Last edited by a moderator:
Policing and Crime Bill 2015-16 - This is now (mostly) the law as part of the Policing and Crime Act 2017
- Thread starter proffrink
- Start date
- Oct 20, 2012
- 5,112
- 1,691
- Thread starter
- #42
Another bump for this as it's getting a bit more real.
As Sacarathe says: Lord Shrewsbury is essentially offering up an amendment that would see all airsoft guns capped at a muzzle energy of 1J (328fps) and remove the exception given to them in the Policing and Crime Bill 2015/16 that would exempt us from any of the new restrictions being brought in. Anything over this limit becomes a section 5 firearm with the potential for a lengthy jail sentence if owned, and whilst it's basically unenforceable at an individual level this is going to see importers being far more sceptical of what they can and can't bring into the country. As we know: Many manufacturers guns clock in at up to the 400fps mark before being downgraded by retailers themselves.
There's a lot of speculation about why Shrewsbury is doing this (vis-a-vis his association with the Gun Trade Association and wanting to potentially bypass VCRA), but ultimately it only means one thing: Another shake-up for UK airsoft legality on a scale like we saw in 2007 when UKARA was introduced.
If you want to get involved in trying to stop this, it's imperative you do something. Anyone can post a comment or make a thread but very few people will take the 10 minutes needed to write an email or letter to the right people.
More about this amendment and a bullet point list of how you can help: http://www.ukapu.org.uk/saveairsoft/
Letter/email writing tips: http://www.ukapu.org.uk/saveairsoft/letter-writing-tips/
And the image from UKAPU if you want the whole thing summarised:
As Sacarathe says: Lord Shrewsbury is essentially offering up an amendment that would see all airsoft guns capped at a muzzle energy of 1J (328fps) and remove the exception given to them in the Policing and Crime Bill 2015/16 that would exempt us from any of the new restrictions being brought in. Anything over this limit becomes a section 5 firearm with the potential for a lengthy jail sentence if owned, and whilst it's basically unenforceable at an individual level this is going to see importers being far more sceptical of what they can and can't bring into the country. As we know: Many manufacturers guns clock in at up to the 400fps mark before being downgraded by retailers themselves.
There's a lot of speculation about why Shrewsbury is doing this (vis-a-vis his association with the Gun Trade Association and wanting to potentially bypass VCRA), but ultimately it only means one thing: Another shake-up for UK airsoft legality on a scale like we saw in 2007 when UKARA was introduced.
If you want to get involved in trying to stop this, it's imperative you do something. Anyone can post a comment or make a thread but very few people will take the 10 minutes needed to write an email or letter to the right people.
More about this amendment and a bullet point list of how you can help: http://www.ukapu.org.uk/saveairsoft/
Letter/email writing tips: http://www.ukapu.org.uk/saveairsoft/letter-writing-tips/
And the image from UKAPU if you want the whole thing summarised:
Last edited by a moderator:
No logical reason indeed
Only the benefit from said Lord with airsoft sales being pushed into th air gun world
I guess this means any Tom dick or Harry could buy them now which would also seem counter productive..
- Oct 20, 2012
- 5,112
- 1,691
- Thread starter
- #45
The speculation is that this 1J limit means a reclassification of airsoft guns and - like MrMcG says - basically putting RIF sales into the preview of air rifle/pistol retailers (i.e. members of the Gun Trade Association, who Shrewsbury is closesly acossiated with).
Airosft gets exceptions to certain laws because it's somewhat managed by UKARA, so this is nothing short of an attempt to gain a few extra sales for the GTA.
The interesting part is here though - the GTA has denied communicating with Shrewsbury on this matter, so either he's acting alone or they've back-pedalled after the boycott of GTA by some airsoft retailers (who are both airsoft gun and air rifle/pistol sellers). The backlash on social media may also have had an effect.
Here's the article from today on UKSN that's circulating: https://ukshootingnews.wordpress.com/2016/09/01/gun-trade-association-chief-tables-house-of-lords-attack-on-airsofters/
In short: Take 10 minutes to email/write to lords and the GTA. It's the only thing that matters right now.
