Is this legal

[No1_sonuk]

Re: Is this legal

Founding members... does that give them the right to bend the law? no...

But the contention is that this isn't bending the law...

so they dont want them sold to minors,but you defend someone who may (may not) be exploiting a loophole which could (possibly) be risking the laws we have that protect us to be able to sell them to somone the government has clearly marked they dont want them selling too?
is this correct.

I'm saying I agree with xsite's interpretation of the law as it is written, not as it has been interpreted by some members of UKARA.

i understand that if dad is a skirmisher and little johnny wants to get involved then ...sure,little johnny is going to end up with one of dads guns to go skirmishing with,that is completley understandable.

But the end result is the same - little Johnny has a RIF...

What you are saying is it's acceptable for a retailer to sell Johhny's dad an IF with, for example, green handguard and stock, then for Johnny (who IS the player, and therefore has a defence), to buy black parts and change them. Again, the end result is the same - Johnny has a RIF. The BIG difference in this case, though, is that Johnny's dad may not know he has a RIF...
Wouldn't you rather it was done with parental consent and the additional stuff that Xsite do?

[magslap]

Re: Is this legal

But the contention is that this isn't bending the law...


I'm saying I agree with xsite's interpretation of the law as it is written, not as it has been interpreted by some members of UKARA.
But the end result is the same - little Johnny has a RIF...

What you are saying is it's acceptable for a retailer to sell Johhny's dad an IF with, for example, green handguard and stock, then for Johnny (who IS the player, and therefore has a defence), to buy black parts and change them. Again, the end result is the same - Johnny has a RIF. The BIG difference in this case, though, is that Johnny's dad may not know he has a RIF...
Wouldn't you rather it was done with parental consent and the additional stuff that Xsite do?

who said anything about johnny BUYING anything,johnny has a gun that is owned by his dad but johnny can use it for skirmishing (his dad will be there too as hes a skirmisher to watch over little johnny)......who said anything about buying??
a retailer can sell a rif to johnnys dad coz hes a regular skirmisher with a defence.who hasnt bought anything for johnny....................where do i say he BUYS a gun for johnny,i merely said johnny ends up with one of his dads guns.........................you just interpreted it that way to try to meet your argument.

[madwelshman]

Re: Is this legal

ah ffs... this thread is ALL about if the law is being broken/bent or not... stop twisting other peoples words you clown!

This is entirely the point, the written word can be interpretated in many ways... you have just proved this now! and quoting me saying ukara wasnt the only defence to the vcrb... if you look to my post before, i clearly stated as such!

Again, you miss quote magslap...

As the majority believe xsite is miss interpreting the vcr bill, simply so they dont have to sell two tones to minors... like every other retailer in the country does...

[No1_sonuk]

Re: Is this legal

a retailer can sell a rif to johnnys dad coz hes a regular skirmisher with a defence.

Sorry, but The SELLER needs the defence, not the buyer. And if you'd read the VCRA you'd understand that.

As the majority believe xsite is miss interpreting the vcr bill, simply so they dont have to sell two tones to minors... like every other retailer in the country does...

Again, not quite right. The question is over interpretation of the UKSI which provides the "airsoft defence".
Xsite is wholly complying with the age-restriction part of the VCRA - Section 40 in not selling the IF to a minor. If you were to go solely by the VCRA, and not include the UKSI, ALL sale of RIFs to airsofters would be illegal.

[magslap]

Re: Is this legal

Sorry, but The SELLER needs the defence, not the buyer. And if you'd read the VCRA you'd understand that.
.

i do understand it,and again,your twisting it....that is neither here nor there as the retailer and dad are complying within the law.
dad earns the right to go on the ukara list so the shop can see hes a regular skirmisher.dad has earned a position in the defence. your just trying to play the words again.

[No1_sonuk]

Re: Is this legal

i do understand it,and again,your twisting it....that is neither here nor there as the retailer and dad are complying within the law.
dad earns the right to go on the ukara list so the shop can see hes a regular skirmisher.dad has earned a position in the defence. your just trying to play the words again.

That brings us to the next contentious point:
Quote me in the law where the phrase "regular skirmisher" appears...

As far as the written law is concerned, you don't even need to have played once to be sold a RIF, as long as it is for "permitted activities". By the letter of the law, it is perfectly legal for a retailer to sell a RIF on the first visit to the site (sign-in paperwork would provide proof of intent).

So again, by requiring the 3-games thing, Xsite are exceeding the legal requirement...

[N_Scooby]

Re: Is this legal

How are we suppose to keep the sport alive then ? I know if i had to wait until i was 18 to even buy/be gifted a IF then i wouldn't play airsoft as hiring at every game is just too expensive.

