Jump to content
MiketheBike

VCR act, can someone briefly explain?

Recommended Posts

I have tried searching for an easy explanation, but have been unsuccessful.

could someone explain to me what the rules are?

 

if I had a pipe in my ferret turret that looked (to the layman) like a gun, what are the rules?

would I just need to belong to the MVT? Or are there other things to consider?

 

cheers

mick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this where the .30 browning would be? You could just buy a cooling Jacket and fit that. It wouldn't contravene the VCR act and is correct. Much cheaper than a deact too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VCR act is a bit of a nightmare to wade through - and the new EU proposals make it much, much worse.

 

However - as I understand it and apply it - you need to be able to show that you have a valid reason for doing what you want to to and are over the age of 18. In my eyes owning a restored turreted Ferret is, by itself the answer to the "need" part of the act. You could join the MVT or IMPS if you wish - certainly either one would be good for aid in case of legal troubles.

Again - as I understand it - just fitting a lump of pipe in lieu of a deac main gun is not a problem - it is not a gun, can never be a gun and, apart from whacking some one over the head, cannot harm anyone.

 

My OT-90 has a dummy gun barrel in lieu of the KVPT that should be fitted. and no one has ever questioned it - at shows or on film sets. I am a member of the MVT and IMPS too. But have never had any reason to ask for aid from them and have never been asked for proof of membership. From experience police generally accept that if you have an MV or wander about in uniform at weekends then you have a valid reason for having something that looks like a weapon.

 

There are people here better qualified than I to give a definitive answer - but this is how I do it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't depend on the MVT for assistance, as recently stated by the chairman "We are not a gun club."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Neil and Chris.

i have a piece of pipe that I have drilled to resemble the 30cal jacket in my ferret turret, I just wanted to check that I was not doing something really stupid if I fitted it at shows to at least look the part. I have a friend who is making a stock of sorts, just so it can be mounted...so not realistic by any stretch of the imagination.

just out f interest Chris...is that jacket you have for sale?

 

mick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that simple Neil. The VCR speciffically excludes 'Realistic Imitaion firearms' if used in TV, film or dramatic productions. So in that case your covered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably worth going back to the source!

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/38/contents

 

See sections 36 and 37.

 

37(7) says - historical re-enactment” means any presentation or other event held for the purpose of re-enacting an event from the past or of illustrating conduct from a particular time or period in the past;

 

This is a CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) explanation -

 

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/d_to_g/firearms/#a04

[h=4]Realistic Imitation Firearms[/h]From 1 October 2007, section 36 Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 created an offence to manufacture, bring into or cause to be brought into Great Britain, or sell realistic imitation firearms. It also made it an offence to modify an imitation firearm to make it realistic.

Section 37 relates to specific defences: this allows persons in the course of trade or business to import realistic imitation firearms for the purpose of modifying them to make them non-realistic. It also provides various defences if the realistic imitation firearm was available for:

 

 

  • a museum or gallery;
  • theatrical performances and rehearsals of such performances;
  • the production of films and television programmes;
  • the organisation and holding of historical re-enactments; or
  • crown servants.

 

Section 38 defines a "realistic imitation firearm" as "an imitation firearm which has an appearance that is so realistic as to make it indistinguishable, for all practical purposes, from a real firearm". As a result of "real firearm" (defined in section 38 (7)) imitations of pre-1870 firearms are not caught by the offence.

Whether an imitation firearm falls within the definition of a realistic imitation firearm should be judged from the perspective of how it looks at the point of manufacture, import or sale and not how it might be appear if it were being misused. Section 38(3) provides that in determining whether an imitation firearm is distinguishable from a real firearm, its size, shape and principal colour must be taken into account.

It is worth keeping in mind that the intention behind this measure is to stop the supply of imitations which look so realistic that they are being used by criminals to threaten and intimidate others. If it is not a realistic imitation firearm it may still be an imitation firearm.

 

Nic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, that's actually a small scale replica that I used as an example. If you do need those parts I can probably get you them from a contact. As they are real and not restricted, they are exempt from the VCR and if any one tried legal proceedings, the CPS would never even try it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought - does the Ferrret have a canvas mantlet cover that goes over the barrel of the 30 cal? If so - get one if you don't already have it and leave that on when not actually on a showground and you should be OK as the"weapon" is not on public display and cannot therefore be used to threaten anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just a thought - does the Ferrret have a canvas mantlet cover that goes over the barrel of the 30 cal? If so - get one if you don't already have it and leave that on when not actually on a showground and you should be OK as the"weapon" is not on public display and cannot therefore be used to threaten anyone.

 

I have just bought a air soft SMG and a airsoft GPMG I checked with the dealer I got them from all I needed to do was demonstrate a good reason to have them I supplied them with my MVT membership and that was a good reason to have a RIF item the same I would expect would be the case for the question that as been raised. The SMG is for a ferret.

 

Al

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading this and seeing all kinds of potential pitfalls.

First off - familiarise yourself with the Act. An 'oh well - it works for me' approach does not constitute a defence in law.

There are no 'valid reasons' nor any legally-recognised 'need' for importing, possessing or creating a Realistic Imitation Firearm (RIF). There are only potential defences of which you may be able to avail yourself if threatened with prosecution for doing so.

Your age is not a factor. The fact that a RIF is not and never has been a weapon, is not a factor. Owning an MV is not a defence. 'No-one has ever questioned it' is not a defence. 'I wasn't sure what the law was' is not a defence.

