Has the status of sub 500fps airguns been changed ?

T

trip43

Regular
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Location
Nova Scotia
A British friend just told me that he read online that sub 500fps guns were going to have their status changed to firearm , has anyone heard anything about this or is my Brit friend misinform ?
 
The laws regarding air guns changed a while ago. It is now 500fps AND more than 5.7 joules of energy to be a firearm. Anything under 500 FPS is an uncontrolled firearm, when the energy/FPS goes below 366 fps air guns become replicas and they are prohibited. So to meet the definition of a uncontrolled firearm the velocity needs to be within that bracket.


http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/fs-fd/air_gun-arme_air-eng.htm
 
trip43 said:
Would that mean my Daisey Model 25 is now a replica and prohibited , as it`s velocity is 330fps using 5 grain BB`s ?
Click to expand...

The law is aimed at air soft guns or true replicas. The model 25 wasn't modeled after a known firearm as far as I know, and even if it were, it would be exempt as it was made before Dec 1, 1998.



3. Air guns that are replica firearms

These are air guns not powerful enough to cause serious injury or death, but designed to resemble a real firearm with near precision. Replica firearms, except for replicas of antique firearms, are classified as prohibited devices.

In particular, some air guns commonly known as air soft guns may fall into this category. These are devices that have a low muzzle velocity and muzzle energy, and that usually discharge projectiles made out of a substance such as plastic or wax rather than metal. An airsoft gun, firing a .20g 6mm plastic pellet with a muzzle velocity below 111.6 m/s (366 fps), and resembling with near precision an existing make and model of a firearm, other than an antique firearm, is a replica firearm and therefore a prohibited device.

Although replica firearms are prohibited, individuals may keep those they owned on December 1, 1998. It is not necessary to have a licence to possess them, and they do not need to be registered. However, an individual cannot import or acquire a replica firearm. If a replica firearm is taken out of Canada, it will not be allowed back in.
The Criminal Code sets out penalties for using a replica firearm or any other imitation firearm to commit a crime.

The CFP receives many enquiries from people wondering whether a low-powered air gun would be considered a replica if it resembles a ream firearm in terms of its shape, but it is made of clear or brightly coloured plastic, or has significant dimensional differences. Many of these devices need to be assessed on a case-by case basis. As a general rule, however, devices significantly smaller or larger than the real version are not classified as replica firearms.
 
Canadian_Zuk said:
The law is aimed at air soft guns or true replicas. The model 25 wasn't modeled after a known firearm as far as I know, and even if it were, it would be exempt as it was made before Dec 1, 1998.



3. Air guns that are replica firearms

These are air guns not powerful enough to cause serious injury or death, but designed to resemble a real firearm with near precision. Replica firearms, except for replicas of antique firearms, are classified as prohibited devices.

In particular, some air guns commonly known as air soft guns may fall into this category. These are devices that have a low muzzle velocity and muzzle energy, and that usually discharge projectiles made out of a substance such as plastic or wax rather than metal. An airsoft gun, firing a .20g 6mm plastic pellet with a muzzle velocity below 111.6 m/s (366 fps), and resembling with near precision an existing make and model of a firearm, other than an antique firearm, is a replica firearm and therefore a prohibited device.

Although replica firearms are prohibited, individuals may keep those they owned on December 1, 1998. It is not necessary to have a licence to possess them, and they do not need to be registered. However, an individual cannot import or acquire a replica firearm. If a replica firearm is taken out of Canada, it will not be allowed back in.
The Criminal Code sets out penalties for using a replica firearm or any other imitation firearm to commit a crime.

The CFP receives many enquiries from people wondering whether a low-powered air gun would be considered a replica if it resembles a ream firearm in terms of its shape, but it is made of clear or brightly coloured plastic, or has significant dimensional differences. Many of these devices need to be assessed on a case-by case basis. As a general rule, however, devices significantly smaller or larger than the real version are not classified as replica firearms.
Click to expand...

So how come Crappy Tire still sells air-soft to anyone, without a license.
 
This is so stupid. I have a pair of Western Arms Berettas that are used as prop guns in videos. They have authentic blow back action when gassed up without BB's so all you have to do is add in a flash and ejected casing in post production. They look great. So now what? I have to turn in these props for destruction? What a load of crap. They cost more than a Norinco 1911 - at least they did when I bought them in 2005.

I guess I need to find a way to make them more powerful than the 300fps or so they are capable of.
 
Pantharen said:
So how come Crappy Tire still sells air-soft to anyone, without a license.
Click to expand...

The airsoft guns sold at CT all have clear plastic bodies. So they do not meet the "resembling with near precision an existing make and model of a firearm" criteria of a replica firearm.

So in short :

Clear plastic body and 366fps or less = good to go
Full black body/ressembles with near precision an existing gun and 366fps or less = prohibited
Full black body/ressembles with near precision an existing gun and over 366fps = Good to go
 
Yes it is stupid to the 9th degree.

We had look-a-like pellet guns for decades before we had orange tip airsoft. The less powerful an airgun is the less damage it can do so that is how stupid the law is to ban low fps but allow mid-range fps. It was stupid to make ANY airgun a "Firearm" where there is no fire (ie explosive powder).

This is a result of our anti-gun culture lead primarily by the police forces in our country who are the largest group gun users and carriers in this country outside of the military.
 
There has been no change, unregulated firearms are still legal. The definition of what is a unregulated firearm has been better defined.

Most blow back pistols have always been below the FPS limit to be deemed a firearm, and are prohibited as replicas once proven so.

The classification of any object is a matter of fact, which must be proven.

