Over 18 for Parts?

[N_Scooby]

Re: Over 18 for Parts?

Indeed, but your post I quoted implied a full-auto AEG would be classed as a section 5 firearm, but a semi-auto one wouldn't. That's not the case.

I have actually just read section 5 (rather than relying on the threads on this forum) and you are correct. They use the term 'except an airgun' a lot but never actually clarify what an airgun is in the eyes of the law.

[dragunovgeorge]

Re: Over 18 for Parts?

That would be classed as manufacture (assuming the end result is a RIF) so therefore caught by the VCRA

Just the same as repainting brightly coloulored parts to a gun like colour to take it under the 51% threshold

im a bit confused here

and sorry for quoting a 3 week old post btw

but i do have ukara

and i have built rif's from the ground up

does that class as "manufacture" then?

also to what extent does modification such as a full wood / metal ak kit come under

i mean i would do it to make it more asthetically pleasing

but then surely that is making something that is already an rif become even more rif ish

[Caveira]

Re: Over 18 for Parts?

Manufacturing a RIF is taking something that isn't a RIF and turning it into one. It could be a non-realistic IF (two-tone), or a block of wood, it doesn't matter what the item does, just what it looks like at the end.

If something is a RIF already, you can do whatever you like to it.

If you turn a two-tone into a RIF, you need to be able to prove that you are a regular skirmisher. BUT, the home office don't like this and believe that the intention of the law was that manufacturers/retailers manufacture and that players purchase. It will take a court case to decide with certainty if individual skirmishers can manufacture (or, in fact, import as that's a bit of a grey area within the literal wording of the act and implementation notices).

[dragunovgeorge]

Re: Over 18 for Parts?

so i can carry on building rifs to my specs from nothing but ordered parts with nothing as a base to start with ?

sorry i just want to make sure im on the right side of the law here

[Caveira]

Re: Over 18 for Parts?

The law's vague on it. I'd suggest you read VCRA yourself so you've got the actual wording to make a decision on.

http://www.banksr.com/statutes/Viole...n_Act_2006.pdf

And

http://www.nio.gov.uk/the_violent_cr...tions_2007.pdf

But, there is no mention of individual players importing directly, or manufacturing. However, HMRC and ACPO accept that we can import ourselves. On that basis, if we are allowed to import even though it doesn't directly state that we can, you could imply that we can also manufacture. In both cases, the act doesn't say that we can't.

[dragunovgeorge]

Re: Over 18 for Parts?

thankyou for that =]

it was when i read this thread, and then i read the act myself and the wording is quite vague

thankyou for the advice =]

[droog67]

Re: Over 18 for Parts?

I'ld have said an under 18 who can build an AEG from parts was an intelligent, educated, young man, who knows how to maintain his weapon.
Lord knows, enough under 18 receive cadet training from HM Forces.
My step-father used to speak of being conscripted for training at 16 during WWII.
How times change.
If an under 18 were to assemble, for use, plinking or skirmishing, and then dis-assemble those parts after use. Would that still be manufacture ? Given that those parts were a RIF or IF to begin with ??
Where do the new modular-systems available now, fit in all this ? Do they have to be stored deconstructed, and assembled at a skirmish site or rifle club ??

[droog67]

Re: Over 18 for Parts?