Making, buying or possessing a RIF for the purposes of historical re-enactment is a defence, but you would need to prove it. I'm not sure whether membership of the MVT or IMPS would satisfy a court, but I doubt it. I'm surprised that it would satisfy a dealer in RIFs, to be honest.

If your defence was 'it looks good on my armoured car when I take it to shows' I think you'd have real problems.

A simple test is to ask yourself this: if I took my bit of drilled pipe into a bank, pointed it at a cashier and said 'give me the money' might they reasonably think they were being robbed at gunpoint? Could it be that my bit of drilled pipe 'might appear' to be a firearm in these circumstances?

If the answer is a likely 'yes' then you may already have committed an offence under the Act.

A 'lump of pipe' could very well be a RIF. But not if you painted it bright orange and stuck a plastic daffodil in the end.

Surely the most important question here is - why take the risk? The sanctions - not the least of which is a spell at Her Majesty's pleasure - are pretty severe.

And there is a very quick and easy way to avoid any of this grief - use deacts. These are not covered by the Act and as long as you use them sensibly and with due care, you should have no problems.

It's actually not too complicated and if you're unsure about where you stand the very obvious response is - then don't do it.

The attitude of the authorities to RIFs has fundamentally changed in recent years. The approach is much less tolerant and the potential penalties for infringement reflect that. That's why cap guns have disappeared from the shelves of toy shops and been replaced by flourescent yellow Nerf guns.

Remember when your Grandad vanished into the shed for five hours and emerged with a beautifully hand made wooden toy rifle he'd made for you to play with? Well Grandads can't do that anymore, because if they did they might well be breaching the VCR Act!

Edited by laboisselle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And there is a very quick and easy way to avoid any of this grief - use deacts. These are not covered by the Act and as long as you use them sensibly and with due care, you should have no problems.

 

Problem being a deactivated GPMG costs a lot more than a replica.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Problem being a deactivated GPMG costs a lot more than a replica.

 

Sadly a court would not see this as a problem. For them the problem would arise when you tried to explain that, knowing a deact would be a perfectly available and legal option, you decided instead to buy or create a RIF without a valid defence for doing so.

Obviously, not being able to (or choosing not to) afford to buy a deact would not be a defence in law to choosing instead to buy or create a RIF.

Buying or creating a RIF simply is not a 'cheap alternative' to buying a deact. And behaving as though it was would be ill-advised, at best.

But clearly there is no need for anyone here to take my word for it. If in doubt, take legal advice. Although a decent legal opinion on this will set you back about the same amount, sooner or later, as the cost of a deact. So...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Neil, yes would definitely be a silly move to drive down the street with an uncovered gun.

 

Some interesting points, and would always want to err on the side of caution and common sense!

 

Mick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From personal experience,common sense + Police and RIF's, De-Acs and airsoft,= not much seen.>:( Know the acts well, be praperared to argue, and send a recorded delivery letter to the Chief Constable stating the law. That's how I got my de-acs back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And there is a very quick and easy way to avoid any of this grief - use deacts. These are not covered by the Act and as long as you use them sensibly and with due care, you should have no problems.

 

Problem being a deactivated GPMG costs a lot more than a replica.

 

And a deac KVPT is virtually impossible to get hold of in the UK - I've been trying for years. Which is why I have a dummy barrel in the cradle and it is covered by a canvas mantlet cover when not physically on a show ground.

If you want to rob a bank with a KPVT you are gonna need a big crew - 4 mean to carry the 6' 6" long KVPT itself. 4 more men to carry the two big high amperage batteries needed to fire it. 2 men to carry the belt and box for the ammo and 1 man to carry the firing solenoid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I say - ill-advised.

But it's at your risk; we're all grown-ups. If you have - or think you have - a defence then good luck to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And there is a very quick and easy way to avoid any of this grief - use deacts. These are not covered by the Act and as long as you use them sensibly and with due care, you should have no problems.

 

Problem being a deactivated GPMG costs a lot more than a replica.

 

Yes sirhc that's one of the reason I went for air soft after taken advice on the matter of the VCR from dealers who should know the law anyway I conformed to the requirments I could of just bourght a two toned coloured one which is outside the VCR act because its classed as a toy in the eyes of the law.

 

Al

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of many side effects of the ill conceived VCR act is that some criminals are painting the ends of their illegal live firearms orange to make police officers question what the suspect has. So as a result the colouring of RIFs has no significance any more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One of many side effects of the ill conceived VCR act is that some criminals are painting the ends of their illegal live firearms orange to make police officers question what the suspect has. So as a result the colouring of RIFs has no significance any more.

 

 

If we do that to Deacts. Will that mean they will come under an unaffected category. & the EU Directive will be

Meaningless in that section?..........:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it looks like it could go bang= Treat it like it could go bang. The law as it stands if you use anything in the commision of crime with the intent to convince a victim it is a firearm= Firearm offence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If it looks like it could go bang= Treat it like it could go bang. The law as it stands if you use anything in the commision of crime with the intent to convince a victim it is a firearm= Firearm offence.

 

Certainly the first part of this statement is correct. Of course the VCR Act made the second part of this statement redundant - if your 'lump of pipe' could be misused for crime and might reasonably be thought to be a firearm, then an offence may well have been committed. Unless - as we have seen - you have a defence under the Act.

And (sorry to be boring, but it's worth restating) owning an MV is NOT a defence, nor is not being able to source/afford a deact!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually that was , and is, the situation. There is a years old nemonic. If you want to aggrevate the situation take your WIFE, Weapon. Imitation firearm. Firearm. Explosive. It is the VCR act that was tortologies.:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...