Airsoft Laws

[Andres]

Originally Posted by The Saint

it's illegal to import blowpipes.

How about reinforced straws?

[The Saint]

Originally Posted by Andres

How about reinforced straws?

I think CSBA will probably require you to prove at a CITT hearing that you need the extra structural integrity in order to suck eggs through the straw.

[Andres]

I think I've been through something like that before, except it involved straps and I was blind folded.

[mcguyver]

Originally Posted by The Saint

Wait, what McGuyver? The loophole is that airsoft guns as replica firearms aren't illegal to possess.

No, the loophole is that airsoft guns are not explicitly declared as replicas, except for about a dozen or so SPECIFIC makes and models. That's why the CFC lists the "case by case" qualification in all their facts sheets, etc.

As Brian has said, replicas are illegal to possess (unless you can prove you bought it prior to Jan. 1/98), sell or otherwise traffic. There is absolutely nowhere in the CCC that states that airsoft guns, including make and model as required for real firearms, are in fact replicas. There is certain case law for certain guns, namely WA M92 and KSC MAC 11 to be specific. That's why you would need to be charged and have a judge or tribunal of the CITT to rule on the status of a SPECIFIC gun.

Whatever the CBSA states when they seize your gun is irrelevant. They do not write law, they only interpret it and make policies for their used based on their interpretations. You can fight them and win, but it is a long and expensive fight and hardly worth the effort for an individual who gets a $300 pistol seized. This inability for them to act outside the confines of a simple seizure is what allows us to keep purchasing from retailers without fear of having the RCMP knock on your door.

This is our only loophole and the only reason we still have a sport at all.

[The Saint]

Originally Posted by mcguyver

As Brian has said, replicas are illegal to possess (unless you can prove you bought it prior to Jan. 1/98), sell or otherwise traffic. There is absolutely nowhere in the CCC that states that airsoft guns, including make and model as required for real firearms, are in fact replicas. There is certain case law for certain guns, namely WA M92 and KSC MAC 11 to be specific. That's why you would need to be charged and have a judge or tribunal of the CITT to rule on the status of a SPECIFIC gun.

I think the major difference in interpretation between you and me just further highlight the ridiculous status quo. My interpretation is that according to the definition given for replica firearms in the CCC, it's basically impossible for airsoft guns to be classified as anything else. Ruling from the CITT supports my position, IMO, because of their overall track record of dismissing appeals based on resemblance first and foremost, ie. replica firearms. Every case I've read mentions brands and models only in reference to the issue of resemblence.

Why do we get guns through still and haven't had a general crackdown on all airsoft in Canada? IMHO, it's nothing to do with definition of airsoft as (or not as) replica firearms. I think it's because, one: to do so is a criminal court affair. If they hit airsoft, we can argue from a pretty strong position that they'd have to follow suit with all replica firearms in Canada, ex. every toy gun that changed hands since 1998. CITT like to argue that it's not a court of equity, I'd like to see the supreme court argue the same thing. If the police and courts come after us, whether we want to or not, all the aforementioned Crosman pellet gun silliness and even those dollar store cap guns can be dragged into a fight we haven't seen since C-68.

Secondly, very much related to the first, control of the importation and sale of replica firearm is highly dependent on successfully arguing legitimate purpose. It's easier for CITT to block importation because that's fairly limited compared to the criminal courts arguing that it's illegal to own anything that resemble real guns. That'll lead into the truely grand issue of whether we want to be a society that outlaws toy guns.

[mcguyver]

Interpretation is the key. It's not what the interpretation is, but who interprets and for what purpose.

Remember the 407 fps bullshit? Well, who's job was that to interpret and what did it really do? It protects Crosman and Daisy and their viable and large market for pellet guns. When we tried to use it, many had the door slammed in their face, quite literally.

And yet there are others very openly on this forum who argue that there is no problem at all. They've driven many guns across the border with the the blessing of the CBSA.

So, therein lies our problem. One agent in Vancouver can cripple airsoft importation on the west coast, while another one on the border in Ontario could care less.

[Zircarg]

I am not an airsofter. I wanted a realistic pistol to target shoot in my basement/backyard and so came across an on-line Canadian retailer. I ordered a KJW Beretta M9 Elite, all metal, gas blow-back model.

I subsequently started reading the posts on this site (because I thought that airsoft sounded really cool) and all of the controversy scared me out of my wits - I was afraid I had done something illegal. I emailed the local RCMP and they said they'd look into my concern. That was Monday - haven't heard back - gun comes this Tuesday. I have 48 hours to return the pistol when received. The retailer said he'd take it back...but I really don't want to if I don't have to.

