SUPREME COURT OF CANADA RULES. Is this is new news and how this affects us?

[Dracheous]

Originally Posted by Cameron SS

I am not a troll I swear, but I do have a legal background that tells me that this court ruling is going to significantly impact the Airsoft and Paintball sports unless it is addressed by legislation from Parliament.

Care to back that up? Exactly what is your "legal background"?


I mean this IS the internet and here I am Barack Obama, but not the peace and love version you see after the CIA is done tampering with all your media lines. The legit hard core let's get rich and be all up on a boat about it!


Or I'm just an asshole that enjoys being humorous when reality has checked out. Who knows!?


What I do know is that you're still making an argument based on loosely gathered "Opinion" calling it "fact!" and now trying to support that with "Well I got a legal background!" As far I as I can see you're intentionally pushing misinformation now. So if you really do have the legal background you claim, explain it. Otherwise you're just continuing to pressure and idea in bad faith.


Either realize this is a group of people with a large number of informed individuals who take great care in making sure what they do on their spare time is perfectly legal. Also note that many of these people have professional lives that hinge on making sure they stay good and legal in everything of their their lively activities. Then continue to note that it is rather insulting to suggest that regular people need to be Lawyers, Police, Paralegals, Judges, or some such that has "legal background" to be able to understand law.


OR... you can always keep:

[Ricochet]

Who gives a shit about one court case, or his opinion. Do you need a PAL to own, operate or purchase and airsoft gun? How about importing or modifying? Are 30 round AR mags sold in Canada? Is it on the owner to buy a gun with too short of a barrel and then Lengthen it himself? Are airsoft guns designed to kill, or to be shot at living targets in a sports setting safely? We don't need to continually link to legislation that has been gone over and over. I'm sorry but the horse corpse is mush by now. Airsoft was legalized by the government with the specific intent of being able to own, transport and shoot at each other without the restrictions of firearms laws, unless in the event of a crime. Not a crime involving a firearm, a crime involving an airsoft gun. And why? Because when airsoft became a thing in Canada, and under the current wording and classification of our firearms laws, they were either illegal for one reason or another, or fell into grey mud. That's what he's reading, the same crap that we were moved away from so we could exist, and he's refusing to see that that's why things are different. It's been explained and showcased to him in ways a four year old would get, which means he's either a troll or suffers from a mental challenge, either IQ or disability based. It doesn't matter anymore though, I still have my guns, I can still shoot my friends legally, and he's still legally entitles to his stupid opinion. It just doesn't have an effect on the world.

[pusangani]

I bet this guy bought www.triggerlocks.ca and wants to make a quick buck by amping up the paranoia lol

[mcguyver]

There are exceptions to pointing a firearm as a crminal offence. Case in point, film, theatrical and TV production. They often use real guns as well as replicas. They point them, and even discharge blank rounds. You don't see wholesale prosecutions of armourers and actors.

The legislation is the same for them as it is for us. Much of our legislation is intent-driven, or mens rea (guilty mind). Without intent to commit a criminal act, and pointing an airsoft gun at others with the expectation of it and agreement to it, there are no laws broken.

That being said, perhaps to ensure that all parties at games understand this, waivers should be mandatory for all participants (whether armed or not) with informed consent that an airsoft gun will be pointed at you, and you accept that by participating. Also, 18+ only, as you can not get informed consent from a minor. This is to CYA and eliminate questions of intent.

[Trev140_0]

I have discussed this with a few people and the bottom line is simple.

"How would you be charged with a crime"

Period.

What circumstance would need to occur in order for something to materialize.

A better way of looking at this is simple. Say you are driving down the street speeding. You get pulled over. You happen to have a meat cleaver on the passenger seat. Or a butcher knife. Or a sword. All to be sharpened at the hardware store.

All of the above will trigger the next level.

So lets use airsoft as an example.

If you are on my field:

1) You are on private property. Property they hunt on with real guns. Not ones that shoot plastic balls.
2) Property is situated well away from roads etc. You don't step out of the car feet from a major road.
3) When you show you sign a CLEAR waiver saying what you are going to do. No "walk on people"
4) Goes with above, there are over 1,300 of these signed-most repeat
5) Game goes on and people leave with articles stowed away so as not to be on a seat like a---oh---butcher knife.

Now, lets look at this a bit different.

Say a player decides to hop on the TTC (bus/subway) to head off to his favorite walk on game. In the GTA. A lady spots a gun in 2 pieces in a big gym bag. She calls the cops at the next stop.

Woops...who is at fault? The host? The player?

This is the issue. Which is still the same as when Airsoft started.


Care and Control.

[Latvian291]

Originally Posted by Danke

Can you cut to your end game? What do you want from us?

You said you're not a troll and you came here to see our reaction. You've seen it 10 ways, all the same. Nothing has changed.

But for some some reason you can't understand the replies. You're getting frustrated because no one is agreeing with your vague and veiled posts.

So what's the deal? Some new group we should send membership fees to who will "fight for airsoft"? Some existing group?

Cards on the table time I think.

I'd like to see the response from CameronSS, master troll.

[Ricochet]

There are a number of ways to get yourself in trouble with an airsoft gun, not all of them criminal, and not all criminal actions will result in a firearms related charge. You'd pretty much have to use your airsoft gun as a firearm or in a way people would believe it to be a firearm, for a firearm related charge to be used. For instance, hitting someone over the head with an airsoft gun isn't the same as hitting someone over the head with a firearm, unless you threatened them at gunpoint first. Assault, assault with a weapon, whatever, but carrying an airsoft gun into public transit, assuming it's within a bag or something, isn't illegal, albeit kind of stupid. Stealing an airsoft gun isn't stealing a firearm, yet it's a criminal charge. It is up to the court to decide the crime, the intent and the guilt of each individual and their actions. Robbing a store with an airsoft gun can instill the same amount of fear and have the same effect as using a real firearm, hence why airsoft guns are considered firearms for some purposes of the criminal code. You have to remember that real firearms aren't necessarily illegal in public unless concealed. City bylaws and negligent behaviour aside, buying a firearm or having it repaired, then carrying it 'appropriately' to your truck to transport it home is not an offense. Taking it to dinner with you may get you a psych exam, among other possible charges, and walking home the long way from hunting and you may get a talking to.

[podpharmer]

Originally Posted by mcguyver

There are exceptions to pointing a firearm as a crminal offence. Case in point, film, theatrical and TV production. They often use real guns as well as replicas. They point them, and even discharge blank rounds. You don't see wholesale prosecutions of armourers and actors.

The legislation is the same for them as it is for us. Much of our legislation is intent-driven, or mens rea (guilty mind). Without intent to commit a criminal act, and pointing an airsoft gun at others with the expectation of it and agreement to it, there are no laws broken.

That being said, perhaps to ensure that all parties at games understand this, waivers should be mandatory for all participants (whether armed or not) with informed consent that an airsoft gun will be pointed at you, and you accept that by participating. Also, 18+ only, as you can not get informed consent from a minor. This is to CYA and eliminate questions of intent.

police let people go all the time for minor crimes (small amount of weed for example) so by your reasoning weed is legal.

just because they don't charge someone does not mean it is not a crime, it just means its not enforced

and no i don't believe they will enforce anything against airsoft/paintball


and several people have screamed repeatedly that the new ruling has changed nothing airsoft has been firearms since 2012 (later verified as 2009). so it would be a crime to point it at someone regardless if its enforced or not. you cant have it both ways. either it was a firearm since 2012 and a crime to point, or it isnt.....so pick one

[Ricochet]

They are regarded as unregulated, not under the restrictions of firearms legislation and parts of the criminal code. The only way an airsoft gun can be considered a regulated firearm is it has a muzzle velocity exceeding 500 FPS and a kinetic force greater than 5.7 joules (that's around 700 FPS with a 0.25g round), or, it is used in a firearms related offense. If it was a fully regulated firearm then you'd need a license to buy one, not to mention all of the other regulations. If you take a piece of wood and carve it to look very similar to a firearm and give it a convincing paint job, and then rob a store with it, they may and can charge you with a firearm related offense, it doesn't have to be an airsoft gun. Do restricted and unrestricted firearms have all the same laws? No they don't, they only share the word firearm, it doesn't make them exactly the same.

[mcguyver]

Originally Posted by podpharmer

police let people go all the time for minor crimes (small amount of weed for example) so by your reasoning weed is legal.