Airosft gets exceptions to certain laws because it's somewhat managed by UKARA, so this is nothing short of an attempt to gain a few extra sales for the GTA.
The interesting part is here though - the GTA has denied communicating with Shrewsbury on this matter, so either he's acting alone or they've back-pedalled after the boycott of GTA by some airsoft retailers (who are both airsoft gun and air rifle/pistol sellers). The backlash on social media may also have had an effect.
Here's the article from today on UKSN that's circulating: https://ukshootingnews.wordpress.com/2016/09/01/gun-trade-association-chief-tables-house-of-lords-attack-on-airsofters/
In short: Take 10 minutes to email/write to lords and the GTA. It's the only thing that matters right now.
jcheeseright
Supporters
- Jun 14, 2012
- 4,280
- 2,261
im not sure this is a commercial move, most Airsoft guns are capable of full auto fire and so won't be able to be sold even by a RFD if his proposal passes.
If that's true then Christ knows what this guy is thinking
I'm not abject to stringent rules and regs and the whole 1j thing is done in NI and other places but I do abject to some silver spooned moron who believes he is above everyone throwing his weight around for no good reason
http://forums.zeroin.co.uk/showthread.php?278395-IMPORTANT-correspondence-with-MA-S-and-Lord-s
Be worth keeping tabs on this
Be worth keeping tabs on this
- Oct 20, 2012
- 5,112
- 1,691
- Thread starter
- #50
Not had a reply to my email (and it was quite nicely worded apart from the bit where I said I might have to take up canoeing instead and probably end up killing myself). Granted it was only sent yesterday though.
Last edited by a moderator:
With regards people thinking what was said above about RFD's not being able to sell airsoft guns as air rifles so it doesn't make sense...they believe we're talking shit about them being classed as section 5. No answer has been forthcoming in how they work that one out as I can only draw one conclusion from the firearms acts.
jcheeseright
Supporters
- Jun 14, 2012
- 4,280
- 2,261
Seems pretty clear to me.... more than 1j makes an airsoft gun a firearm and:
Section 5 (1)
(a) any firearm which is so designed or adapted that two or more missiles can be successively discharged without repeated pressure on the trigger.
Unless they're unaware most airsoft guns are full auto capable?
Section 5 (1)
(a) any firearm which is so designed or adapted that two or more missiles can be successively discharged without repeated pressure on the trigger.
Unless they're unaware most airsoft guns are full auto capable?
Shizbazki
Supporters
- Oct 4, 2014
- 785
- 144
Hhmmm has anyone actually read the legislation and the bill at length to understand it? as knowledge is power?
TL
R – I think as Airsofters we are well covered, so chill the f**k out! The new Bill proposed for the 14-09-16 might be better for Airsoft really, hint, hint, the bill also proposes a new section to the Firearms Act 1968, S.57A 
But read on to learn more of what I mean?
So upon seeing the news on several forum sites about the up and coming Policing and Crime Bill due to be talked over in the House of Lords on 14-09-16 its seemed that the sport of airsoft is to be doomed if you take the information from UKAPU, UKARA et al, however as some have pointed out that Lord Shrewsbury is doing this for political reasons, one cannot for one second think that maybe UKAPU might have their own political agendas other than being the saving grace of Airsoft it wants to be seen as.
UKAPU have produced a nice poster where they have a step by step, “What you can do to help”
1. Write an angry letter to a Lord on their “LORDS HIT LIST”;
2. That the GTA will be the only ones to benefit, boycott all GTA members who support the bill and
3. JOIN UKAPU.
Link to the reference above:
http://www.ukapu.org.uk/saveairsoft/
Point 1 with the HIT LIST sounded a bit unprofessional to me and started my scepticism, Point 2 GTA boycott fine I agree with that, you don’t shop at a place that is against your beliefs, but point 3 “JOIN UKAPU” got me thinking, is this more for UKAPUs own political reasons? I noticed that to be a UKAPU Silver or Gold member they want your money (£5 for silver, £10 for gold), Bronze is free for a year but after that you have to upgrade up.