Possession of replicas is not illegal. Only transfer is illegal
 
Perhaps I can clear up a little confusion here (I hope). Section 2 of the Criminal Code defines a firearm as a barrelled weapon that is capable of firing a projectile that can cause death or serious bodily injury to a person. It makes no mention of projectile velocity or energy levels. Section 84(3) of the Criminal Code says (and I'm paraphrasing) that what would otherwise be a firearm, is NOT a firearm for the regulatory offences (such as requiring a PAL or previously requiring registration) if the projectile is less than 152.4 meters per second (500 fps) or has an energy level less than 5.7 Joules (4.2 foot pounds). There are exemptions for other items as well such as signalling devices or nail drivers etc. So it is a firearm if it is used to say, seriously wound someone on purpose or if it is used in an armed robbery, but it is not a firearm for the regulatory requirements of requiring a PAL if the velocity is under 500 fps or energy is less than 4.2 ft/lbs. I hope this helps.
 
Last edited:
Linus said:
Perhaps I can clear up a little confusion here (I hope). Section 2 of the Criminal Code defines a firearm as a barrelled weapon that is capable of firing a projectile that can cause death or serious bodily injury to a person. It makes no mention of projectile velocity or energy levels. Section 84(3) of the Criminal Code says (and I'm paraphrasing) that what would otherwise be a firearm, is NOT a firearm for the regulatory offences (such as requiring a PAL or previously requiring registration) if the projectile is less than 152.4 meters per second (500 fps) or has an energy level less than 5.7 Joules (4.2 foot pounds). There are exemptions for other items as well such as signalling devices or nail drivers etc. So it is a firearm if it is used to say, seriously wound someone on purpose or if it is used in an armed robbery, but it is not a firearm for the regulatory requirements of requiring a PAL if the velocity is under 500 fps or energy is less than 4.2 ft/lbs. I hope this helps.
Click to expand...

Also, the definition of when an airgun is classified as a firearm is - I trust everyone has carefully noted - contained within the Criminal Code itself and NOT within 'Regulations' to the Criminal Code. IOW, any changes to that 152.4mps/5.7J definition would require actual legislative change by Parliament and NOT a simple bureaucratic fiat.

So you can tell your British friend that the only way the law in Canada will change regarding when an airgun requires a PAL to own and when it doesn't is if there is an actual change by Parliament to the Criminal Code itself. And personally, I sincerely trust that so long as the CPC is the party in power, any changes enacted by Parliament to the sections of the Criminal Code governing firearms and to the Firearms Act itself will be going in the other direction.
 
Top court to decide if pellet guns are firearms

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/court+decide+pellet+guns+firearms/9535981/story.html

OTTAWA — Is a pellet gun a firearm?

That is the question that Canada’s Supreme Court will answer after an Ottawa man’s lawyer argued that a recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision has exposed owners of pellet guns purchased at sporting good stores to criminal prosecution and potentially lengthy mandatory minimum prison sentences.

On Thursday, the country’s highest court agreed to hear the case of Christopher Dunn.

Dunn, 45, had his acquittal on firearms charges overturned after the court of appeal disagreed with an Ottawa judge’s ruling that the Crosman Model Pro 77 air gun Dunn was accused of brandishing in April 2010 met neither the definition of a firearm or a weapon.

According to the Criminal Code, a firearm is any barrelled weapon from which any shot, bullet or projectile can be discharged and is capable of causing serious bodily harm or death. But the definition of weapon is defined as anything used or intended for use in causing death or bodily injury or for the purpose of threatening or intimidating someone.

The court of appeal unanimously found that any pellet gun capable of firing a shot with a velocity capable of causing serious bodily harm met the definition of a firearm, regardless of how it was used or if it was used. It was a significant about face for the court of appeal — previously they had twice ruled an air gun was only considered a weapon if it was used to cause bodily harm or to intimidate someone.

Dunn’s lawyer, Solomon Friedman, argued that the consequences of their decision are far-ranging and of national importance.

It exposes pellet gun owners to charges of careless storage as well as other offences carrying mandatory minimum sentences, he argued.

Parliament never intended readily available pellet guns, sold in stores like Canadian Tire and Walmart, to be classified as firearms, Friedman argued.

“The Ontario Court of Appeal has created countless new “firearms owners,” all of whom are unlicensed and have never been subjected to mandatory safety training and other regulatory requirements,” Friedman, a firearms law expert, argued in court documents. “None of these individuals have been put on notice that they are entering into a highly regulated zone of conduct — firearms ownership.”

In their response, the Crown’s office argued that the court of appeal’s decision fixed a “jurisprudential glitch” that affected only a handful of cases in Ontario.

According to the Crown, the court of appeal decision “simply restored” the prevailing interpretation of a firearm that had existed in Ontario before another 2006 appeal court decision and across the rest of Canada.

A date has not yet been set for the Supreme Court hearing.

aseymour@ottawacitizen.com

twitter.com/andrew_seymour

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen
Click to expand...
 
The 366 fps only applies to importing airsoft guns. Once it's in the country you can change the spring out and have it shoot whatever you want (average field fps limit is 400-420). To the person asking about their blow back pistols: You're fine doing what you've been doing.
 
The Daisy 25 and other BB guns are ok because they shoot steel BBs instead of plastic airsoft type BBs, and hurt when you get hit with them. The 366 fps is not an issue with that type of gun.
"These are devices that have a low muzzle velocity and energy, and that usually discharge projectiles made out of a substance such as plastic or wax rather than metal."
This is why you can have a Walther PPK BB gun. An airsoft Walther PPK would be a replica because of the light plastic BB and low velocity.
 
There is a great deal of confusion about this situation. I just looked at the original story. Mr. Dunn apparently had a Crosman Pro77. I just looked this item up and...it is not an airsoft gun.

It's a C02 BB pistol with an up to 350 fps velocity.

So, according to the law as written, an unregulated air pistol. Not a replica, not an airsoft.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom