Which retailers in the UK accept Just-Cos Cosplayer Insurance?

[Fatboy40]

14 hours ago, Rogerborg said:

UKARA records site membership, there's no reason to just have a single one. I've had three on the go at once.

 

Exactly, and in the context of this many players using HPA will have multiple site memberships as being a "member" is often a requirement to be able to use the sites own compressors or dive tanks for refills.

48 minutes ago, ak2m4 said:

 

@GiantKiwi why do you think that exactly?  how much are you thinking and what area?  I'd say yearly pen test / audits would be a nice bonus but "significant" I'm not so sure

 

I'm leaning more towards GiantKiwi's point of view here.

 

UKARA just has I believe three points of data (potentially four), the players name / site  / their UKARA number. If we follow the proposed...

 

# A system that stores a profile/ portfolio of verifiable activity,  such as pictures direct from registered sites, payment receipts,  registered address etc.

 

... we're into the realm of substantial data on an individual that will uniquely identify them and can be used as a method of conducting fraud / targeted phishing etc.

 

This leads onto knowledge of what the UK's Information Commissioners Office requires, nominated data controllers, associated legal liabilities etc. and this has overheads that will cost so need to be funded in some way. I just think that we're lucky that UKARA exists and all it costs is around a £25 cost to be a member of a site we play at anyhow (and the site gets a little more money so that it can turn a profit and still be available to us).

[woody_2231]

This thread is getting heated but I'ill try to remain neutral.

 

Like the others said, just-cos is very dodgy and non-universal. Fire-support and airsoft world are the only ones that states they accept just-cos. I have never used just-cos because VCRA doesn't count cosplay as rennactor. 

 

The expense of playing three games as a beginner is absurdly high, it's huge turn off for people without some sort of income. I understand airsoft isn't cheap in general but the price for playing in sites have some room for improvement. Also, UKARA only last for 12 months, 2 of those months is spent waiting to be approved. If ukara lasts for 2-3 years then the expense would be justifiable, but reality is that it isn't. 

 

If the expense is too unbearable or u felt that u won't play enough games to get ukara, there are less dodgy methods to get RIFs than Just-cos. 

 

Military vehicles trust is a bit more universal and is accepted as a rennactor defence. It's the defence I personally use. It worked on:

 

-Patrol base

-Fire support 

-airsoft world 

-Fubar bundy airsoft

-Others

 

 

 

Edited March 8 by woody_2231

[Fatboy40]

1 hour ago, woody_2231 said:

Military vehicles trust is a bit more universal and is accepted as a rennactor defence. It's the defence I personally use.

 

Very interesting as I think my younger brother has this as he has a D-Day used Willy's jeep and a Dodge truck.

 

So this covers you for all RIF's and not just those that mimic weapons from a specific conflict / period in time?

[Lozart]

56 minutes ago, Fatboy40 said:

So this covers you for all RIF's and not just those that mimic weapons from a specific conflict / period in time?

 

I very much doubt that a retailer that would accept that as a defence will actually be bothering to check if you're buying an SMLE or a DD MK18!

[woody_2231]

2 hours ago, Fatboy40 said:

 

Very interesting as I think my younger brother has this as he has a D-Day used Willy's jeep and a Dodge truck.

 

So this covers you for all RIF's and not just those that mimic weapons from a specific conflict / period in time?

I bought an AA pit viper on patrol base , TM AKM GBB on airsoft world, WE desert eagle on fubar bundy and a E&C glock on fire support using the defence and they all accepted it. So I say it does cover RIFs from all periods

Edited March 7 by woody_2231

[Rogerborg]

1 hour ago, woody_2231 said:

So I say it does cover RIFs from all periods

 

Or: it probably wouldn't, should it ever actually come to court, but:

 

1) It won't

2) It's the retailer's problem if it did.

 2.1) Which it won't.

[Pseudotectonic]

RIF under VCRA actually has to look like a "modern firearm", "[...] “modern firearm” means any firearm other than one the appearance of which would tend to identify it as having a design and mechanism of a sort first dating from before the year 1870."

