Age for non-supervision of an air rifle, under 500 fps
- Thread starter Jonothan
- Start date
justinb1981
Regular
- Location
- Hamilton, Ontario
What kind of critters? Airguns that shoot under 500fps aren't powerful enough to humanely kill anything bigger than a mouse
depends what you're packing, i have a .25 cal and a .380 cal airgun, both under 500 fps... pretty sure those will hurt more than a mouse
but yea dont take the 177 down to the farm to shoot critters or youll just have alot of injured rodents with lead pellets stuck in them, not cool
Age is not a good indicator, maturity is. Out in the prairies lots of youngsters are fine with 22s unsupervised. Check out overseas... Many kids with aks... And handling them safely around others. No matter the calibre they need to know the do's and fonts of muzzle control...
I was 9 years old walking around Kitchener to the local parks with a loaded pellet gun slung over my shoulder. Used to sit in little bushs waiting on little birds. Other kids playing on the swings and slides. All the police ever said to me was "you be careful". But that was 50 years ago. It may be child abuse in todays world. LOL
Sure, if both the maturity and safety training are in place before hand. I was allowed to have an air rifle at age 4 supervised. I was still upper single digits when allowed to roam alone with it. But the safety training by then was hammered in. Much better activity for youngsters than video and social media.
surplusshooter
Regular
- Location
- BC Sea to Sky
100% dependant on the kid. But if he knows th do's and don'ts shouldn't be an issue
gunsaholic
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Winnipeg, Manitoba
I don't think the OP is really referring to maturity level in his question but more so to is it legal for someone that age to be left unsupervised with an air rifle that is under 500 fps and doesn't require a pal.
I was given free reign as a kid at the cottage (early/mid 70s...I was about 8 years old) and while being responsible seemed hard-wired in my case, my buddy Mike was a little more...carefree should we say. I do remember an OPP cruiser pulling up beside us one day as we strolled down a dirt road. The officer took our names, told us to be careful, and not to walk with our guns loaded. (which we never did anyway) Then told us to have a nice day. Imagine that ever happening today? lol I suspect some cottager saw us...thought our Chinese break-barrel rifles were AK-47s.
To the question~yes, depends on the kid I think. However, "critter" should be more clearly defined. In Ontario, there is a rabbit season and you need to be a licensed hunter with a small game tag to go after them. Even groundhogs here require a small game license whereas in places like Alberta and the lowly gopher~I don't think any license is required. If the animal is a pest animal around the farm (ie, pigeons/gophers/rats/mice/crows/magpies etc.) then I doubt a kid being careful with an airgun would ever be a problem.
I think .177 is slightly less useful than a .22 cal. air rifle, but, effective enough if the critter is small/close and the shot is good.
To the question~yes, depends on the kid I think. However, "critter" should be more clearly defined. In Ontario, there is a rabbit season and you need to be a licensed hunter with a small game tag to go after them. Even groundhogs here require a small game license whereas in places like Alberta and the lowly gopher~I don't think any license is required. If the animal is a pest animal around the farm (ie, pigeons/gophers/rats/mice/crows/magpies etc.) then I doubt a kid being careful with an airgun would ever be a problem.
I think .177 is slightly less useful than a .22 cal. air rifle, but, effective enough if the critter is small/close and the shot is good.
If you're worried about using an airgun to limit damage it will do when they shoot something they shouldn't, then they are not mature enough regardless of age.
If you're worried about the fact that they're under 18 and cannot possess a firearm while alone, have a look at the definition of supervision and ponder whether it is open to interpretation. And how much you would spend in court defending that interpretation.
If you're worried about the fact that they're under 18 and cannot possess a firearm while alone, have a look at the definition of supervision and ponder whether it is open to interpretation. And how much you would spend in court defending that interpretation.
THIS^^
I OWNED and used unsupervised a 22lr and 410 single shot shotgun when I was 11....Grandfather and Father taught me the 4 golden rules...looked me straight in the eye and said "don't screw around and don't disappoint us" I didn't.
Different times and mindset.
I'm pretty sure now the local "tactical" squad would prolly descend on the area...cordon off...there'd be charges....SOMEBODY has to get charged with SOMETHING...and some negative media coverage to go with it all....
Good luck with it all....seriously.
canadian hunter312
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Brant County
x2
.177 and .22 from 450-500 fps are both very capable of killing those critters with head shots.
Perhaps I've used the wrong .22 pellet gun but it was almost useless. It was my cousins and I was shooting gophers so they didn't destroy his lawn or the dog dig up a tree looking for one. I recall seeing the pellet knock the gopher over and bounce off. It got up and ran down a hole. I grew up on a cheap .177 pellet gun and it worked great. It actually has some penetration power. So comparing the two with equal velocities I'd take the .177 every time. If you have a higher performance .22 then it may be better but a blanket statement that .22 is better just is not true.