On the poster UKAPU made they mention the Airsoft Trade Body, no internet footprint, all Google searches lead back to UKAPU, UKARA is also on the poster but their website make no mention of the new bill, albeit their website is hardly the best.
I have always learned to be quite sceptical and tend to look to the actual paperwork, for those of you that don’t know, Acts and Bills can be written in a very archaic manner that’s basically means you need to break it down to understand it.
So with that I decided to go to the House of Lords website and look up the Policing and Crime Bill proposal as well as refer to the original Firearms Act 1968 specifically S57 (and 57A which doesn’t exist, yet! But if this Bill passes it will)
So lets start with the crux of the matter, the Firearms Act 1968, S.57 (1):
In this Act, the expression “firearm” means a lethal barrelled weapon of any description from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged and includes—
(a) any prohibited weapon, whether it is such a lethal weapon as aforesaid or not; and
(b ) any component part of such a lethal or prohibited weapon; and
(c ) any accessory to any such weapon designed or adapted to diminish the noise or flash caused by firing the weapon; and so much of section 1 of this Act as excludes any description of firearm from the category of firearms to which that section applies shall be construed as also excluding component parts of, and accessories to, firearms of that description.
They want to change the wording of Firearms Act 1968, S.57 (1), note that the new additional change is highlighted in bold to this:
In this Act, the expression “firearm” means—
(a) a lethal barrelled weapon (see subsection (1B));
(b ) a prohibited weapon;
(c ) a relevant component part in relation to a lethal barrelled weapon or a prohibited weapon (see subsection (1D));
(d) an accessory to a lethal barrelled weapon or a prohibited weapon where the accessory is designed or adapted to diminish the noise or flash caused by firing the weapon.
You will notice that at the end of S.57 (1) (a) has the “see subsection (1B))”
Subsection 1B states:
“(1B) In subsection (1)(a), “lethal barrelled weapon” means a barrelled
weapon of any description from which a shot, bullet or other missile,
with kinetic energy of more than one joule at the muzzle of the weapon,
can be discharged.”
And this is where we’re getting our knickers in a twist, before it used to state that a “lethal barrelled weapon” means a barrelled weapon of any description from which a shot, bullet or other missile. This could be anything from a shotgun to a pipe launching out a potato etc. Now it has the addition of “with kinetic energy of more than one joule at the muzzle of the weapon, can be discharged.” So adds a specific muzzle velocity too.
So reading it like this means it can be construed that any barrelled weapon which discharges a shot etc with more than 1 joule of energy will be made illegal overnight and that all airsofters up and down the UK should be banged up, so far UKAPU have been correct and have used this to try and gain more members to sign up in apparently the “GOOD FIGHT”.
BUT!!!!
If you were to go to the Firearms Act 1968 and check through the Act as it currently stands, it goes through all its sections numerically occasionally adding the odd “A”, “B”, “C” to certain sections, refer to Section 30 of the Firearms Act 1968 which has Sections 30A, 30B, 30C and 30D.
Section 57 goes straight to Section 58 as expected, however the new Bill proposed for the 14-09-16 has a line stating:
“Subsection (1) is subject to section 57A (exception for airsoft guns).”
Basically, the new Bill wants to add a part specifically for us, S.57A which (does not yet exist) is a whole new proposed section to the Firearms Act 1968 which states:
57A Exception for airsoft guns
(1) An “airsoft gun” is not to be regarded as a firearm for the purposes of this Act.
(2) An “airsoft gun” is a barrelled weapon of any description from which only a small plastic missile, with kinetic energy at the muzzle of the weapon that does not exceed the permitted level, can be discharged.
(3) “Small plastic missile” means a missile that—
(a) is made wholly or partly from plastics, and
(b ) does not exceed 6 millimetres in diameter.
(4) The permitted kinetic energy level is—
(a) in the case of a weapon which is designed or adapted so that two or more missiles can be discharged successively without repeated pressure on the trigger, 1.3 joules;
(b ) in any other case, 2.5 joules.”