 

So if it looks like something that could have been plausibly produced after 1870 it would count as RIF (including sci-fi or video game or other fictional gun shaped objects that, basically, looks like a gun)

[Colin Allen]

6 hours ago, woody_2231 said:

The expense of playing three games as a beginner is absurd even with rentals. I understand airsoft isn't cheap in general but the price for playing in sites have some room for improvement. Also, UKARA only last for 12 months, 2 of those months is spent waiting to be approved. If it lasted for 2-3 years then the expense would be justifiable, but reality is that it isn't. 

What is absurd about the expense of playing three games as a beginner?  Do you mean that you think rental costs are too high?

Two months spent waiting to be approved?  Are you referring to the requirement to play three games in more than 56 days or did you have to wait that long for your UKARA number to be sent to you?  If the former, that is a requirement set by UKARA so that you can show that you are a dedicated player.  If the latter, such a wait is very unusual.

After the first year, assuming that you keep your UKARA registration at the same site, there is no extra expense involved as you qualify just by playing at the site.

[Tackle]

My take, these days Airsoft is only as expensive as you let it be, every bit of the highest quality kit has a budget equivalent, same for the guns (aeg's), obviously gas kits a bit different, but there's no reason someone can't be game ready for as little as £250, maybe less if you punt around the s/h classifieds. 

Same goes for green fees, a days fun for as little as £25 if you've got your own kit, very few other sporting pastimes compare to it, even renting a squash court for an hour is about £15.

Paying a bit more for rental kit to give you the ability to qualify for ukara is a relatively small price to pay if your planning to stick with it. 

[Galvatron]

On 07/03/2024 at 12:06, woody_2231 said:

The expense of playing three games as a beginner is absurd even with rentals. I understand airsoft isn't cheap in general but the price for playing in sites have some room for improvement. Also, UKARA only last for 12 months, 2 of those months is spent waiting to be approved. If it lasted for 2-3 years then the expense would be justifiable, but reality is that it isn't.

 

 

How do you qualify the expense being absurd? The sites aren't charities. Their overheads of BBs, maintenance for the rental guns, their eventual replenishment and the labour costs of inspecting and stocktaking have to be taken into consideration along with a profit margin. It's really easy to belittle operating costs when you deviate from "try(ing) to remain neutral" and show an agenda against the current system.

 

Let's not push a false narrative that 2 months of having a UKARA defence is waiting to be approved is the norm. I had a provisional UKARA number the day I became a member of the site I played at to apply for becoming registered with UKARA BUT my defence didn't become active until a couple of days after I was signed off after playing my third game in just over 2 months and the site, after which the owner sent off an email to UKARA confirming I had satisfied the requirements. That defence was active for 12 months from the day I received by email from UKARA, not from when I played my first game. The only expense I have to incur to renew my UKARA registration is to continue my membership at the site for another year - that is much less expensive than monthly gym memberships, a few packs of cigarettes or a week's worth of overpriced custom Starbucks coffees.

 

Imparting misinformation as fact is less than conducive to discourse in good faith, especially when you "try to remain neutral".

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 8 by Galvatron

[Cannonfodder]

If you're waiting up to a couple of months after the 3rd game to get your ukara number them that's down to the site owner being lazy, not ukara

[Rogerborg]

13 hours ago, Pseudotectonic said:

So if it looks like something that could have been plausibly produced after 1870 it would count as RIF (including sci-fi or video game or other fictional gun shaped objects that, basically, looks like a gun)

 

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

 

“real firearm” [in the context of a realistic imitation firearm] means —

(a) a firearm of an actual make or model of modern firearm (whether existing or discontinued); or

(b) something falling within a description which could be used for identifying, by reference to their appearance, the firearms falling within a category of actual modern firearms which, even though they include firearms of different makes or models (whether existing or discontinued) or both, all have the same or a similar appearance.

 

So I'd argue that (e.g.) a Pulse Rifle or an XR-5 is not strictly speaking a RIF, although all retailers treat them as such, even the BBgnuz4u ones.

 

The APS UAR is an interesting case, as it's not a replica of a specific bullpup, but it's got so many features from the L85, AUG and Tavor that I think it would fall into (b).