This has nothing to do with weed.

just because they don't charge someone does not mean it is not a crime, it just means its not enforced

It is not about whether charges are laid. I am stating that it is not a crime to begin with.

and no i don't believe they will enforce anything against airsoft/paintball

Correct, because there is no crime.

and several people have screamed repeatedly that the new ruling has changed nothing airsoft has been firearms since 2012 (later verified as 2009).

Correct

so it would be a crime to point it at someone regardless if its enforced or not.

No. There are exceptions as listed above

you cant have it both ways.

The FA is full of exceptions.

either it was a firearm since 2012 and a crime to point, or it isnt.....so pick one

You are implying that all airguns are firearms all the time for all purposes, with no exceptions. The law says otherwise. You apply the correct exceptions for the correct items at the correct time.

This has been covered ad nauseum here.

Some of us have been doing this for awhile.

[podpharmer]

Originally Posted by mcguyver

This has nothing to do with weed.

Thanks tips, it was just an example of something that is illegal and not enforced to counter your point that something must be legal because people are not being charged.

Originally Posted by mcguyver

There are exceptions to pointing a firearm as a crminal offence. Case in point, film, theatrical and TV production. They often use real guns as well as replicas. They point them, and even discharge blank rounds. You don't see wholesale prosecutions of armourers and actors.

[RainyEyes]

Originally Posted by podpharmer

Thanks tips, it was just an example of something that is illegal and not enforced to counter your point that something must be legal because people are not being charged.

oh my god there's another one
remember don't feed the trolls

[Dynamo]

can this thread be closed already? do we really need more know nothing know it alls fanning the flames of ignorance in here?

[Cliffradical]

No, I'm fine with this. Every time Mr. Schutzstaffle comes in here and loses an argument, another droog comes out of the woodwork to back him, and it's both entertaining and sweet.

[Cameron SS]

Originally Posted by mcguyver

There are exceptions to pointing a firearm as a crminal offence. Case in point, film, theatrical and TV production. They often use real guns as well as replicas. They point them, and even discharge blank rounds. You don't see wholesale prosecutions of armourers and actors.

The legislation is the same for them as it is for us. Much of our legislation is intent-driven, or mens rea (guilty mind). Without intent to commit a criminal act, and pointing an airsoft gun at others with the expectation of it and agreement to it, there are no laws broken.

That being said, perhaps to ensure that all parties at games understand this, waivers should be mandatory for all participants (whether armed or not) with informed consent that an airsoft gun will be pointed at you, and you accept that by participating. Also, 18+ only, as you can not get informed consent from a minor. This is to CYA and eliminate questions of intent.

The film industry is an example of inconsistent enforcement, not legality. I have limited experience working with the film industry, but the one film I did work on, all of the firearms were deactivated, and therefore not firearms at all, and not subject to any gun control legislation. Many of the technical staff and assistant directors did complain that that Canadian gun laws made working with replicas and blanks a huge hassle, to the point where they decided not to bother, and edit in all the gun effects during post production.

There are many crimes, referred to as strict liability offences, where there is a limited requirement for intent. True crimes, like murder, require an intent to perform that act that results in death, and an intent to CAUSE the death.

Strict liability offences only require the intent to perform the act. Virtually all charges of recklessness and negligence are strict liability offences, because based on the definition of the crime, you can't have a 'guilty' mind if you just weren't thinking about what you are doing. Most firearms offences are considered quasi-regulatory, and are strict liability offences. The offence of pointing a firearm does not require intent to cause harm or to "commit a criminal act". The only intent the crown needs to prove, is the intent to actually point the firearm. This has been affirmed in dozens of superior court rulings over the last 30 years.

Originally Posted by Latvian291

I'd like to see the response from CameronSS, master troll.

I'm certainly starting to feel like a troll. No real end game. There certainly isn't any prize. As I said at the outset, I came here to inform myself, share my opinion, and gauge the opinions of the airsoft community as they relate to this ruling.

I certainly can understand the replies, well, most of them anyways. While I do not agree with all of them, we can all say that. To the extent that precious few of the comments here demonstrated even a working knowledge of Canadian law, those were the comments I was looking for. After 179 posts I still haven't seen anyone post a relevant legal opinion quoting any law showing what happened in 2012 to create the current understanding of laws relating to airsoft. That's disappointing.

