Crom Dubh, would you like to point to anywhere in what you were quoting that refers directly to paintball markers? Would you like to point me to anything anywhere legal that states paintball markers are firearms? Would you like to point me to anything anywhere legal that states a paintball marker to be a weapon? or that it has a lethal barrel? (scary concept considering how many i've had pointed at me)
The fact is that no such thing exists. There is no law which definitively covers paintball markers. There never has been in the UK.
The thing is that we are as responsible players of our sport have looked to the worse case scenario and tried to make ourselves fit within in it just in case.
That's why when the turbo discussion and legality was happening I was at the fore front of trying to point out why allowing it COULD have resulted in us being dragged up on fire arms offences and be very bad. It may be allowable but we would need to prove it in a court of law, which is one place I didn't think we were ready to be.
I believe in erring on the side of caution, which is why I do not like you referring to markers as fire arms. I suggest for the benefit of our sport until you have solid evidence that they are (maybe from a court of law?
) that you do not refer to them as such, in case people in this country take the wrong impression as so often happens.
One fire arms expert who was brought in to look at the latest guns of the time a few years back, including RT's, turbo shockers and angels in Full Auto didn't think there would be a problem with any of them "in his opinion" but stated the only way to find out would be in court. We don't want to go there, or at least we didn't. Maybe in the near future we will be ready to go there and get our own guidelines.
Trouble is, that's all we have. And to avoid the risk of a court case going against us we play as fairly and tightly within the worst case scenario to protect ourselves.
I've argued that we could come under fire arms legislation in order to give us the safest legal position from which to defend ourselves if things go wrong. And I will argue vehemently against anyone who thinks we are using fire arms because I do not believe markers fit any of the legal definitions of a fire arm.
Apart from the fact I do not think they fit the lethality description as I've argue before. I have further points of discussion. When ever they talk about weapons or fire arms they talk about lethality and penetrative wounds. When they talk about trivial injuries they say 'such as' bruising. When a kid trips and lightly grazes his knee is that not a trivial injury? It's more than bruising and will probably bleed but to any sensible person it's still a trivial injury. All paintball injuries on the skin can be easily classed as trivial.
I do not think paintball markers are even weapons and so as pieces of sports equipment we may not even be under the same guidelines. This wasn't just my idea it's something a fire arms officer once told me.
A definition for you...
weap·on Pronunciation Key (wpn)
n.
An instrument of attack or defense in combat, as a gun, missile, or sword.
Zoology. A part or organ, such as a claw or stinger, used by an animal in attack or defense.
Now does a marker fit that description? possibly. but within a sporting definition of attack and defense only. And in those cases you can say the same thing about a baseball bat. A baseball bat is used to defend your team from loss of points and also to attack their score in order to win. As is the main point of any piece of sports equipment.
A paintball marker is not designed to harm someone, in fact quite the opposite they are designed not to harm people or we wouldn't be able to use them the way we do. In fact many manufacturers take extra efforts to ensure their products can not harm people on the receiving end (such as AGD with the vent valve to prevent to high velocities). It's similar to a baseball bat. neither were designed to hurt people. I venture through their intended use the baseball bat is much more dangerous.
I'll bet millions of pounds that there are more people killed each year from baseball bats than there are from paintball markers.
I have a water pistol that works on compressed air and shoots water down a barrel. I have no doubt the large burst of water it shoots comes out with more than 1ft/lbs of energy. Is it also a fire arm? is it governed by these regulations? I doubt it because it's obviously not lethal or intended to be so. It does not penetrate when fired it just leaves a mark (wet) on the surface (sound familiar?) however when shot in the eye it is dangerous to your eye ball and can do damage, IIRC there was even a warning on the packaging about that...
There has even been some discussion within the UK paintball industry that since paintball markers possibly do NOT appear to fit the description of a fire arm that FA would actually be allowable. But again I ask do we want to risk it?
Crom dubh, although I understand why you started this arguement and that it was done in good faith. YOU are not someone to dictate who is or is not breaking the law when it comes to paintball markers (unless you are some high level lawyer fighting this debate that I don't know about...). Because there is no definitive law about paintball markers. Maybe when it comes to thunderflashes yes you are absolutely right. But you may have inadvertently put it into people's heads that are not part of this sport (e-bay) that paintball markers are fire arms and dangerous and that selling them with select fire boards is illegal. We do not actually KNOW that, and you may inadvertently do more harm than good
You talk about trying to give them a squeaky clean image in the eyes of the law? Do you honestly think calling them fire arms will help that? in the eyes of the law or anywhere else? How about saying we govern ourselves under the worst case regulations as pertaining to fire arms but actually markers are sports equipment...
Trouble is there is no definitive statement either way. No one has stood up in a court of law and declared what a paintball marker is or is not and how it is allowed to function. Until that day I'd rather we stayed careful and kept as quiet as possible until we can stand up and declare it to our benefit.
All we have is definitions which are open to interpretation and opinion.
manike
