Pseudotectonic
Members
- May 7, 2022
- 472
- 307
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/66/section/161
"and in consequence a user of the highway is injured, interrupted or endangered"
Unfortunately this might stick
People’s view of how the sport of airsoft skirmishing will fair if Labour win the election
- Thread starter novioman
- Start date
"and in consequence a user of the highway is injured, interrupted or endangered"
Unfortunately this might stick
Colin Allen
Members
- Aug 27, 2022
- 1,896
- 2,323
Highways Amendment Act 1986: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/13/body?view=plain+extent.
Yes, utter spacktads, but the arrest is nonsense. Highways Act 1980, Section 131 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/66/section/131 "If a person, without lawful authority or excuse discharges any firearm within 50 feet from the centre of a highway which consists of or comprises a carriageway, and in consequence thereof the highway is damaged, he is guilty of an offence."
Whether an airsoft gun is a firearm for the purposes of the Highways Act is neither here not there.
Still, the process is the punishment, and I'd expect the charge will be changed to Firearms Act 1968 S19, or something else that they can make stick.
Tactical Pith Helmet
AF-UK patch owner
- Jul 5, 2016
- 1,040
- 2,576
Was your journey 'interrupted' by said twat, or did you merely perceive that your journey required interruption despite the lack of actual danger? I think that this is how the law was designed.Sadly corrected, "interruption" gets you the jail.
It was explained to me a few years back that if one set up a pigeon shooting hide that backed onto the crash barriers of a motorway, that you would be about 50' from the centre of the highway. Some pillock could stop and report you as being a threat if they saw you. If you were shooting safely away from the highway and over 50' away, nowt the plod can do, but if closer than 50' and shooting safely then it's court and convincing 12 jurors that you posed no threat and that the reporter was incorrect in his/her/their assessment.
Since Clint Eastwood has shown us all that a shotgun has an effective range of three miles and never misses, a jury may well side with the pillock rather than the pest controller these days.
Last edited by a moderator:
Colin Allen
Members
- Aug 27, 2022
- 1,896
- 2,323
Pseudotectonic
Members
- May 7, 2022
- 472
- 307
Section 161 is titled "Penalties for causing certain kinds of danger or annoyance". It is mainly to keep the highway safe and free of distraction.
Specifically it prohibits the actions of "lighting" a fire, or "discharging" fireworks or firearms. Fire itself can be dangerous and highly distracting/annoying, but it is the action of starting a fire that is illegal. Fireworks and firearms can also be dangerous and highly distracting/annoying, but it is the action of firing that is illegal.
Coming back to airsoft, the mere sight of someone waving a realistic looking gun shaped object by itself doesn't qualify for Section 161.
It is the firing of airsoft that got them done in. Airsoft can also be loud. Stray BBs can be dangerous. It's exactly the type of danger or annoyance Section 161 is written to protect highways from.
Specifically it prohibits the actions of "lighting" a fire, or "discharging" fireworks or firearms. Fire itself can be dangerous and highly distracting/annoying, but it is the action of starting a fire that is illegal. Fireworks and firearms can also be dangerous and highly distracting/annoying, but it is the action of firing that is illegal.
Coming back to airsoft, the mere sight of someone waving a realistic looking gun shaped object by itself doesn't qualify for Section 161.
It is the firing of airsoft that got them done in. Airsoft can also be loud. Stray BBs can be dangerous. It's exactly the type of danger or annoyance Section 161 is written to protect highways from.
They were (based on the face level of reporting*) acting in a manner that members of this forum and responsible airsofters would not endorse.
They were a bit naughty, brought attention to themselves and got caught.
* the area does have some ‘green’, I’ll be more sympathetic if in their minds they went somewhere out of the way, had a few test/practice shots in a bush and ended up in trouble
As opposed to heading up the street and shooting a bush
With their ages their should have been some form of common sense, but it’s not as common as we may wish
They were a bit naughty, brought attention to themselves and got caught.
* the area does have some ‘green’, I’ll be more sympathetic if in their minds they went somewhere out of the way, had a few test/practice shots in a bush and ended up in trouble
As opposed to heading up the street and shooting a bush
With their ages their should have been some form of common sense, but it’s not as common as we may wish
Tactical Pith Helmet
AF-UK patch owner
- Jul 5, 2016
- 1,040
- 2,576
Thanks Colin, the phrase 'twelve men good and true,' from Twelve Angry Men went through my head as I was typing. Genuine Freudian slip!
Rogerborg
Supporters
- Aug 22, 2017
- 9,190
- 6,049
Last edited by a moderator:
Tactical Pith Helmet
AF-UK patch owner
- Jul 5, 2016
- 1,040
- 2,576
Yep, fire can cause smoke to block one's vision, firing an unmoderated rifle 10 feet from a horse rider for example also clearly would be a serious matter too.
Shotgun beside a motorway would be unnoticeable, but I wouldn't like to be in the dock arguing it these days.
The phrase is first recorded in the 14th Century, been around a bit.
Colin Allen
Members
- Aug 27, 2022
- 1,896
- 2,323
The earliest use of it that I am aware of is from The Scourge of Corruption. Or a crafty Knaue needs no Broker. Printed for Henry Gosson and William Houlmes, 1615). However, that does not relate to juries.
The earliest use of it relating to a jury that I am aware of is from The Muses looking-glasse. Printed by Leonard Lichfield for Francis Bowman, 1638), by the poet and playwright Thomas Randolph (1605-1635).
If you have an earlier source, I would be fascinated to see it.
Tactical Pith Helmet
AF-UK patch owner
- Jul 5, 2016
- 1,040
- 2,576
Had an idea that the film's dialogue was quoting a known phrase. Given that the duodecimal system is so old, I'd not be surprised if twelve jurors was a relic from well before the 17th century.
The jury of 12 dates back to Henry 2
So the basis of the phrase may even be as far back as the 1200s, though documented later
Those original juries acted differently, gathering the facts in Henry’s time as opposed to listening and evaluating as per today
So the basis of the phrase may even be as far back as the 1200s, though documented later
Those original juries acted differently, gathering the facts in Henry’s time as opposed to listening and evaluating as per today
The Waco Kid
Members
- Feb 7, 2022
- 351
- 535
“Gosh, I wonder what Women sat on before juries came along? Bean bags I suppose.”
View attachment 133104
Ah, the oddities of the English language.
View attachment 133104
Ah, the oddities of the English language.
Tactical Pith Helmet
AF-UK patch owner
- Jul 5, 2016
- 1,040
- 2,576
Love the pressure gauge under the end of the barrel. No wonder so many wear eye patches...
