I really do have a defence that I skirmish often. (Not trying to sound cocky there, but it's what I like to do )

 

Parents would have to assume full responsibility of said RIF but would be the youth's defence. A tick on the database or so saying that a parent must be there upon purchase, or if buying online, parents must ring up and scan ID over to assume responsibility of it, but the youth has the defence. Obviously once the youth is 18, the gun is given/sold to the youth.

Not that much from the current gifting system but allows youth's to pay for said item.

[Rock-climby-Dave]

UKARA or another similar scheme NEEDS to be COMPULSORY

 

FAR too often I get enquiries like:

Hi, I'm a player, I'm over 18, but my site owner is a berk and doesn't believe in UKARA. Please may I buy a gun?

To which my answer unfortunately is usually no. as there is no cost effective (it is business afterall) method of proving defence.

 

To prove defence you need to be a registered member with a site holding a minimum of third party insurance.

If you do not have UKARA you need to provide:

 

Photographic ID in person, proving you are who you say you are.

Proof of membership to a site.

A copy of your sites insurance certificate.

 

UKARA has all of these, every time you buy a RIF.

2 forms of ID has been checked by your site when you joined the scheme.

they have then stamped the paperwork and signed it off. (1 form of ID must have your address to show proof for the postcode required)

This is then given to a retailer so that no site can add players willy-nilly.

 

It is a sensible system, it is easy to use and is very clear. WHYYOUNOUSEUKARA!?

[kungfumonkey]

yeh i like the idea of doing a junior ukara licence for the younger players

[TPI]

i hate the idea of 14 year old's maybe 16* but 14 honestly just drop the fecking driving age to 10 and the legal consent to have sex age to 5 no bloody point Although i do believe in the Orange Tip Thing for if it's not on site and it isn't in your house why doe's it not have a Orange Flash hider.

 

And some site's don't give you a member ship card they just sign you up to UKARA and go now F*ck off

 

*If it was dropped to 16 i say the Blighter's Would need to Attend atleast 4 or 5 Time's to get on a Junior one

[Airsoft-Ed]

I don't think it would make their numbers suddenly shoot upwards, Craig. Under 18s rely on their parents to get them to and from events, as well as to sign the insurance waiver every time they visit, so if a parent isn't happy with it they won't go.

 

Plus they still have to discover airsofting in the first place. I'd never even heard of it until I turned 18, so UKARA was never something that bothered me particularly.

 

All I'm suggesting is that since the whole process of two toning weapons is pointless, because they still can't be seen in public either way, why not just do away with them all together and make it so that if you want any gun at all, you must get UKARA validation? Then to make it fair, so that under 18s can still have their own guns, lower the age of UKARA sign up to 14, but leave the purchasing of the gun open to the UKARA holders parent or guardian.

 

That way the gun is always the responsibility of an over 18 year old's, but people can still buy guns more or less as freely as before. The only difference being, everyone now HAS TO go through the "trust procedure" of getting UKARA in order to get a gun, meaning everyone who buys one will have a respect for the hobby and have a reason to own a gun. They won't be likely to shoot people in the streets with two tones or whatever because there will be no two tones. There will be no way to own a gun unless you have UKARA, but UKARA can now be had by 14y olds

 

I think that's a pretty good idea, if I do say so myself.

[Finius]

Not bashing your ideas or anything buddy, but I dunno, could be helpful, could not, depends on how it's played by the government etc

 

Don't worrying about ripping my ideas apart, that's the point of the thread

 

I think, since it's been about five years since we got all these rules put on our heads, it might be nice to see what people think the community is doing right, wrong, too much of or not enough of, it can't hurt to speculate

 

Everyone's making valid points and I have some excellent rebutals (some simply for the point of playing devil's advocate), but as I'm job hunting (read that as buying airsoft stuff), I must wait until later to reply properly

[Richard65]

I would fully support the idea that a non playing parent could hold a joint membership with a junior player thus allowing the parent to register with UKARA. I would also support a change to the law making that parent legally responsible for any offences by the junior member.

 

I heard recently about a lad who cycled to the airsoft site with the black barrel of a two-tone sticking out of his rucksack. He was followed by a panda car and the ARU caught him just as he entered the site - flat on his face with real guns pointing at him! Parent who had bought the gun was a lawyer :lol:

 

As Ed suggested - introducing this would allow the UKARA (or associated organisations) to propose a ban on the sale of two-tone airsoft guns as a way of tightening controls so that you have to be UKARA registered to buy any airsoft gun. So, if a parent wants to buy a gun for a junior without being involved in the sport of airsofting then they buy an airgun and comply with the laws for those.

 

Should this be taken a bit further with a restriction on the import of guns except by registered traders? UKARA could then show that they will only sell a gun after it has been restricted to 350fps as a maximum. That would also differentiate shops selling airsoft guns from thjose selling higher powered guns as air guns that shoot bbs.

 

I had a look at the UKAPU site and have mixed feelings. Their efforts to gain recognition from Sport England sounds a great idea but I do not feel the need for a `players' association in itself. The valid defence (as I understand it) requires you to skirmish at sites registered with UKARA and so there is already the basis of a body that can negotiate with the police/government. Perhaps the UKAPU would work better as an official subsection of UKARA to provide player input.