 

 

Contrast with the much broader Firearms Act 1968 definition: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/27/section/57

 

“imitation firearm” means any thing which has the appearance of being a firearm (other than such a weapon as is mentioned in section 5(1)(b) of this Act) whether or not it is capable of discharging any shot, bullet or other missile;

 

Which is why how we get our toys should be far less of a concern than what we actually do with them.

 

For example, that chap here who was determined to open-carry a Pulse Rifle on a bus because it wasn't technically a RIF... but would very much be an IF for FA purposes.

[Pseudotectonic]

Quote

(b)

something falling within a description which could be used for identifying, by reference to their appearance, the firearms falling within a category of actual modern firearms which, even though they include firearms of different makes or models (whether existing or discontinued) or both, all have the same or a similar appearance.

It needs to be read in full: (don't just highlight some words and ignore the rest😂)

 

1. something falling within a description

That means something that can be described in a certain way...

 

2. which could be used for identifying, by reference to their appearance,

...by their appearance, that can point out...

 

3. the firearms falling within a category of actual modern firearms which,

...a type of modern firearm (e.g. pistols) that...

 

4. even though they include firearms of different makes or models (whether existing or discontinued) or both, all have the same or a similar appearance.

...can include different brands (e.g. Berretta or Sig or Glock) but looks the same or similar (i.e. a pistol).

 

So for example, a sci-fi video game pistol (e.g. from video game Doom), even though is definitely not an actual firearm, its appearance can still fall within a general description of a pistol, therefore it would be an RIF.

 

Another example, a fictional pistol (e.g. AI generated image) that has half a slide from a Glock and half a slide from Sig and a body style of a Berretta, it is definitely fictional, and certainly not any actual firearm brand or model, but because its appearance, again, fits the description of a pistol, it would be an RIF.

 

Same logic with the pulse rifle, because it has the general appearance of a real rifle, someone who is not a sci-fi fan and firearm expert won't be able to tell whether it is fictional or actual but certainly it will still look like a rifle, therefore can still be frightened into submission for example in a robbery, which is the whole intent of VCRA is to try to stop these RIFs from becoming tools of crime. (Whether the law is effective is a totally different topic)

 

So the law is actually (a) actual firearm or (b) looks like some sort of actual firearm.

[Cannonfodder]

Imo if you're unsure if a gun is a rif or an if ask yourself 1 question. Would Joe public shit themselves if you walked into the post office openly carrying it?

 

We can debate the legal technicalities till the cows come home, but at the end of the day most people know ⅘ of bugger all about firearms so would just think "gun" rather than "ooh  nice glock/sig/whatever"

[superwok]

Just wanted to provide an update...

 

I spoke with the retailer, and they requested the Just-Cos Cosplayer Insurance certificate along with a photo of me participating in an airsoft event. After reviewing these, they were satisfied, proceeded with processing my order, and confirmed that it will be delivered on Monday.

 

For the casual players who may not have the opportunity to attend events regularly. It presents an alternative path to legally acquire a RIF from a UK-based retailer. 

 

 

 

[Rogerborg]

14 hours ago, Pseudotectonic said:

ts appearance can still fall within a general description of a pistol

 

Which actual make and model of pistol?

 

 

On 08/03/2024 at 08:16, Rogerborg said:

The APS UAR is an interesting case, as it's not a replica of a specific bullpup, but it's got so many features from the L85, AUG and Tavor that I think it would fall into (b).

 

Replies needs to be read in full.

[Pseudotectonic]

1 hour ago, Rogerborg said:

Which actual make and model of pistol?

 

It doesn't matter which, because "pistol" is a category of actual modern firearms which, even though they include firearms of different makes or models (whether existing or discontinued) or both, all have the same or a similar appearance.

 

As long as something looks like it belongs to the pistol category, it already ticks the box. Anything that can be described as a pistol shaped object (with non unrealistic colour) would tick the box.

 

VCRA is written so it doesn't have to list out every single type of actual firearms that was ever invented and those yet to be invented in the future. If tomorrow someone invents a type of firearm that is a bucket shaped object you wear on your head with a cylinder sticking out in front, and call it a Headcannon™, it would automatically become a new category of RIF that new replicas can realistically imitate.

 

[Rogerborg]

10 hours ago, Pseudotectonic said:

It doesn't matter

 

"What Parliament meant to legislate was..."