Also again why are people still questing this when X-Site have said multiple times this is all within the law ? I'am new to these forums but not new to airsoft, i don't know about anyone else but this is really annoying, X-Site come on and tell you "Yes, this is all legal and with in the law" then someone starts moaning about how it shouldn't be and how/why they thing it is wrong.................... ?
(This is just what i think of this thread)

Under 18's wouldn't be allowed to skirmish full-stop.

I wanted to drive a car when I was 5 years old but I had to wait until I was 17. Now I drive my car everyday. Youngsters may want to skirmish when they are 14 but they would have to wait until they were 18. Then they could skirmish every weekend if they wanted to.

I think I may even revise my thinking and limit RIF's to over 18's unless they pass some sort of test first. There are a lot of people on this forum who I believe should not be let loose with anything gun shaped.

[magslap]

Re: Is this legal

That brings us to the next contentious point:
Quote me in the law where the phrase "regular skirmisher" appears...

As far as the written law is concerned, you don't even need to have played once to be sold a RIF, as long as it is for "permitted activities". By the letter of the law, it is perfectly legal for a retailer to sell a RIF on the first visit to the site (sign-in paperwork would provide proof of intent).

So again, by requiring the 3-games thing, Xsite are exceeding the legal requirement...

but by sticking to somtihng like ukara ,if it for some reason it went to court you could prove you were reguarly playing...not a one off,a step that was made to help protect our sport by people acting responsibly.

[Fizzy]

Re: Is this legal

but by sticking to somtihng like ukara ,if it for some reason it went to court you could prove you were reguarly playing...not a one off,a step that was made to help protect our sport by people acting responsibly.

Could you? UKARA wouldn't be my proof, it would be the people running my local/regular site.
Here's a scenario for you...

You skirmish 3 times in no less than 2 months at your local site and your site membership number is registered on the UKARA database as you buy yourself that RIF you've been waiting for. You then don't skirmish again for 11 months, but you're still registered on the UKARA database. Are you a regular skirmisher?

[magslap]

Re: Is this legal

Could you? UKARA wouldn't be my proof, it would be the people running my local/regular site.
Here's a scenario for you...

You skirmish 3 times in no less than 2 months at your local site and your site membership number is registered on the UKARA database as you buy yourself that RIF you've been waiting for. You then don't skirmish again for 11 months, but you're still registered on the UKARA database. Are you a regular skirmisher?

its a better approach at protecting our hobby than putting someone on it after 1 game as mentioned above

[No1_sonuk]

Re: Is this legal

but by sticking to somtihng like ukara ,if it for some reason it went to court you could prove you were reguarly playing...not a one off,a step that was made to help protect our sport by people acting responsibly.

OMFG! You STILL don't get it!
As the buyer, YOU would not be prosecuted (assuming you're over 18) if someone sold you a RIF. The SELLER alone would be liable to prosecution.

Yours is the very common misconception that the buyer needs a defence. That isn't so. The buyer needs to be able to provide a defence for the seller. Legally that is 2 different things.

its a better approach at protecting our hobby than putting someone on it after 1 game as mentioned above

That may be so. However it's not a legal requirement, and legality, rather than "protecting our hobby" is what this thread is about.
If you re-read all my posts, you'll see they're based on the way the law is written, not my opinion of how it should be interpreted to protect airsoft.

The question was "is this legal", not "is this the way it should be".

[Caveira]

Re: Is this legal

If you re-read all my posts, you'll see they're based on the way the law is written, not my opinion of how it should be interpreted to protect airsoft.

Well, more like how you interpret the meaning of the way the law is written.

[Fil]

Re: Is this legal

Well, more like how you interpret the meaning of the way the law is written.

That may well be the case but it does fit with how the law was interpreted by the legal counsel Tim recieved before putting the system in place.

[BAMF]

Re: Is this legal

Why is it wrong tho?

If you had bothered to actually read any of my posts, then you would know why I believed it was "Wrong tho" as you so succinctly put it.

If you don't know why, but have managed to get to a stage in your life where you have subscribed to an internet forum surrounding the sport of replica imitation firearms and shooting other people and you're able to quote UK legislation somewhat verbatim as though it were copied and pasted from the pertinent site. Then I must say "I'm not here to wipe your rear-end for you...virtually or otherwise"

You appear readily available to understand and interpret complex legislative text, but a simple post on an internet forum seems to confound you? You have read through my post, yet merely quote one line from it? My beliefs are my beliefs. The day I have to justify them to a stranger on the internet without just cause is the day I hang my keyboard warrior status up and donate my substantial earnings to a worthless endeavour.

You tell us (without looking at Google or your textbooks) "Why is it right though?"

[BAMF]

Re: Is this legal

Lovely slow server creating double posts!