UK FPS Limits - New Govt Guidelines

[Belladonna]

ca and g&g sprs arnt designed semi only... thier auto boxes with a bit taken out... thats not the same

 

and it leaves them in the same boat as they are air rifles over that fps

[mattmanic]

Will this affect pistols too? I know that the big revolvers and CO2 guns are over often over 360 fps

[Pablo]

They didn't actually say 328 + 10% though if I remember correctly - it was 1J +10%, which I read as 1.1J.

 

On the paintball thing - they were at a meeting discussing airsoft, so inevitably they were taliking about airsoft rather than paintball.

 

On the UKARA thing - I think we've cleared up that it's UKASGB we're talking about here, though UKARA were there too (as was Tim from the ABA). I believe Ken said the HO brought the subject up themselves, and specifically mentioned chinese imports (which often exceed 1.1J stock). I believe they remarked that they'd prefer that chinese guns were therefore not used, though again I'm left wanting the bloody minutes in front of me so I know what they actually SAID.

[snorkelman]

thats a rather glaring hole in the VCRA isnt it? theoretically by upgrading any rif to +350 you would then be in possesion of a air rifle and then not subject to the same rules and regs that you would have been sub 350

 

yeps provided you're content with bolties and the airgun way of doing semi autos - otherwise you could find yourself out of one frying pan and into a completely different fire.

 

the commercial sales requirement of face to face logged sales via RFDs has headed off potential for a lot of stuff like that (if it wasnt for the new airgun regs I wouldnt have been that surprised to have suddenly seen loads of high powered 'springers' coming onto the market to replace all the replicas n blank firers that came a cropper under the VCRA)

[Delfi]

They didn't actually say 328 + 10% though if I remember correctly - it was 1J +10%, which I read as 1.1J.

 

I seem to recall that too ... in which case the maximum muzzle velocity for a weapon (ANY weapon) at a skirmish (with a 0.2g BB) is 345 fps.

 

D

 

 

 

 

 

[Stealthbomber]

They didn't actually say 328 + 10% though if I remember correctly - it was 1J +10%, which I read as 1.1J.

The OP of this thread said 328fps +/- 10%.

The letter you posted on page 1 of this thread said a MAXIMUM of 1J.

 

The same letter also stated that this was a guideline and not a legal requirement.

 

To me this is akin to a government campaign suggesting that people drive at 15mph in suburban areas even though the speed limit is actually 30mph.

[Pablo]

The OP of this thread said 328fps +/- 10%.

The letter you posted on page 1 of this thread said a MAXIMUM of 1J.

 

The same letter also stated that this was a guideline and not a legal requirement.

 

My apologies, I was referring to what I was told by Ken. Sooner I get me hands on a copy of the minutes, the better

[Chimpy]

Given the law is defined in terms of muzzle energy not the velocity of a specific sized spherical projectile weighing 0.2g I would place my bet on the advice being about muzzle energy. That said I agree with Stealth that these are guidelines. I would add that it's these sorts of guidelines that CPS lawyers will be looking at should your case come before them.

[Smoke]

I take it you mean UKASGB reps, not UKARA reps? How a site runs its affairs has sod all to do with UKARA....

 

I didn't think that there were any Ministers at the meeting at all, just Civil Servants?

 

I'm also interested to hear how a Minister did this, when he wasn't there?

 

I've spoken to the Minister since the HO meeting, I'm fairly sure he would have mentioned this.

 

Total rubbish.

[Aitch]

You can request the minutes via the HO, the last time i tried to get minutes for a HO/Airsoft meeting i was blocked due to the VCRA process still being decided, this time round that shouldn't have any effect on applying, just e-mail the home office asking for the minutes, state the Attendants/date/relevance of the meeting, they then have 28 days to supply you or refuse you with a valid reason under the FOI act (I think)

[Pablo]

True, but I'm going to try asking a few people for copies first.

[galactica]

I'm also interested to hear how a Minister did this, when he wasn't there?

 

I've spoken to the Minister since the HO meeting, I'm fairly sure he would have mentioned this.

 

Total rubbish.

 

the civil service is full of ministers responsible for various areas...the title does not automatically mean cabinet minister.

[imp1864]

I seem to remember that the minutes of this meeting were going to be posted a good number of weeks ago. Is there any reason as to why we do not have them? From the same meeting, though slghtly off topic the issue was raised about re enactors need to portray Waffen SS. So I would be very interested from both points of view, to read this draft.

[Smoke]

the civil service is full of ministers responsible for various areas...the title does not automatically mean cabinet minister.

 

True, but the VCRA is being dealt with by the Home Office Minister for Policing.

 

Changes of law need to go through Parliament. As this certainly hasn't, the same legal limits are in place. The same grey areas, are still grey.

