I think you're confused, because your premise doesn't lead to your conclusion at all. You're missing something in between.
Originally Posted by BloodSport
"4. Air guns that are neither firearms nor replicas
These are air guns that are not powerful enough to be classified as firearms and that do not resemble a real firearm closely enough to be considered a replica. An example would be a harmless air gun made out of clear plastic or a device that is obviously a child’s toy
Like replicas, they generally fall within the definition of an “imitation firearm” and are subject to some penalties under the Criminal Code if used to commit a crime."
The above establishes that the Cybergun Defender in question is an imitation firearm. There's no disagreement there, since that's what I've been saying all along.
Air guns do fall under the laws of legal age of purchase in this country.
That is an unsubstantiated conclusion.
In order for "air guns" to fall under the "laws of legal age of purchase" in this country, 2 things must happen.
1. Airgun in question must fall under a Canadian legal definition, being an "airgun" has no legal significance unless it corresponds to a legal definition
2. Above definition must fall under an existing legal age of purchase, being a legal definition has no legal significance unless legal control measures is explicitly stated within the definition itself or through the use of the definition in specific sections of statute, regulations or bylaw
The airgun in question is one Cybergun Defender. Through its inaccurate dimensions, transparency and low power, it is clearly established to be an imitation firearm. Number 1 is fulfilled.
Since the legal category of concern is imitation firearm, we have to look at whether any legal age restriction exist for that category only. Imitation firearm is not firearm, so any legal age restriction for firearm does not apply to imitation firearm unless otherwise indicated. Imitation firearm as it is defined in s. 84(1) of the Criminal Code includes no mentions of any control measures, including age, so any age restriction would fall upon the specific offences within the Code and specific permission-provisions of the Firearms Act.
An examination of the Criminal Code and Firearms Act would reveal that no such offences in the Code nor permission-provisions exist for imitation firearm, both on the part of the seller and buyer. Imitation firearm only appears (relevant to our study) in s. 85(2) of the Criminal Code, under Using imitation firearm in commission of offence. Since that section only applies to the use of imitation firearm as a weapon in crime, it has no bearing on legal age of purchase.
Furthermore, imitation firearm does not appear under any of the Possession Offences (s.88-98) of the Criminal Code, which is what the Firearms Act derive its legal "teeth" from when it comes to punishing non-compliance. Especially since imitation firearm is not subject to the age restriction placed on firearm, thus requiring imitation firearm to be explicitly named in relevant sections of law.
Also, any age restriction would exist in the Firearms Act, not the Criminal Code. Punishment for non-compliance of the age restrict in the Firearms Act exist in the Criminal Code. Since there is zero mention of imitation firearm in the Firearms Act, and imitation firearm doesn't share the firearm's age restriction, there is no federal age restriction on imitation firearm. Period.
An examination of provincial bylaws would reveal that such bylaw does exist, but only in Ontario. Since the device in question was purchased in BC, it is not relevant.
In conclusion, number 2 is not fulfilled as far as the item in question is concerned.