 

As far as people trying to find ways around the rules - should there be restrictions on `for sale' sections of forums. De;liberately being a bit controversial here but should you have to prove membership of a registered club (or UKARA registration) before you are allowed to post on either a `guns for sale' or `guns wanted' forum? If that involved paying a small annual membership fee to cover the c forum admin costs would you pay?

[hilander]

just a fast reply here . as nearly all of the above state the same facts. if the goverment get involved . there will be a big price to pay . maybe 50 - 60 quid a year.

[Airsoft-Ed]

I wouldn't want to advocate having to pay in order for my details to be checked, nor would I want to be the one doing the checking. It would be more hassle than it's worth, especially if there were charges for it, how would people pay them, where would the money go, who would get it? It'd be an administrative nightmare. I wouldn't want to restrict certain parts of the forums to certain people depending on their entitlements either.

 

They are community forums, they are free to use and they exist for the purpose of forwarding information from those who have it, to those who need it.

 

Segregation on any level is a move in the wrong direction. It may create a bad atmosphere between the two groups and that's not what we need.

 

Going back to the Junior UKARA process and people requiring a defence to buy any gun, my only negative thoughts on the issue are as follows:

 

Would site owners have UKARA immunity? 'Cos they'd have to buy hire guns to get set up. It'd be like the chicken and the egg.

What came first? The UKARA registered site where people can sign up to get guns? Or people with guns already to set up a site?

 

There'd have to be minor changes in the law for it to work, or the number of existing sites might stop expanding, or even see a decrease.

[Richard65]

Going back to the Junion UKARA process and people requiring a defence to buy any gun, my only negative thoughts on the issue are as follows:

 

Would site owners have UKARA immunity? 'Cos they'd have to buy hire guns to get set up. It'd be like the chicken and the egg.

What came first? The UKARA registered site where people can sign up to get guns? Or people with guns already to set up a site?

 

There'd have to be minor changes in the law for it to work, or the number of existing sites might stop expanding, or even see a decrease.

 

Not sure why the site owners would need UKARA immunity as you have to be a member of a participating site in order to get UKARA registration. This is an extract from the registration form:-

 

In order to comply with the new legislation, and before you can purchase Airsoft guns,

you must be a member of what the government call an "official skirmish* site".

First, check to see which of your local sites are participating in the UKARA player

validation scheme. You will need to become a local member of one of these skirmish

sites in order to register with UKARA. A full list of participating schemes is available by

visiting http://www.ukara.org.uk

 

Reading this it would suggest that even if you skirmish every week, you do not have a defense unless you are a member of an official skirmish site - I believe that is any site with third party insurance.

[kungfumonkey]

i think anyone setting up a site would be ukara registered themselves anyways, and if not maybe implement that all "new start" sites must become ukara registered that way theres one defining rule set and standered across great Britain, which in its self would help show the sport in a more responsible way also introduce fines etc for people starting sites outside of the law.

 

for example a site making a profit would need to be ukara registered but a privately owned site being used by a team/ group of friends ( non profit) wouldnt its easy to find out which sites are which because all u would have to do is contact the owner posing as a customer.

[broklebean]

just a fast reply here . as nearly all of the above state the same facts. if the goverment get involved . there will be a big price to pay . maybe 50 - 60 quid a year.

 

 

i agree with what your saying the goverment wont do it for free anywhere they can make some money they will. then they will add special tax to RIFs.

 

all in all i think a license would be a good idea maybe a photo license tho so if its lost the finder wouldnt be able to use it at a site or to buy a RIF.

[TPI]

Yea a Photo ID Kind of like a Driver's License With a Registered site on it your Address and E-Mail and an Expiry Date aswell as Age

 

i still think under 16's shoudln't be allowed access to buying RIF's because if i'm honest even on here their are user's that are under 16 but their are only 1-3 out of the 80 or so kid's that act Responsibly so a Longer Time Frame to see How Committed they are would be a Great thing.

 

Edit:

 

having read more than 2 posts up now i can say more

 

I think the Whole Parent's Thing is utter Crap unless they go into the Shop or Site and Show they Understand the Risks if that was to happen then i would support it and support getting rid of Two-Tone's aswell otherwise we'll just see what a few member's may remember from halfway throuygh the year when a youtube channel popped up with Kid's Playing with airsoft's in the Street with OUT Eye Pro and Damaging other folk's Thing's and they even thought that the road they were playing on was Private Yet it was Obviously a Public Estate!!!

[Saltyyy]

But the thing is Craig, an over 18 needs to be responsible for it, so parental/guardian ownership and accepter of responsibility is needed.

[TPI]

Yea and that parent dosen't know the law's around it or dosen't bother to ask unlike your parent's

[d_loydy00007]

To be honest i think it is quite simple to obtain a RIF regardless of your UKARA or club membership. when i first started our greatest love i often trawled the classified to find my potential first starter kit. of all the enquiries i made only 1 seller asked for proof of my defence (prior to be completing my three attendances). Subsequently i was contemplating selling a few dusty AEG's myself then it dawned on me. how do i prove that this is a valid defence?? all my sales will now only be to my club members to ensure that a defence is in place to cover my arse.