 

But hey, enjoy the fuss

[Pablo]

Well, the only reason we haven't published the minutes here is 'cos I'm waiting for a copy meself.

[Beast06]

For those of you that don't know, the 1J limit is set in legislation for NI (unlike the rest of the UK where, correct me if I'm wrong, it's defined by HO guidelines and legal precedent), and anything more powerful than this requires a FAC (not that you can get a FAC for an Airsoft gun). I'm therefore assuming that we still can't get away with +10% over here.

 

None of this will affect us at all because, as you said, we've got our own legislation. We're 1J strictly no matter what, so no 10% for us (legally).

[Boom3r]

At the last meeting with the HO there were 3 civil servants from the Violent Crime Policy Unit and 5 of us from the Airsoft side. No Minister either Secretary of State or Minister of State has been present since the defence was offered in the summer/autumn of 2006.

 

Whilst I am recently in receipt of a copy of the minutes I am not as yet authorised to release them more publicly than the members of the UKASGB who I have represented at all the meetings with the HO. Whilst I cannot share the minutes with you I will say that considering the meeting lasted 2 and 1/2 hours the minutes are very short running to less than 2 pages.

 

With regard to power levels these were raised by the HO especially in respect of Chinese Clones which were coming into the country with power levels in excess of 400fps with a .2gm bb. Under currently understood case law these are arguably s5 firearms, in that they are capable of discharging more than 1 shot on a single pull of the trigger. It has been understood that the level which is the critical point for this is 1.35j or 377 fps or 1 ft pound as per Moore v Gooderham ( the science and reasoning maybe bad but thats all we have to work with).

 

The HO guideline figure that they quote for lethality so often is 1 joule. However, all the FSS have said that at levels below 1 joule a lethal injury is unlikely to occur. This for lawyers is not a definition of lethality, that will only come with a court case, where all the evidence is put forward. When this first raised its ugly head in 2004 I contacted the FSS's gun unit to see whether they had tested airsoft guns, they hadn't. The figure of 1 joule comes from the last FCC report where despite hearing evidence from many scientists advocating a level of lethality being set at 3-4 joules they opted for the guideline figure and no decision to make the level a statutory one.

 

THe UKASGB has a guideline figure for our sites of 328 fps unless the sites have written clearance from their insurers to run at a higher level. In the 2 years I have been chairman I have never seen a letter in those terms from an insurer. The +10% comes from correspondence from the HO again in 2004/2005 which allowed a leeway of up to 10% for variations in chronographs and air temperature.

 

Unlike Ken my opinion is that the HO figures is a guideline and as it has never been tested remains a guideline figure of their choosing where the science may or may not support the contention. It has been and will remain a grey area until a court decides. However, my opinion is that for AEGs the 328 + the 10% allowance are sensible.

 

That leaves the thorny question of sniper rifles. Personally I have no problem with 500fps sniper rifles and their use provided they are used in a sensible way with the appropriate chronoing and minimum engagement ranges being used (This might have something to do with not running a site anymore and not having to worry about the insurance situation). BUT it is a grey area.

 

I have used this argument with the HO

 

Hard tackling is part of rugby provided you abide by the rules governing such tackles. If you were to tackle someone on the street in a manner that was within the rules of rugby you would be assaulting that person.

 

They counter with the argument from case law that you cannot consent to being sado-masochistically assaulted. Whilst I cannot remember the case name off the top of my head at the moment we are not consenting to be beaten with baseball bats covered in barbed wire if we consent to being shot by a single shot sniper at ranges of greater than 25 meters.

[harborne blue]

On the 'consent to assault' thing, yes there are various exemptions but you get caught up in common law. It's a long time since I studied this but basically the waiver forms that people sign have absolutely zero standing in law other than to provide an illustration of what the individual expected or could be said to have expected to occur. So, in Airsoft terms you get two teeth shot out and the site didn't warn you about this being a risk then you sue and the waiver means zero.

 

The example with say a 500fps sniper rifle would be that the shot takes out an experienced players glasses and an eye with it... They complain / sue (fairly inevitable with any serious injury) and the law comes down on us like a ton of bricks.

 

Don't think it could happen? My bro's Wileys were blown apart with a 20m+ shot that hit the edge of the frame and this was at Fireball with the strictest chrono'ing I've seen.

 

Personally I think that FPS should be 400 for bolt actions, 350 for support weapons and 330 for other AEGs - otherwise we all might as well run around with the same thing - but if it is 320+10% for AEGs then I'm off to buy some stronger springs as all my AEGs chrono at <340.

[Stealthbomber]

With regard to power levels these were raised by the HO especially in respect of Chinese Clones which were coming into the country with power levels in excess of 400fps with a .2gm bb. Under currently understood case law these are arguably s5 firearms, in that they are capable of discharging more than 1 shot on a single pull of the trigger. It has been understood that the level which is the critical point for this is 1.35j or 377 fps or 1 ft pound as per Moore v Gooderham ( the science and reasoning maybe bad but thats all we have to work with).