[Tommikka]

12 hours ago, superwok said:

.

 

For the casual players who may not have the opportunity to attend events regularly. It presents an alternative path to legally acquire a RIF from a UK-based retailer. 

 

 

 

Note that to be pedantic:

for an adult buyer in the UK it is always legal to acquire a RIF

any offence is committed by the retailer

 

By asking for a photo of you playing at an airsoft event they have not committed an offence under the VCRA, as they have been able to reasonably confirm intent to play airsoft at an insured site.

What they have also managed to do is to con you into spending £20 on ‘cosplay insurance’ which bears no relevance to the VCRA or to playing an airsoft event

 

What does the Just Cos insurance certificate insure you for?

 

Their web page says that it provides “Public Liability insurance in their right as a re-enactor to wear and carry costume articles that may prove alarming or ‘scary’ to third parties who may not understand our purpose. This policy particularly covers the right to carry imitation weaponry that could otherwise be mistaken as real or mistakenly reported as an offensive weapon.”

 

What injury / damage is your JustCos going to pay out for a third party being alarmed or scared?

 

https://www.just-cos.co.uk

 

The skirmisher defence under the VCRA requires the site/event to have public liability insurance, for the injury of you/third parties or the damages/losses to you/third parties. 

[Pseudotectonic]

(VCRA RIF Regulations 2007) Just-Cos insurance can fulfil the third party liability insurance requirement for the "permitted activity" which just means "acting out of military or law enforcement scenarios for the purposes of recreation", which of course include skirmishing, but arguably cosplay also falls into such recreation, and indeed one can argue airsoft skirmishing is just a cosplay event with some procedural competitive acting.

[Tommikka]

26 minutes ago, Pseudotectonic said:

(VCRA RIF Regulations 2007) Just-Cos insurance can fulfil the third party liability insurance requirement for the "permitted activity"

 

 

 

 

It could provide the third party liability - but then why ask for a photo playing at an event - which backs up playing at what should be an insured site/event?

28 minutes ago, Pseudotectonic said:

", which of course include skirmishing, but arguably cosplay also falls into such recreation, and indeed one can argue airsoft skirmishing is just a cosplay event with some procedural competitive acting.

It could be argued that airsoft is cosplay skirmishing (a very good argument as the look is the case that backed up a need for RIFs to be realistic - otherwise for just shooting each other IFs would do)

 

But cosplay in itself isn’t a defence (airsoft skirmishing isn’t even a defence under the core VCRA as a statutory instrument was used to add skirmishing)

 

The JustCos public liability as described in the justcos site is a load of bollocks - insuring against hurt feelings.  What liability is there for injury/damages/losses due to seeing a RIF that JustCos will pay for ?

 

[Pseudotectonic]

Photo is just for the "permitted activity" part, because the insurance itself is not proof of the activity. With UKARA the site handles checking the ID check etc to prove you actually play, but with your own insurance and your own activity you gotta show something to prove what you are doing with the RIF, so the seller can have the defence.

 

--

 

Although, looking at the Just-Cos website it does seem very dodgy because there is no contact information and zero info about the exact policy or even who is the provider of the insurance... not even company name or company registration number... on that basis I would avoid it.

[Dan Robinson]

It's a website that doesn't look like it's been updated for 7 years.  I'm not sure I'd trust it much more than I could wipe my arse with it.

Edited March 10 by Dan Robinson

[GenuineGerman]

That does look odd, I would expect a website to state a basic detail of what you get for signing up and paying for pli. 
 

If I’m honest it looks like an easy way to get money (not calling it a scam) without much of a service to provide. I would be very worried if I had it and ever needed to use it. 

[Colin Allen]

I am really not sure what they are providing insurance against; they mention public liability relating to dressing up and carrying "scary" items including imitation weaponry or having such reported as being an offensive weapon, but what are the members actually being insured against?

Public liability insurance covers against the cost of claims for:
Personal injuries
Loss of, or damage to, property
Death

You cannot insure against being arrested for carrying a RIF or any type of offensive weapon or for dressing up as something scary.  Perhaps the insurance is in case someone has a heart attack or is injured running away from what they perceive to be someone wielding a gun or dressed as a a monster.

It does seem that it might better be called Just-Con.