This above means that either UKAPU have only read a small part of the new bill and stopped reading or they want more members, Section 57 is so specific to Airsoft guns NOT being regarded as firearms for this Act is unreal, in fact the way S.57A, Paragraph 4, line b - is written technically means that Full Autos can go up to 1.3J or about 372FPS using .20g BBs, Semi Auto DMRs and Bolt Actions can legally go up to 515FPS on .20g BBs. This is why we should use joules instead of FPS and weights to measure our guns.
This means that if this Bill passes, nothing for Airsofters will change, I think the Airsoft community have misinterpreted Air Weapons such as Air Rifles and Pistols with Airsoft Guns. Frankly the Bill has included S.57A to try and bring the Firearms Act 1968 up to date to formally recognise Airsoft Guns under the Act but clarifies that Airsoft Guns are NOT firearms.
For those of you fearing that Police would come to Airsosft Sites and Chrono everyone en masse, I would say don’t woryy, Police have better things to do and would risk alienating Airsoft Players, of which a sizeable portion are Police Officers themselves.
References:
1.
Firearms Act 1968
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/27/section/57
Accessed 03-09-16
2.
Policing and Crime Bill 2015-16 to 2016-17, HL Bill 55 dated 14-06-16, Las accessed on 03-09-16
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2016-2017/0055/17055.pdf
Specifically referring to Page 137, Part 6 – Firearms, Paragraph 111 Firearms Act 1968: meaning of “firearm” etc
TL
R – I think as Airsofters we are well covered, so chill the f**k out! The new Bill proposed for the 14-09-16 might be better for Airsoft really, hint, hint, the bill also proposes a new section to the Firearms Act 1968, S.57A But read on to learn more of what I mean?
So upon seeing the news on several forum sites about the up and coming Policing and Crime Bill due to be talked over in the House of Lords on 14-09-16 its seemed that the sport of airsoft is to be doomed if you take the information from UKAPU, UKARA et al, however as some have pointed out that Lord Shrewsbury is doing this for political reasons, one cannot for one second think that maybe UKAPU might have their own political agendas other than being the saving grace of Airsoft it wants to be seen as.
UKAPU have produced a nice poster where they have a step by step, “What you can do to help”
1. Write an angry letter to a Lord on their “LORDS HIT LIST”;
2. That the GTA will be the only ones to benefit, boycott all GTA members who support the bill and
3. JOIN UKAPU.
Link to the reference above:
http://www.ukapu.org.uk/saveairsoft/
Point 1 with the HIT LIST sounded a bit unprofessional to me and started my scepticism, Point 2 GTA boycott fine I agree with that, you don’t shop at a place that is against your beliefs, but point 3 “JOIN UKAPU” got me thinking, is this more for UKAPUs own political reasons? I noticed that to be a UKAPU Silver or Gold member they want your money (£5 for silver, £10 for gold), Bronze is free for a year but after that you have to upgrade up.
On the poster UKAPU made they mention the Airsoft Trade Body, no internet footprint, all Google searches lead back to UKAPU, UKARA is also on the poster but their website make no mention of the new bill, albeit their website is hardly the best.
I have always learned to be quite sceptical and tend to look to the actual paperwork, for those of you that don’t know, Acts and Bills can be written in a very archaic manner that’s basically means you need to break it down to understand it.
So with that I decided to go to the House of Lords website and look up the Policing and Crime Bill proposal as well as refer to the original Firearms Act 1968 specifically S57 (and 57A which doesn’t exist, yet! But if this Bill passes it will)
So lets start with the crux of the matter, the Firearms Act 1968, S.57 (1):
In this Act, the expression “firearm” means a lethal barrelled weapon of any description from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged and includes—
(a) any prohibited weapon, whether it is such a lethal weapon as aforesaid or not; and
(b ) any component part of such a lethal or prohibited weapon; and
(c ) any accessory to any such weapon designed or adapted to diminish the noise or flash caused by firing the weapon; and so much of section 1 of this Act as excludes any description of firearm from the category of firearms to which that section applies shall be construed as also excluding component parts of, and accessories to, firearms of that description.
