Solid balls in the UK....

[JoseDominguez]

aghhhhhhhhhhhh, I just did science in my holidays.
I'm putting in for overtime.

I think you meant potassium
That's the one that burns on contact with water.

 

[ollytheosteo]

The balls concerned are made from a solid rubbery material and designed to be re-used for practice, although I have seen the velcro ones on the net. The guys that make them say "not for shooting at people" and supply target holders with net backs for practicing your shooting skills, not a bad idea if they accurately mimic a paintball in terms of weight etc.
My concern is that as paintball markers are exempt from uk firearms laws because they are designed to fire paintballs, could the introduction of a non-frangible round designed to pass thru a marker change their legal status?
Paintball markers are not firearms because a firearm is defined in law as a "lethal barrelled weapon". Lethality is defined by the projectile's ability to cause a penetrating wound, and anything that can is a firearm. Airsofters are looking at a 328 fps limit due to this legislation, as energy levels at velocities over that level can theoretically cause a penetrating wound. Shooting someone with such a weapon, even with their consent, is defined as assault and punishable accordingly. During the big fuss a few years ago when various police forces etc tried firing a variety of nasty things thru markers, it was agreed that markers are designed to only fire paintballs. It seems a retrograde step to introduce a solid round that is designed to pass thru a "weapon" that, as far as UK law is concerned, can only fire paintballs. Tests have shown that the larger the rubber ball, the less likely it is to cause such a wound, so the .68 balls should be ok, but it might be handy for the industry in the UK to agree a position before any potential problems arise, or shops start stocking these balls, individuals order them over the net etc.

Thanks to everyone for their polite informed comments.

 

[stongle]

Originally posted by JoseDominguez
aghhhhhhhhhhhh, I just did science in my holidays.
I'm putting in for overtime.

I think you meant potassium
That's the one that burns on contact with water.

sh*t, no wonder I failed chemistry

 

[L J]

Originally posted by Dazdread
Are the paintball masks rated for face protection with these heavier projectiles?

the lexxan lenses on goggles can withstand a 12 gauge shotgun blast... who wants to try it out

 

[ollytheosteo]

That one always cracks me up- it is true (I have a shotgun and I've tried it) but unfortunately whilst lenses can stop a twelve-bore it turns out that the average human forehead can't.
More seriously- those sites using rubber balls may find that their insurance etc is affected as most mask/goggle warranties are invalidated by velocities over 300fps or projectiles other than paintballs, whether they can penetrate or not.

 

[JoseDominguez]

yup, and the law for a marker not being a real firearm states "not capable of causing lethal injury without SIGNIFICANT modification" I reckon that if the powers that be realise we can just switch ammo and cause a lethal injury we are screwed.
A solid rubber projectile at 300 fps will cause a lot of pain........ up that to 420 fps? or maybe more...... then fire a string into someone.................. goodbye paintball in the UK.
I don't think we should be messing with this at all......... the reason we are safe is that markers fire paint........follow the rules and we are fine, even turning it up will just cause pain...... it's never going to kill or maim (as long as goggs are on) but 10 rubber balls to the forehead? base of the skull/temple could be nasty. How about a 300fps bouncey ball to the nadgers?

They use them in the US for riot control in prisons and I've seen video of them used and the aftermath........... it was horrific and they were being fired at kiddy fiddlers and rapists. Open wounds, split skin, concussion and all using rubber balls from unmodified markers.

Can we just stick with paint?

 

[ollytheosteo]

My point exactly- these new bouncy balls are a potential problem and the UKPSF etc probably need to think about action to head off this possibly damaging issue. There is already at least one site in the uk using solid rounds through markers and sooner or later someone is going to try importing practice balls unless the industry acts now.

 

[L J]

Originally posted by ollytheosteo
My point exactly- these new bouncy balls are a potential problem and the UKPSF etc probably need to think about action to head off this possibly damaging issue. There is already at least one site in the uk using solid rounds through markers and sooner or later someone is going to try importing practice balls unless the industry acts now.

can i just say i think you guys have taken the imagination to far, these vball things arent hard rubbuer and dont weigh more than a pball, and because they ale covered in velcro they dont fly well, and someone said they go like 30 ft... so cant have much power behind them can they

 

[JonnyB]

They are for sale on ebay UK as we speak...
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3662190248&category=310

damn you Fat Bob!

 

[JoseDominguez]

Ollie isn't talking about V-balls.........it's the solid rubber ones he's seen. My point about the V-balls was that they don't perform like paintballs, so why bother using them for practice? it'd be like practicing at quasar......... yes it's fun, but irrelevant for training.
The other point is that if alternative ammo is available, the powers that be are going to start paying us more attention..........
Markers are designed to fire paint, anything else is dodgy.
As for "damn you fat bob"......... why? as I said before, the v-balls are meant for use at lower velocities and are lighter than a paintball (nearly a third) so they have less impact than a paintball. Also, they are meant for target shooting.
Anyway, I just don't think we should be firing anything but paint, it's not America we have to be far more careful.