The problem with that is normal people don’t know what the fuck a Sig 552, or HK 416 is, they just see a big black gun and think HOLY SHET!
1 Like
That’s the point of the already existing gun laws that have been around for decades.
If you take an item that looks like a firearm and use it in a threatening or illegal manner to cause fear, the laws already covering this offence despite Gelblasters even existing when those laws were written.
Hence why I simply can’t understand that special new laws had to be put in place to relate to the banning of Gelbasters specifically… because the laws were already in place to be able to prosecute any person using a replica firearm for illegal purposes anyway 
2 Likes
Politicians only respond to bad press.
A great tool to fan the flames of fear into the uneducated public to make themselves look better 
They had to do it here as crims were getting thrown out of court as there was no law to convict using a toy. Now that they are classed as firearms those laws apply.
A QPol member once explained it to me this way, and I checked online a while back about prohibited weapons up here. What I got from it was that it comes down to the use of the item, not the item itself.
So, for example, it’s perfectly legal to own a rolling pin. If you then take that rolling pin and bludgeon someone to death with it, it becomes an offensive weapon and therefore becomes illegal because of the use you put it to. The charge then is for the crime, not possesion of the rolling pin.
Which is why up here replicas are unregulated and gel blasters are legal. Same for items like Japanese swords, Viking axes and so on. Fine to own and display, but use it in a criminal manner and you get the book thrown at you, which is as it should be. Rob a business with a replica pistol, it’s treated as real by the courts.
I get that it’s frustrating for the police when criminals walk out of courts because of a “toy” loophole. But the lawmakers and politicians should be addressing the loopholes rather than blanket banning or over regulating an item that 99% of it’s owners won’t use for illegal purposes and will be responsible with.
Punishing the crime should be enough, there’s no need to ban a harmless item on the off chance that 1% of people who own it might use it illegally. That’s policing it at both ends and starts to get into the realm of “thought policing”. They take something away from you that might be used illegally because there’s a lack of faith that you’ll do the right thing.
But I’m singing to the choir here.
But they won’t, it’s too hard.
The thing with blasters was brandishing in public, causes no harm but a disturbance. Big difference if they are bludgeoned to death with it.
Got an I regret my actions and I’m sorry and on your way. Not now.
Again it comes back to every state having different laws for every damn thing. I still remember when I was on my P plates and was cruising through the blue mountains, the Fuzz pulled me over and said you’re speeding. I said ah no I’m doing the 100K/hr limit. He said no you can only do 80. I was like wtf. Different state laws.
Well said. I guess a lot of these things just comes down to who was setting the rules and how much do people now want to go back and change those rules, knowing it doesn’t really help their political campaign or whatever.
It’s like the 12-6 elbow ban, finally lifted after years of being a disqualifying move, all because some commissioner saw a brick breaking contest and this was how they did it, and they decided it was too dangerous for MMA.