Jackisback Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 Hello all, I was hoping you could clarify the law in relation to buying airsoft weapons online, as many sites seem to offer this option. Section 32 of the VCRA makes it seem like the buyer and seller (or representative) must be there in person for the sale to be legal. The only way around this I can see is that if subsection 3b applies to the person delivering the parcel. Is this the case? If not, how is it legal. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose87 Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 airsoft weapons i believe are not directly classified as 'air weapons' and there for do not come under that section of the VCRA. they come under 36-41 imitation firearms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackisback Posted January 11, 2014 Author Share Posted January 11, 2014 Ah, okay. That will explain it then. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AK47frizzle Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 airsoft weapons i believe are not directly classified as 'air weapons' and there for do not come under that section of the VCRA. they come under 36-41 imitation firearms. It's funny because one of my local airsoft gun shops (wonderland models; they have decent guns but they triple the original price, wank.) sell sniper rifles, regardless of FPS, as air rifles which means you can bypass the two tone law completely because it's sold as an air rifle....................... dunno how that's possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose87 Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 well to be fair, you can sell RIFs to anyone doesnt matter how its labeled. theres no law against selling them to someone (well in the VCRA is does say its illegal to sell a RIF) its just if that persons intentions are not above board then the shop becomes liable. Upon further reading of the VCRA, section 36 subsection 1. 'A person is guilty of an offence if......' A company is not a person, surely this directly relates to second hand selling. Surely you try to take a company to court for selling RIFs and you state the above. then they win! It clearly states person. its not ambiguous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russe11 Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 well to be fair, you can sell RIFs to anyone doesnt matter how its labeled. theres no law against selling them to someone (well in the VCRA is does say its illegal to sell a RIF) its just if that persons intentions are not above board then the shop becomes liable. Upon further reading of the VCRA, section 36 subsection 1. 'A person is guilty of an offence if......' A company is not a person, surely this directly relates to second hand selling. Surely you try to take a company to court for selling RIFs and you state the above. then they win! It clearly states person. its not ambiguous The person in this instance is the sales person. Just as a barperson is responsible if they sell to someone underage not the licencee. If the business owner tells their staff to check UKARA registrations and they don't, they are not doing anything wrong. If however a Business owner or manager doesn't tell their staff to check UKARA numbers, then they are also guilty of the offence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose87 Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 its very arguable, as then the person in the business is liable not the business itself. as with the VCRA on many counts i think it cant be interpreted making it difficult as to what is legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longshot Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 It is always illegal to sell a RIF. It's not about whether it's legal, it's about whether you can avail yourself of a defence against prosecution after the fact. Moose, it's not "very arguable" at all; if you, as a person, sell a RIF to someone you are guilty of an offence. The 'arguable' part is whether the business is liable for anything since it's that which has no obvious legislation (though i'm sure there'll be something out there in trading laws that relates to this). I'd suggest that the business is liable to a degree, but it would depend on whether it could show that it had sufficiently explained the legal situation to its staff members and monitored them sufficiently. If a 30 year old teacher has a sexual relationship with a 15 year old student it is not the school (which in this case is the business) that will face a charge of statutory rape. The school may be help responsible in other ways, by it is the individual who has broken the law. The vagueness of the law is an issue though. Russell has suggested that the business owner might tell employees to check UKARA numbers, but since this is no way a legal requirement the business owner could just say: "make sure they're buying it for playing airsoft at a proper site" and they would theoretically have done their part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose87 Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 you can hardly compare the situation of rape to someone selling a toy from a toy shop which is what they are legitimately there to do, whereas a teacher isnt there to rape. well if you order over the internet then who is the person liable as it will just print out in a warehouse to be packaged as the payment is done automatically. i think the point is that it is arguable thats why the UKARA has done what its done as like you say the law is vague and therefore open to interpretation to different points of view so they have decided that make the ukara and cover their asses wholesale. so no one can point the finger at employees or business owners. I do get that if you as a person sell a RIF you have committed an offense, which in itself is an idiotic law. I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longshot Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Yeah, bad analogy, granted. Perhaps a better one might be someone working in a shop that sell shotguns who sells a shotgun to someone without checking if they have a shotgun certificate. Clearly it's the individual salesperson who is at fault (provided they have received the correct training) not the shop or its owners. That said, your online sale example is interesting, and I imagine that's part of the reason they have the whole 'face to face' policy for real firearms. As you say though, stupidly conceived laws will lead to stupid outcomes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose87 Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 yer its one of those thing they brought in a law with no real way to enforce it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supporters jcheeseright Posted January 12, 2014 Supporters Share Posted January 12, 2014 well to be fair, you can sell RIFs to anyone doesnt matter how its labeled. theres no law against selling them to someone (well in the VCRA is does say its illegal to sell a RIF) its just if that persons intentions are not above board then the shop becomes liable. wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose87 Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 you know what i mean! if i sell you a RIF its technically illegal but its not really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supporters jcheeseright Posted January 12, 2014 Supporters Share Posted January 12, 2014 technically it IS illegal, and being technically right is the best kind of right. technically punching someone in the face is illegal... see where I'm going? When zero one/fire support/land warrior etc sell someone a gun they are committing a crime, because the sale of a RIF is against the law... however, they have a defence against prosecution from that law so while the police would be fully within their remit to arrest the person in said shop, the CPS wouldn't touch it with a shitty stick as they cannot actually be prosecuted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose87 Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 its VCRA all over, just a childs reaction to a moral problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supporters jcheeseright Posted January 13, 2014 Supporters Share Posted January 13, 2014 they're the cards we've been dealt, best to play with what we've got and not draw any unwanted attention! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose87 Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 no draw attention i say......all the way from canada. things only change if people challenge them. up the revolution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DX115FALCON Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 It's funny because one of my local airsoft gun shops (wonderland models; they have decent guns but they triple the original price, wank.) sell sniper rifles, regardless of FPS, as air rifles which means you can bypass the two tone law completely because it's sold as an air rifle....................... dunno how that's possible. Went into Wonderland a few years ago. Prices were extortionate! Please note that Land Warrior is only 23 minutes from that shop. map from one to another is here: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/preview#!data=!4m33!3m24!1m5!1s97-101+Lothian+Rd%2C+Edinburgh+EH3+9AN%2C+UK!2s0x4887c7989a0a8983%3A0x5cd62f64b24b518!3m2!3d55.9462076!4d-3.2050595!1m5!1s1+Hardengreen+Ln%2C+Dalkeith+EH22+3NA%2C+UK!2s0x4887bec7758294bf%3A0x814f172fdd117c33!3m2!3d55.8833589!4d-3.0837078!3m8!1m3!1d21781!2d-3.2156821!3d55.9150217!3m2!1i1366!2i642!4f13.1!8m2!1e1!2b1!5m2!13m1!1e1!7m4!11m3!1m1!1e1!2b1!6m1!1e1&fid=0i1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.