Its only a little bit concerning to see how many people refer to information posted on the internet by the RCMP, an organization with a strong track record for getting it wrong, as legal advice. I've critized these sources repeatedly, quoted actual law that contradicts that opinion, and provided other examples of when the RCMP got it wrong, and no one has responded or seriously challenged that information.

The Airsoft Canada threat on the current status of airsoft guns in Canada says, and I quote "The website reference in question does not accurately reflect the existing Firearms Act and its related regulations." That was posted back in 2003, and while the law has changed, the validity of RCMP news bulletins has not.

I'm not frustrated. Its the internet. I expected disagreement. Not sure what is vague or veiled about my posts. I think I have gone out of my way to be as clear as possible as to the basis of my beliefs.

Are there any groups who fight for airsoft on a political/legal basis? If there isn't, its not a bad idea to start one.

Cards on the table? I am here for personal interest. I have several friends who are airsofters that are completely clueless as to how the law the works and how it relates to airsoft, and have no clue the significance of anything except for what they read on that highly trust worthy news source: the internet.

I guess after all this, if I had to have a purpose, it would be to issue a warning that would largely fall on deaf ears. I've already said as much in previous posts, so I won't bother to repeat it.

Originally Posted by podpharmer

police let people go all the time for minor crimes (small amount of weed for example) so by your reasoning weed is legal.

just because they don't charge someone does not mean it is not a crime, it just means its not enforced

and no i don't believe they will enforce anything against airsoft/paintball

and several people have screamed repeatedly that the new ruling has changed nothing airsoft has been firearms since 2012 (later verified as 2009). so it would be a crime to point it at someone regardless if its enforced or not. you cant have it both ways. either it was a firearm since 2012 and a crime to point, or it isnt.....so pick one

I agree with this post 110%.

I still haven't really seen what happened to make airsoft firearms since 2012, or 2009. Someone writing a masters thesis, does not a law make.

Originally Posted by Ricochet

They are regarded as unregulated, not under the restrictions of firearms legislation and parts of the criminal code. The only way an airsoft gun can be considered a regulated firearm is it has a muzzle velocity exceeding 500 FPS and a kinetic force greater than 5.7 joules (that's around 700 FPS with a 0.25g round), or, it is used in a firearms related offense. If it was a fully regulated firearm then you'd need a license to buy one, not to mention all of the other regulations. If you take a piece of wood and carve it to look very similar to a firearm and give it a convincing paint job, and then rob a store with it, they may and can charge you with a firearm related offense, it doesn't have to be an airsoft gun. Do restricted and unrestricted firearms have all the same laws? No they don't, they only share the word firearm, it doesn't make them exactly the same.

"Unregulated firearm" is not a term found anywhere in law. This is a discussion about law. I'm not sure why you keep using this term. All objects, once they have been determined to meet the legal definition of firearm, are subject to regulation under the law. Of course not all firearms are treated the same, but that has never been disputed.

Several people here have pointed out that there are exceptions in the criminal code which apply to certain firearms, including airsoft guns, that exempts them from licensing and a few other requirements, but has them treated as firearms at all other times.

The belief that its only a firearm if its used in a crime would be circular reasoning, and is expressly what the Ontario Court of appeal ruled against. Things that aren't inherently firearms BECOME firearms when used as such in an offence. Things that ARE inherently firearms, as the 2013 ONCA ruling said included anything shooting over 214 fps, is a firearm all the time, and subject to the full body of laws for weapons and firearms. S 84(3) lists the exemptions for airsoft guns. Transportation, Magazines, pointing, concealing, etc are not among the things airsoft guns APPEAR to be exempted from.

Bottom line: Ontario Court of appeal said an airsoft gun is always a firearm.

After reviewing all your posts, you have been pretty consistent in indicating that there are no storage or transportation requirements for airsoft, yet there seems to be some disagreement on that from other members here. Can you clarify if airsoft guns are subject to storage/transportation rules?

Originally Posted by Cliffradical

No, I'm fine with this. Every time Mr. Schutzstaffle comes in here and loses an argument, another droog comes out of the woodwork to back him, and it's both entertaining and sweet.

Schutzstaffle? That only took 179 posts. I guess Godwin was right.