Quote Originally Posted by Cocksure View Post
Semi auto airguns ARE FIREARMS NOT AIRGUNS....
Be courtious enough to bother reading what I wrote rather than making assumptions...

I had no idea that having a debate on the internet meant I wanted people to take my argument as a defence in law....I won't argue with you again. ( especially when you're wrong! ) oh and you Bri.....tit.

Just read your edit...yes they do say airgun etc, but you fully understand my point now.If it don't fit the terms of an airgun it no longer is one. Ta.
Its not an edit. It's a direct quote from the Act. You have read the act haven't you?

I did read what you wrote. That wasn't your original point of debate. Your point was they were exempt because they were airguns. They're not exempt. Doesn't matter what they are or are not, what you think it makes them or what it doesn't. They're not exempt.

There's a difference between opinion, qualified opinion and fact. You state that fact is wrong, when it clearly isn't. If that actually had any traction as fact it could be called upon. But it doesn't. It's not even qualfied opinion. That's why the Cocksure defence wouldn't be used. Because it isn't one. Because it's not fact.

Changing what you say because you're stuck doesn't change it, changing your point doesn't either, trying to camoflague it with another argument doesn't either. Saying something is wrong when it isn't doesn't either.



Semi auto airguns are Section 5. The thing called an LP50 is considered as such. That's why they've been seized.



Try not to get upset about it. (Unless you've got a s5 airgun).