kaiser Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 I was into airsoft about 15 years ago, back when there was no real law about owning an all black replica gun. When I looked into it again recently and discovered the change in the law I thought it was a good sensible idea. What I do not understand is there seems to be almost no exceptions to the law. For example, I am a fully licensed shotgun owner, I shoot on a regular basis (both clays and game), how is it that I am not trusted to buy a replica firearm when I have been through the slightly more rigorous licensing process (including two police visits and a gun safe inspection) to get my shotgun certificate. It seems odd to me that I am able to own a real firearm but not a replica airsoft one. I have no issues with going through the process to obtain a UKARA registration but it seems to me to be overkill, I absolutely agree with need for a licensing process when it comes to airsoft but why no exceptions? I am not bringing this up for an argument or anything like I was just wondering whether anyone had any thoughts on the matter. Kai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR01 Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 I was into airsoft about 15 years ago, back when there was no real law about owning an all black replica gun. When I looked into it again recently and discovered the change in the law I thought it was a good sensible idea. What I do not understand is there seems to be almost no exceptions to the law. For example, I am a fully licensed shotgun owner, I shoot on a regular basis (both clays and game), how is it that I am not trusted to buy a replica firearm when I have been through the slightly more rigorous licensing process (including two police visits and a gun safe inspection) to get my shotgun certificate. It seems odd to me that I am able to own a real firearm but not a replica airsoft one. I have no issues with going through the process to obtain a UKARA registration but it seems to me to be overkill, I absolutely agree with need for a licensing process when it comes to airsoft but why no exceptions? I am not bringing this up for an argument or anything like I was just wondering whether anyone had any thoughts on the matter. Kai The VCRA was a knee-jerk reaction by politicians to a problem that didn't really exist (not unusual). We're lucky that hard work by the retailers, site owners, etc. at least got us the specific defence to allow us to continue to own RIFs and play airsoft, but as part of that work there were only limited exemptions. The fact that FAC holders were not included in that list was because they, like collectors, didn't have a need for them, whereas we do. That said, how many owners of RIFs have gone on a killing rampage in the last 10-20 years, compared to how many licenced gun owners?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supporters TPI Posted February 6, 2012 Supporters Share Posted February 6, 2012 I don`t how many have?........................(wait`s expecting a funny end to the joke).......................... i can tell you though it`s most likely becuase of people who have the license to have a gun turn their nose`s up at airsoft they certainly do in america apart from a few (Thank you NutnFancy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiser Posted February 6, 2012 Author Share Posted February 6, 2012 I don`t how many have?........................(wait`s expecting a funny end to the joke).......................... i can tell you though it`s most likely becuase of people who have the license to have a gun turn their nose`s up at airsoft they certainly do in america apart from a few (Thank you NutnFancy) That is probably true but that is beside the point, why should I go through another process in order to get a replica gun when I have already been checked and probed by the police for my SGC? It seems odd to me. Rest assured I do not turn my nose up at airsofters although I cannot see me getting into it myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supporters Finius Posted February 6, 2012 Supporters Share Posted February 6, 2012 Because a replica is much harder to trace forensically, for a list of reasons longer than my "little (leviathan sized) man"**. The options when compiling the VCRA were simple. Put airsoft under the firearms licensing system, thus making them equal in terms of security requirements, declarations of purchase, punishment for misuse etc (and therefore making them seem more threatening and less like toys as well as a myriad of other things), or give them a specific defence for certain uses under the VCRA and clarify their place in British law. I will always gun for alternatives to UKARA - it's a silly system, you wouldn't believe how hard I argued with people overt the Two Tone situation too, but, we got the deal we got and frankly, it's better than what we were told at first so I'll take it and I'll live with it. **Yes, that was a penis joke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnno Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 It seems odd to me that I am able to own a real firearm but not a replica airsoft one. I have no issues with going through the process to obtain a UKARA registration but it seems to me to be overkill, I absolutely agree with need for a licensing process when it comes to airsoft but why no exceptions? I am not bringing this up for an argument or anything like I was just wondering whether anyone had any thoughts on the matter. Kai There is no problem owning a RIF without UKARA if you have had it since before the regs came in as far as I know. The problems start when you try to buy a new one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.gif.c9becc9e80e8b91706ea684ec6e23c92.gif)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.