I would like to clarify one small point which some of you may-not be aware of.
All Statutes, or Acts of Parliament (they aren't actually Laws as recognised by International Convention, rather Rules for the Employees of the UK, you all have a National Insurance Number ? except those of you under 16, but i won't go into that right now) are infact written in Legalese, the Language of The Law Society. The language used by Barristers and other Legal Professionals, and in The Courts. This language, Legalese, is defined in Blacks Dictionary. Like the Book of Mimms, not commonly available outside its professional usage circles.
Legalese, rather confusingly, looks like English, is written much like English, and spoken in rather the same manner as English. However, none of the definitions in Blacks' Dictionary will follow those in The Oxford English Dictionary.
IT IS NOT PLAIN ENGLISH.
IT IS THE LANGUAGE OF THE LAW SOCIETY.
What you, might reasonably understand as the definition of words like "manufacture" will bear little resemblence to how Blacks' Diction defines this as a "term" under the Act.
To me, to manufacture something, begins with a remit of function, then a design brief (function dictates form) followed by a set of design drawings, these being each components given: side elevation, end elevation and plan view, with dimensions, drawn to scale. The next stages of the process of manufacture involve, such stages as, obtaining raw materials, sizing, sand-casting, high speed milling, machine lathe-work, forming and vacuum forming of plastic components, fabricating, welding, brazing, soldering, pressing or stamping, and bluing. After that, once all the components had been manufactured, would come assembly and quality control testing.
Yes, i did three years of Engineering at a Technical School, and have worked for many years with engineers in automotive restoration.
I would say, assembling parts, is just that, re-cycling or restoring. Nothing more.
As for the quotes on power limits on air powered weapons, you are correct these have a place as Firearms under a seperate Act.
As for making AEGs deadly, well, a 15lb draw weight crossbow is deadly with no more than a large thorn dipped in poison, commonly used still by some tribes.
I used to work in a Forensic Laboratory, many years ago, and it isn't the force of firing which necessarily makes something dangerous or deadly. Simply put, the Elastane bound Barium Sulphate 6mm BBs used in Airsoft are not, and probably would not ever become deadly, they are quite simply not designed to be.

[droog67]

Re: Over 18 for Parts?

MOD please delete this post, duplicated in error.

[Caveira]

Re: Over 18 for Parts?

I would like to clarify one small point which some of you may-not be aware of.
All Statutes, or Acts of Parliament (they aren't actually Laws as recognised by International Convention, rather Rules for the Employees of the UK, you all have a National Insurance Number ? except those of you under 16, but i won't go into that right now) are infact written in Legalese, the Language of The Law Society. The language used by Barristers and other Legal Professionals, and in The Courts. This language, Legalese, is defined in Blacks Dictionary. Like the Book of Mimms, not commonly available outside its professional usage circles.
Legalese, rather confusingly, looks like English, is written much like English, and spoken in rather the same manner as English. However, none of the definitions in Blacks' Dictionary will follow those in The Oxford English Dictionary.
IT IS NOT PLAIN ENGLISH.
IT IS THE LANGUAGE OF THE LAW SOCIETY.
What you, might reasonably understand as the definition of words like "manufacture" will bear little resemblence to how Blacks' Diction defines this as a "term" under the Act.
To me, to manufacture something, begins with a remit of function, then a design brief (function dictates form) followed by a set of design drawings, these being each components given: side elevation, end elevation and plan view, with dimensions, drawn to scale. The next stages of the process of manufacture involve, such stages as, obtaining raw materials, sizing, sand-casting, high speed milling, machine lathe-work, forming and vacuum forming of plastic components, fabricating, welding, brazing, soldering, pressing or stamping, and bluing. After that, once all the components had been manufactured, would come assembly and quality control testing.
Yes, i did three years of Engineering at a Technical School, and have worked for many years with engineers in automotive restoration.
I would say, assembling parts, is just that, re-cycling or restoring. Nothing more.
As for the quotes on power limits on air powered weapons, you are correct these have a place as Firearms under a seperate Act.
As for making AEGs deadly, well, a 15lb draw weight crossbow is deadly with no more than a large thorn dipped in poison, commonly used still by some tribes.
I used to work in a Forensic Laboratory, many years ago, and it isn't the force of firing which necessarily makes something dangerous or deadly. Simply put, the Elastane bound Barium Sulphate 6mm BBs used in Airsoft are not, and probably would not ever become deadly, they are quite simply not designed to be.

Valid points, but two problems:

The act defines altering a non-realistic IF into a RIF as an offence in itself.