I find it astounding that if truly illegal, an uninformed individual like myself can easily acquire a so-called 'illegal' firearm from a Canadian retailer and walk off into oblivion with it.

I could get myself a restricted firearms license, buy a real pistol and go down to the local shooting range...but still couldn't fiddle at home with a BB gun incapable of causing any real harm.

It just doesn't add up.

[Andres]

You can purchase Airsoft without a license.

[The Saint]

Originally Posted by Andres

You can purchase Airsoft without a license.

It'd be more accurate to say that there's no licence that's really guaranteed to add legitimacy to your acquisition of airsoft guns.

Personally Zircarg, I'd enjoy your new GBB and forget about the law. Don't plink outside, don't let strangers know you have it, and it'll be a non-issue like it is for the vast majority of us.

[Andres]

Originally Posted by The Saint

It'd be more accurate to say that there's no licence that's really guaranteed to add legitimacy to your acquisition of airsoft guns.

Or that too...

[Brian McIlmoyle]

not surprising as it is that confusion that continues to allow us to purchase airsoft guns and use then responsibly.

The fact is that every airsoft gun would likely be found to be a replica if tested in court.

However this would not mean that everyone who also possessed that particular model would aslo be in possession of a replica... unless their specific gun was also tested.

So you pretty much have to commit a crime with your guns to end up having a replica firearm definition stick.

The existing laws do not restrict possession of airsoft guns at all because airsoft guns are not defined under the law as replicas

The definition of if any particular thing is proscribed under the law is a point of law that can only be defined by a court. In the case of many firearms, they have been defined spacifically by make and model as restricted or prohibited, so their definition is established.. and no longer a point of law..but a point of fact.

Such is not the case with airsoft guns.. their definition as a class of items is a point of law, not fact.. in the eyes of the criminal court.

Of course the CBSA takes the position that all airsoft guns are replicas.. but again this does not in fact make it so.. it is an interpritation that has been tested in court in matters of importation of airsoft guns and does not affect their subsequent disposition.

So we are in the confused position of having a single object that upon importation is defined as a replica firearm... but at the moment that is comes into the possession of the importer sheads this status.. and is again undefined and remains so until again under the scrutiny of the law.. at which point it must again be defined by a court in a case by case basis.

So where does that put us as owners and purchasers?

Firmly in the so called "grey zone" Although our possession of these articles is 100% legal regarless of how we came into possession and when (as long as we are 18 and not under a possesson restriction) even if they are defined in our case as replicas. It is the
how we came into possession that could be tricky... as long as the airsoft gun remains undefined then no laws are broken.. once a gun becomes defined then everyone in the chain of possession has illegally transfered a prohibited device.

So here is the worst case scenario.

Importer A brings a gun in.. at the moment of import it is a replica. as CBSA says it is ( and has upheld enough challenges that importers agree to be bound by this definition despite it not applying as a class to all airsoft guns)
The retailer subsequently sells the gun as "an airsoft gun" to an individual who now possesses the gun legally. This person then sells the gun to a stranger.. who uses his new GLOCK to hold up a gas station.. and gets caught.. and charged with the use of a replica in a crime.. the airsoft glock is compaired to a real one and found to meet the test of being a replica.

at this point every transfer of that particular gun just became illegal and a chargeable offense of illegal transfer of a prohibited device is provable. so now instead of buying an airsoft gun from a retailer who legally imported it you purchased a replica firearm illegally, and subsequently sold a replica firearm illegaly and could be charged with 2 criminal offenses that could result in prison terms of up to 10 years.

However this does not mean that your buddy who also purchased an airsoft gun from the same retailer is in possession of a replica because his gun has not been proven to be a replica. His gun remains a legally aquired and possessed airsof gun.

This should also indicate why there are so few retailers... would you want to take the risk of selling these things to stangers knowing that every sale could potentially end up with you defending yourself from criminal charges and possibly going to jail for a $300 gun that you make $100 on?

[ArmaliteWhore]

Why does this thread exist? There's a better one stickied in General Discussion.

[Jimski]

there is no Airsoft Club.
The Airsoft club doesn't exist.

[Brian McIlmoyle]

Originally Posted by ArmaliteWhore

Why does this thread exist? There's a better one stickied in General Discussion.

Because no one bothers to read it

[The Saint]

Originally Posted by Brian McIlmoyle

However this does not mean that your buddy who also purchased an airsoft gun from the same retailer is in possession of a replica because his gun has not been proven to be a replica. His gun remains a legally aquired and possessed airsof gun.

Wouldn't the worst case scenario be the courts realizing that "airsoft" is a viable subcategory to add to replica firearms? I've got a hard time seeing them going on a model-per-model basis with this.