Posting PF48. Persistence and politeness pays off.

[Garvin]

This is exactly the stupidity of the general public that causes the issue of the OP

They are not "making up their own rules" they have read & remembered the section prohibiting weapons, probably because it has been specifically shown to them.

Then because you and other idiots like you lie &/or hide posting an item that is allowed under another different section (guns for sporting use) they are not corrected and therefore educated that in fact the item is perfectly legal to declare & send.

Do not dare to complain about a situation that you deliberately fail to address when given the opportunity.

As you know, Steve, I disagree profoundly with you on this point. It's not the stupidity of the general public that's at fault, it's the failure of Post Office staff to update themselves on the rules.

It's not a lie to say 'sporting goods' or similar, and since you know the actual rules and they don't, you're not doing anything wrong.

Ultimately if an airgun is discovered in a Parcelforce 48 consignment, it is well within the rules and the exact declaration made in the Post Office is immaterial, as long as it's not an out and out lie.

Obviously PCPs with air bottles are another matter...

But all power to the OP for doing what he did.

[angrybear]

As you know, Steve, I disagree profoundly with you on this point. It's not the stupidity of the general public that's at fault, it's the failure of Post Office staff to update themselves on the rules.

It's not a lie to say 'sporting goods' or similar, and since you know the actual rules and they don't, you're not doing anything wrong.

Ultimately if an airgun is discovered in a Parcelforce 48 consignment, it is well within the rules and the exact declaration made in the Post Office is immaterial, as long as it's not an out and out lie.

Obviously PCPs with air bottles are another matter...

But all power to the OP for doing what he did.

I know we disagree over method, but surely the point must be to EDUCATE those who have failed to understand their own rules.

And surely the way to educate them is to be open about what is being sent, when it is in compliance with those written rules, & where necessary to be the one who stands there & says politely "Actually you're wrong, read the rule"

The stupidity I refer to is by those who deliberately avoid correcting the error, by disguising a perfectly legal action, & by doing so further promote that error within the system.

[Garvin]

I know we disagree over method, but surely the point must be to EDUCATE those who have failed to understand their own rules.

And surely the way to educate them is to be open about what is being sent, when it is in compliance with those written rules, & where necessary to be the one who stands there & says politely "Actually you're wrong, read the rule"

The stupidity I refer to is by those who deliberately avoid correcting the error, by disguising a perfectly legal action, & by doing so further promote that error within the system.

I take the point and it's well made.

Realistically though, not everyone has the time or energy to do their civic duty in this way, especially when it may mean spending ages persuading some officious jobsworth that he/she is wrong about the very rules he/she is meant to oversee!

In a perfect world, yes, we should all take the time to educate the ill-educated and insist on our rights, like the OP has done.