Indeed. That's just common sense really.

 

The HO guideline figure that they quote for lethality so often is 1 joule. However, all the FSS have said that at levels below 1 joule a lethal injury is unlikely to occur. This for lawyers is not a definition of lethality, that will only come with a court case, where all the evidence is put forward. When this first raised its ugly head in 2004 I contacted the FSS's gun unit to see whether they had tested airsoft guns, they hadn't. The figure of 1 joule comes from the last FCC report where despite hearing evidence from many scientists advocating a level of lethality being set at 3-4 joules they opted for the guideline figure and no decision to make the level a statutory one.

Yep.

 

As I said, to my mind this is similar to being advised to driveat 20mph in town where the speed limit is 30mph.

 

Hard tackling is part of rugby provided you abide by the rules governing such tackles. If you were to tackle someone on the street in a manner that was within the rules of rugby you would be assaulting that person.

 

They counter with the argument from case law that you cannot consent to being sado-masochistically assaulted. Whilst I cannot remember the case name off the top of my head at the moment we are not consenting to be beaten with baseball bats covered in barbed wire if we consent to being shot by a single shot sniper at ranges of greater than 25 meters.

 

The "nails through dangly bits" case was Operation Spanner.

A bunch of gay S&M types got put in prison for up to 5 years for indulging their interests.

[guinnessman]

That is true of bolt action and double-action weapons.

 

Full auto weapons would immediately be classed as a section 5 firearm and the same may apply to semi automatic weapons too.

 

 

Not sure about that statement.

 

The law is kinda complicated on this, however:

 

Firearms Law Guidance

 

Specifically, page 6 of the document, and I quote:

 

Firearms and ammunition for which no certificate is required2.26 Firearm and shot gun certificates are

required in respect of the majority of firearms

and ammunition. However, the following

types are exempt:

i) Air weapons and ammunition for air

and gas-operated weapons

Air guns, air rifles and air pistols are exempt

from the certification requirement if they are

not of a type declared specially dangerous

by the Firearms (Dangerous Air Weapons)

Rules 1969 or the Firearms (Dangerous Air

Weapons) (Scotland) Rules 1969.

The Rules provide that any air weapon is

“specially dangerous” if it is capable of

discharging a missile so that the missile has,

on being discharged from the muzzle of the

weapon, kinetic energy in excess, in the case

of an air pistol, of 6 foot lbs or, in the case

of an air weapon other than an air pistol,

12 foot lbs

.

 

Apparently 1 foot lb is equal to 1.35 joules, so 6 ft lbs = 8.1 joules, 12 ft lbs = 16.2 joules.

 

Section 5(1) of the Firearms Act 1968 states that a firearm which is designed or so adapted that two or more missiles can be succesively discharged without repeated pressure on the trigger is a prohibited weapon. However a firearm is designated as a lethal barreled weapon from which a shot, bullet yada yada yada can be fired. But by HO reckoning it can't cause serious injury unless the muzzle energy is above the limits stated above. Make of that what you will, but to my mind it means even 400 fps AEG's can't be classed as Section 5 firearms, although saying that I wouldn't want to be hit by one!

 

EDITED: interesting read about Moore v Gooderham. To be honest I think it'll need another case law to fully determine what the definition of 'lethal' is. Great

[Delfi]

Would it not also be sensible to be talking about 'impact energy' rather than muzzle energy?

 

(Although measuring that might be difficult we still have the benfit of doubt in our favour)

 

D

[Stealthbomber]

Would it not also be sensible to be talking about 'impact energy' rather than muzzle energy?

 

(Although measuring that might be difficult we still have the benfit of doubt in our favour)

 

D

It would indeed.

 

Unfortunately, you have to consider the worst-case scenario.

A projectile carries most energy at the muzzle and there's always a chance that somebody will be in the way just as the weapon is discharged so you have to ensure that the muzzle energy isn't lethal.

[Delfi]

It would indeed.

 

 

Fair comment ... so we're restricted by point blank firing considerations.

 

AEG or not ... it's 1.1J by the look of it.

 

Screws up an important part of the game for me ... anyone moving over open ground should be scared of snipers.

 

D

 

[BenjaminRombough]

so how does paintball get away with it? i know its a different section of law but what are their rules?

[Stealthbomber]

so how does paintball get away with it? i know its a different section of law but what are their rules?

*sigh*

 

Cos paintball uses frangible ammo. Paintballs are squidgey.

 

That's a thorny subject cos it leads us back to Area 51 Airsoft, Dr Sheldrake, the original 1J rule and all the cobblers that was initiated so he could flog RAP guns converted to work with rubber balls... which turned out not to work properly.