They want to change the wording of Firearms Act 1968, S.57 (1), note that the new additional change is highlighted in bold to this:
In this Act, the expression “firearm” means—
(a) a lethal barrelled weapon (see subsection (1B));
(b ) a prohibited weapon;
(c ) a relevant component part in relation to a lethal barrelled weapon or a prohibited weapon (see subsection (1D));
(d) an accessory to a lethal barrelled weapon or a prohibited weapon where the accessory is designed or adapted to diminish the noise or flash caused by firing the weapon.
You will notice that at the end of S.57 (1) (a) has the “see subsection (1B))”
Subsection 1B states:
“(1B) In subsection (1)(a), “lethal barrelled weapon” means a barrelled
weapon of any description from which a shot, bullet or other missile,
with kinetic energy of more than one joule at the muzzle of the weapon,
can be discharged.”
And this is where we’re getting our knickers in a twist, before it used to state that a “lethal barrelled weapon” means a barrelled weapon of any description from which a shot, bullet or other missile. This could be anything from a shotgun to a pipe launching out a potato etc. Now it has the addition of “with kinetic energy of more than one joule at the muzzle of the weapon, can be discharged.” So adds a specific muzzle velocity too.
So reading it like this means it can be construed that any barrelled weapon which discharges a shot etc with more than 1 joule of energy will be made illegal overnight and that all airsofters up and down the UK should be banged up, so far UKAPU have been correct and have used this to try and gain more members to sign up in apparently the “GOOD FIGHT”.
BUT!!!!
If you were to go to the Firearms Act 1968 and check through the Act as it currently stands, it goes through all its sections numerically occasionally adding the odd “A”, “B”, “C” to certain sections, refer to Section 30 of the Firearms Act 1968 which has Sections 30A, 30B, 30C and 30D.
Section 57 goes straight to Section 58 as expected, however the new Bill proposed for the 14-09-16 has a line stating:
“Subsection (1) is subject to section 57A (exception for airsoft guns).”
Basically, the new Bill wants to add a part specifically for us, S.57A which (does not yet exist) is a whole new proposed section to the Firearms Act 1968 which states:
57A Exception for airsoft guns
(1) An “airsoft gun” is not to be regarded as a firearm for the purposes of this Act.
(2) An “airsoft gun” is a barrelled weapon of any description from which only a small plastic missile, with kinetic energy at the muzzle of the weapon that does not exceed the permitted level, can be discharged.
(3) “Small plastic missile” means a missile that—
(a) is made wholly or partly from plastics, and
(b ) does not exceed 6 millimetres in diameter.
(4) The permitted kinetic energy level is—
(a) in the case of a weapon which is designed or adapted so that two or more missiles can be discharged successively without repeated pressure on the trigger, 1.3 joules;
(b ) in any other case, 2.5 joules.”
This above means that either UKAPU have only read a small part of the new bill and stopped reading or they want more members, Section 57 is so specific to Airsoft guns NOT being regarded as firearms for this Act is unreal, in fact the way S.57A, Paragraph 4, line b - is written technically means that Full Autos can go up to 1.3J or about 372FPS using .20g BBs, Semi Auto DMRs and Bolt Actions can legally go up to 515FPS on .20g BBs. This is why we should use joules instead of FPS and weights to measure our guns.
This means that if this Bill passes, nothing for Airsofters will change, I think the Airsoft community have misinterpreted Air Weapons such as Air Rifles and Pistols with Airsoft Guns. Frankly the Bill has included S.57A to try and bring the Firearms Act 1968 up to date to formally recognise Airsoft Guns under the Act but clarifies that Airsoft Guns are NOT firearms.
For those of you fearing that Police would come to Airsosft Sites and Chrono everyone en masse, I would say don’t woryy, Police have better things to do and would risk alienating Airsoft Players, of which a sizeable portion are Police Officers themselves.
References:
1.
Firearms Act 1968
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/27/section/57
Accessed 03-09-16
2.
