The_Lord_Poncho Posted October 24 Share Posted October 24 19 hours ago, Rogerborg said: Spot the firearm, the air weapon firearm, and the non-firearm air weapon here. Top - air gun (based on the semi-only selector) middle - firearm (H&K logo on the folding stock) bottom - airsoft (process of elimination) actually - just spotted the bottom one too only has semi. But loads of white text safety blurb printed on both the top and bottom options, so those must be the more dangerous ones. Oh, wait, hang on.... Rogerborg 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenJackson Posted Thursday at 15:09 Share Posted Thursday at 15:09 On 24/10/2024 at 12:02, Pseudotectonic said: Ok after looking up statutory interpretation, it seems there are various rules the judge can use for interpretations, but it is up to the judge to decide which rule to use. And among these rules, the only way airsoft is considered air weapon is if it is taken using the Literal Rule and selectively with certain English dictionaries and not others, and very selectively on words, and without considering the generally understood conventional classifications. Meaning even with this method the judge will have to quite purposefully go out of his way to interpret airsoft as air weapon, which should never happen. Paperback Oxford English Dictionary says "Air rifle" (or "air pistol") is defined as: a gun which uses compressed air to fire pellets. And then "pellet": a piece of small shot or other lightweight bullet. - Origin Old French pelote 'metal ball'. Cambridge Dictionary online says "air rifle" is: a gun [...] uses air pressure to fire a pellet (= small metal ball). And when using other methods i.e. Golden Rule or Mischief Rule or Purposive Approach, then airsoft should logically be excluded. The exclusion of "airsoft" (as a class of barrelled weapon with certain ballistic characteristics) from "firearm for the purposes of this Act" should extend to "firearm [and shot gun and air weapon] ..." because that should be the more accurate meaning within context, and for the purposes of the introduction of the exclusion as a general exclusion to the Act. And generally, I think any judge would select the easiest method of interpretation, and the "general exclusion" method is the most straightforward, and would require the least interpretation gymnastics from the judge. To say "airsoft is air weapon" would require the judge (actually, firstly, the prosecutor) to make a technical judgement to explain how a particular airsoft rifle uses compressed air or air pressure therefore it is air weapon, and why metal pellet is irrelevant to such a definition. Which should be easily defended with above by the defendant (or his solicitor). So I guess we should be safe for now. Airsoft guns are not "air weapons" under the Section 57A. This changes when we breach the "lethal" power limits as described. If this is a bolt action gun then this becomes an air rifle by legal definition, which unless you're in Scotland, won't get you in any hot water for ownership, but a site would be screwed if somebody complained of an injury and it was discovered you were over the limits and had technically injured them with an air rifle. The same can be said for fully automatic airsoft guns, although once these surpass the specified limit, they become Section 5 firearms, meaning there's no legal variation between your airsoft gun, and a completely bog standard real M240B. As already stated, the UK firearms law is incredibly poorly written, with far too many overlaps and grey areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supporters Rogerborg Posted Friday at 12:20 Supporters Share Posted Friday at 12:20 21 hours ago, BenJackson said: Airsoft guns are not "air weapons" under the Section 57A. I'm baffled by why that would be. All that 57A says is: An “airsoft gun” is not to be regarded as a firearm for the purposes of this Act. Anything beyond that is inference and (absent case law) assumption, not explicit. 21 hours ago, BenJackson said: As already stated, the UK firearms law is incredibly poorly written, with far too many overlaps and grey areas. 115% agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now