And,

As far as the lethality issue is concerned, this is defined as the ability to penetrate skin to a level where blood loss can occur. An alternative legal test has also been used which states that if a weapon is capable of killing vermin, it is a lethal barreled weapon.

Both of these issues are VERY clearly defined in both the guidance notes and, in relation to the firearms act, case law.

[droog67]

Re: Over 18 for Parts?

Valid points, but two problems:

The act defines altering a non-realistic IF into a RIF as an offence in itself.

And,

As far as the lethality issue is concerned, this is defined as the ability to penetrate skin to a level where blood loss can occur. An alternative legal test has also been used which states that if a weapon is capable of killing vermin, it is a lethal barreled weapon.

Both of these issues are VERY clearly defined in both the guidance notes and, in relation to the firearms act, case law.

I concur with the learne'd gentleman, that point one is probably the most valid.
The point which i find distressing about the Statute in question, is the assumption of guilt before any provenence, 12 just men and true, in this age of speed cameras are we to relinquish all freedoms ?
As my original note states, and i think that your second point illustrates that rather well. The Statutes which Govern the employees of the Company of the U.K., are not written to the same definitions as The Oxford English Dictionary, i wrote "deadly" you wrote "lethality". Please, all of you reading this thread, look-up the definition of "lethal", "lethality", "deadly" and "dead" in The Oxford English Dictionary. Is it given as "penetrate the skin to a level where blood loss can occur" ??
The words of Knaves, twisted to make a trap for fools. Is the old saying which comes to my mind, the more i learn about Legalese.
I assume, Case Law, that if a weapon can be used to kill vermin, it is assumed to be, potentially, sufficiently dangerous to cause severe injury to a man or woman or a child ?? Hence, the shock value and sensationalism in the media, of a weapon being branded "lethal".

[Caveira]

Re: Over 18 for Parts?

Don't forget that there are already LOTS of laws where guilt is assumed.

Take a RIF into public and you can be prosecuted if you can't prove that your intention was legal - assumed guilt. The prosecution could be under a law that's been on the books for 43 years (Firearms Act 1968) and not VCRA.

Take your car onto the road without valid insurance and you automatically commit an offence. Give the keys to someone else and you are guilty of allowing someone to drive an uninsured car if the cover isn't valid. Get a ticket and you'll be prosecuted if you fail to provide details of the driver.

[droog67]

Re: Over 18 for Parts?

Get your wife to say she was driving when the car went through the speed camera, and you keep your licence to drive............................................. .........................

[droog67]

Re: Over 18 for Parts?

Get your secretary to say you were at an appointment, not with a call girl, get substantial damages, then a short stay at a 0 Star Establishment on the Suffolk Coast, all expenses paid, keep your Title and write a book, make even more money........................
Claim to have had your duck pond or moat cleaned........................
ETC, ETC, ETC,
i could go on, but this becoming staid,
No, guilt is always assumed, that's why people are cautioned, detained, questioned, and charged.....
it's up to all of us, what we say, when we say it and how we say it.
It's up to the CPS to proceed or drop a charge, it's up to the Courts to convict or not....
The Police will always follow their procedure, rightly or wrongly that's a matter of opinion, they will tell you that they are only trying to establish the facts, true, but the one thing they will not tell you, is that the language they're using whilst questioning you is Legalese, not Plain English. If you speak to them, the CPS will assume that you are answering in Legalese.
Always have a Duty Solicitor or your Barrister present if you do so.
Only a fool would have a RIF uncovered in a Public Place in my opinion.
I wonder, if enough parts to build an AEG were discovered somewhere, alongside them bright red, bright blue or bright green paint, what would be the conclusion then ??
I wonder how many youngsters have mistakenly taken a few pots of model paint to their under £10 springer which they bought at a car-boot sale, only to end up with a caution for a "firearms offence", that said "offence" going onto the ever growing statistics of "gun-crime", feeding the call for tighter and tighter controls ????
A question there, do you have those figures ????? are they even available ???????