Policing and Crime Bill 2015-16 to 2016-17, HL Bill 55 dated 14-06-16, Las accessed on 03-09-16
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2016-2017/0055/17055.pdf
Specifically referring to Page 137, Part 6 – Firearms, Paragraph 111 Firearms Act 1968: meaning of “firearm” etc
AndyGif290368
Members
- Jul 12, 2016
- 120
- 0
the proposed bill
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2016-2017/0055/17055.pdf
the proposed amendment
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2016-2017/0055/17055(e).pdf
the amendment is to leave out Section 5 page 128 line 7. this section includes the exemption for airsoft guns, which then places all in the 1j category.....
on another forum there is a post that Lord Shrewsbury has replied to an inquiry stating that he doesn't believe the amendment will be accepted and is doing this to garner more information from the government why we should have an exception.
here is link to a message on facebook with the reply
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10210394830576816&set=p.10210394830576816&type=3&theater
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2016-2017/0055/17055.pdf
the proposed amendment
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2016-2017/0055/17055(e).pdf
the amendment is to leave out Section 5 page 128 line 7. this section includes the exemption for airsoft guns, which then places all in the 1j category.....
on another forum there is a post that Lord Shrewsbury has replied to an inquiry stating that he doesn't believe the amendment will be accepted and is doing this to garner more information from the government why we should have an exception.
here is link to a message on facebook with the reply
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10210394830576816&set=p.10210394830576816&type=3&theater
Last edited by a moderator:
- Oct 20, 2012
- 5,112
- 1,691
- Thread starter
- #55
Shizbazki you really did spend a whole lot of time writing what we've known for months now. Did you read this thread?
The bill itself is fine. UKAPU worked hard to sit down with those writing it and have an exception added for airsoft (i.e what the first 2 pages of this thread are about and what your own post is about). A little while back Shrewsbury decided to propose an amendment to remove the one UKAPU had added as a means of seeing why it was added in the first place. This is called a 'probing amendment' and is not intended to pass (nor really every does).
This information was unknown though as Shrewsbury supposedly did not go through the gun lobby.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Oct 20, 2012
- 5,112
- 1,691
- Thread starter
- #57
So my opinion on the new limits is that they're fine. Not for DMRs, but for your average AEG and bolt action sniper rifle they're fair and leave some leeway.
The muzzle energy sits at around 1.3J, which is a fair margin above what most sites allow 1 to 1.14J (depending on their insurer and other stuff). Never seen a site allow more than 1.14J with a fully automatic airsoft gun. 2.5J is also well above the 500ft/s with a .20 that I've never seen exceeded by any UK site for bolt action rifles.
The DMR issue is a significant one because getting a DMR to 400 or 450ft/s with a .20 isn't going to happen any more, which is a bit of a shame. However, as most sites have been removing their DMR rules due to trigger responses being just ridiculously good these days (and people abusing it), this is less of an issue than a restriction on BASRs and automatics, I feel.
I guess I'm just happy that we have an exception in the first place, which I know if probably not the right opinion to have.
The muzzle energy sits at around 1.3J, which is a fair margin above what most sites allow 1 to 1.14J (depending on their insurer and other stuff). Never seen a site allow more than 1.14J with a fully automatic airsoft gun. 2.5J is also well above the 500ft/s with a .20 that I've never seen exceeded by any UK site for bolt action rifles.
The DMR issue is a significant one because getting a DMR to 400 or 450ft/s with a .20 isn't going to happen any more, which is a bit of a shame. However, as most sites have been removing their DMR rules due to trigger responses being just ridiculously good these days (and people abusing it), this is less of an issue than a restriction on BASRs and automatics, I feel.
I guess I'm just happy that we have an exception in the first place, which I know if probably not the right opinion to have.
Last edited by a moderator:
jcheeseright
Supporters
- Jun 14, 2012
- 4,280
- 2,261
DMRs won't be affected so long as they're locked to semi auto surely?
The exemption gives up to 2.5j for weapons not capable of discharging more than one projectile per trigger pull; e.g. Semi automatic.
The exemption gives up to 2.5j for weapons not capable of discharging more than one projectile per trigger pull; e.g. Semi automatic.