 

my point is this, the second hand market as in any sale of goods is far superior to that of sales through legitimate retailers but yet there is a huge whole in the system. As the registered retailers can contact UKARA to verify membership authenticity why is this not public?? Surely you cant make the sale of a new RIF obide to the law but not the possession. i know my comments will not be accepted by all, espicially the under 18's. Wouldn't it just make sense for the club with which under 18's are members to retain the RIF's in secure storage (as they often do with their hire guns) solely for that individual. this way the younger generation get the toys they want with the piece of mind knowing that they are safely looked after and legal.

 

Just my thoughts

[TPI]

As i read your second ParaGraph Loydy i Had my heart in my throat and my hand's clasped together!

 

i Also Agree with that but i also see why other's despise people that think this and that it is seen as Harsh and actually potentially Damaging to getting new Blood in and Playing.

 

But i Totally whole Heartedly Agree that we should be Able to Look up a UKARA No. Ourself's and check the Supplied address is Correct because i have had RIF's Sold to me without so much as a query about my Defence!.

[magicaldr]

Hmm, interesting debate. I must admit I have often wondered about a few of the issues here.

 

Personally I don't think much of VCRA, it strikes of half baked legislation from people who are scared of, well, us. Not sure why but after getting rid of all the real guns (not such a bad thing) they move on to the plastic ones with a law that means its OK to buy a more dangerous air pistol (which looks fully real) but a plastic one that cant hurt you is painted mad colours. Then call it the Violent Crime Reduction Act

 

So I would like others like to see that anomaly sorted out, all weapons designed to look like 'Real Steel' firearms should be under the same rules regardless of being above or below a certain FPS or shape of projectile (Paintball for example). Real steel should be defined as weapons covered by Firearms laws with specific exemptions for Air Rifle's and Air Pistols that don't replicate more powerful 'Real' guns. Yes that's a fun one to legislate, but less of a mess than the current descriptions which would see a broom handle almost classed as a RIF.

 

This would mean that paintball M16's, Air pistol P99's, etc. are now RIF's and subject to rules on purchase. So you would add a valid reason to own them to the rules they are already under as air weapons, face to face, etc. You also now can extend UKARA to a wider group with new defences of paintball skirmisher, target / practical shooter, and the discussed airsoft parent...

 

I would also like to see IF's downgraded in law, it makes no sense to have the same penalty for IFs and RIFs when the purpose of an IF is to ensure everyone knows its not 'real'. It would also be good if people run about with RIF's in a dangerous way were prosecuted under firearms laws, which already allow for this (its the threat / fear, not the weapon or not that is the illegal act). We could then do away with RIF/IF in public laws or just make them a warning / misdemeanour's not major crime.

 

We could also do with sensible guidelines on transport so we can deal with the jobsworths and scare mongers out there. Personally I hate the idea of orange tips, but a barrel plug with flag like paintball uses may be a good idea. Although the current advice of a proper gun bag makes passing through public areas pretty safe.

 

It would also be nice to have RIF's at airsoft level legally defined as toys in such a way that airlines and postal services cant keep discriminating against us by saying they are firearms.

[Richard65]

I think the Whole Parent's Thing is utter Crap unless they go into the Shop or Site and Show they Understand the Risks if that was to happen then i would support it and support getting rid of Two-Tone's aswell otherwise we'll just see what a few member's may remember from halfway throuygh the year when a youtube channel popped up with Kid's Playing with airsoft's in the Street with OUT Eye Pro and Damaging other folk's Thing's and they even thought that the road they were playing on was Private Yet it was Obviously a Public Estate!!!

 

Craig - If you had a joint junior/parent membership then it should improve controls. You would still have to be over 18 to buy a gun but now you would also have to be a member of a registered club. I would expect the club to want the same degree of identification for the parent as they require for an over 18 who has completed the skirmish requirement. Part of the membership process would be for the club to explain the rules/law and if they could refuse membership just as they can with anyone now.

 

At the moment anyone over 18 can buy a two-tone and gift it a kid. They do not have had to attend any airsoft skirmishes or even have any intention of doing so. This is what leads to the youtube issue you mentioned. The two-tone does not even have to be a cheap plastic gun - for just a few £ you can have any RIF painted and it would probably not be that difficult to remove the paint (not tried it and know it would be illegal). If two-tones were banned then the membership route would be the only way of buying an airsoft gun and that should help with having the sport more widely recognised/accepted.

[kungfumonkey]

maybe they could impose a ban on allowing a RIF to be converted into a IF or put a cap on the power range of IF's say 150fps and must be made of say 90% plastic that way it would be a toy also up the % needing to be a bright colour to say 75% that way people would be abit more likely to wait there 3 games or pay for a site membership than just spend £10- £20 getting a rif two toned

[joshcowin]

i think if it was a law you should have to renew every 3 years,every years a ballache