Airsoft Canada
BuyAirsoft

Go Back   Airsoft Canada > General > General
Home Forums Register Gallery FAQ Calendar
Retailers Community News/Info International Retailers IRC Today's Posts

Interesting BC Judgment on Airsoft

:

General

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old January 13th, 2012, 18:24   #1
Flashman
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Interesting BC Judgment on Airsoft

A recent BC Supreme Court judgment has made some comment on Airsoft guns vs replicas that is of some interest.

The judgment can be found at:

http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/...12BCSC0034.htm
Flashman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 13th, 2012, 18:51   #2
kalnaren
 
kalnaren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Oakville, Ontario
That was actually a pretty good read. A judge with common fucking sense.

It doesn't really mean anything for the replica vs. not replica though, just that Walsh was not a) part of any potential criminal activity committed by the importer, and b) Walsh felt airsoft guns were legally imported and legal to sell, and thus did not form any intent to circumvent the law in selling airsoft guns.
__________________

Quote:
"Someone in a Prius tried to race me at a stop sign the other day. I couldn't believe it. I had him for the first 100 feet or so but I can only walk so fast."

Last edited by kalnaren; January 13th, 2012 at 18:53..
kalnaren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 13th, 2012, 19:21   #3
Tex
 
Tex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Abbotsford, B.C.
Bout time 4-5 years is a long time to be wondering what is going to happen to you.

This is the results from a bust that took down Will from Specarms, Matt from wargames, peter kang from XP blue seas and a half dozen other names he used for his store. Few threads on here from 2008 about the bust and Wills case.
__________________
W-69

_/|
Tex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 13th, 2012, 19:37   #4
Pinard
formerly Contractor 6-8, CptPinard17eRAM
 
Pinard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Quebec, Saint-Hyacinthe
interresting read nonetheless, so is the conclusion!
__________________
Retired chairsofter
Pinard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 14th, 2012, 03:04   #5
CR0M
 
CR0M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Hamilton
I was hoping that this was going to take airsoft guns a little less out of the grey area... not really... still a bit grey... i think
CR0M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 14th, 2012, 13:50   #6
Flashman
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
The interesting part, to my mind, is the judges analysis of replica in the context of the criminal code. Although he doesn't come to a definitive conclusion his analysis and comments will be of great assistance for the next time this matter is before the courts.

Last edited by Flashman; January 14th, 2012 at 14:07..
Flashman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 14th, 2012, 14:26   #7
Styrak
 
Styrak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Saskatoon, SK
Send a message via MSN to Styrak
Quote:
Originally Posted by CR0M View Post
I was hoping that this was going to take airsoft guns a little less out of the grey area... not really... still a bit grey... i think
This had.....nothing to do with changing the legality or definition of airsoft guns.
__________________

Airsoft Sales and Repair/Upgrade Services
Styrak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 14th, 2012, 17:50   #8
McKee
Merica'
 
McKee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: London, Ontario
Send a message via MSN to McKee
Interesting, but they don't ever really define if an airsoft gun is a replica or not. The defense makes some good points for them not being replicas, the crown makes some good points for them being replicas. Ultimately the judge acquitted Walsh based on his ignorance of Tickells actions and the circumstances he imported the guns under. The true case that would set a precedent regarding Airsoft would be Tickell's judgement (assuming he was charged.)
__________________
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side" - Han Solo

Commanding in Airsoft
McKee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 14th, 2012, 18:43   #9
Death March
 
Death March's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Manitoba
I belive they said it is a replica in part 36-37 "Evidence to establish whether the devices are replica firearms" in the terms of the Criminal code no? Still alot of smoke around this issue and it just kinda seems the Judge was having a goodday
__________________
Death Before Dishonor" Bleeding Black Label"
Death March is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 14th, 2012, 23:22   #10
Brian McIlmoyle
8=======D
 
Brian McIlmoyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Toronto
A large portion of this decision turns on the definition of "Replica Firearm"

This judge has clearly handed down a decision that airsoft guns in general do not in his opinion meet that test.

Prior decisions have not to my knowledge brought into contention the requirement that in order for an object to be a replica firearm, it must also replicate the internal mechanism of a firearm.

The transfer of prohibited devices charges turn specifically on the defining of airsoft guns as Replica Firearms.

These charges were thrown out because in this judges opinion airsoft guns "fail miserably" to be replicas of firearms.

This is a very important decision.. and if not appealed could substantially change the status of airsoft guns in Canada.
__________________
Brian McIlmoyle
TTAC3 Director
CAPS Range Officer
Toronto Downtown Age Verifier

OPERATION WOODSMAN

If the tongue could cut as the sword does, the dead would be infinite
Brian McIlmoyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 15th, 2012, 00:36   #11
MaciekA
 
MaciekA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian McIlmoyle View Post
These charges were thrown out because in this judges opinion airsoft guns "fail miserably" to be replicas of firearms.

This is a very important decision.. and if not appealed could substantially change the status of airsoft guns in Canada.
Would you be able to speculate on what the necessary mechanism would be for this decision (if, as you say, not appealed) to actually go about changing the status of airsoft guns in Canada? Would it be other cases of litigation using this case as a precedent? Bills being written? etc?

I guess what I am asking is... Should the outcome of this case serve to embolden various participants in the airsoft ecosystem to push the envelope further and "bring on the heat" to test where the limits of the law lie now, or is that crazy talk? Since it sounds crazy to me, how does one get laws actually written/edited/removed without stirring up trouble or unwanted attention?

As an example of one outcome I'd like to see if the replica designation was dropped: At the moment one of the biggest pain points for businesses and players alike in Canada is the legal document that often gets posted around here as a PDF link which serves to make airsoft importation so difficult and makes some "game legal" guns into not-precisely-legal-in-the-eyes-of-the-law (opaque guns, velocity minimums, etc). I think it would improve matters somewhat if even that one aspect was revised, due to airsoft rifles not being considered replicas anymore and potentially not being subject to the velocity minimums. This would have good effects on the importation pipeline -- no more custom homologation for Canadian specs on the exporter's side -- potentially bringing down costs and improving import times for retailers, allowing some retailers to ramp up their imports through their US partners, realizing some economies of scale.. etc.

Crazy talk?
__________________
"Mah check"

Now you know

MaciekA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 15th, 2012, 00:50   #12
Flashman
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
We are a common law jurisdiction which means that court judgments in addition to the statutes and regulations form the law
Flashman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 15th, 2012, 03:40   #13
Death March
 
Death March's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Manitoba
I know the laws are different,but this might have some relation to them banning the WE M4's in the U.S.? Kinda fits as to what the Judge was saying in regaurds to the inernals and would make some sense about there worries of being able to fire a live round??
__________________
Death Before Dishonor" Bleeding Black Label"
Death March is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 15th, 2012, 04:19   #14
Fuzzy
 
Join Date: May 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian McIlmoyle View Post

These charges were thrown out because in this judges opinion airsoft guns "fail miserably" to be replicas of firearms.

This is a very important decision.. and if not appealed could substantially change the status of airsoft guns in Canada.
Actually, the charges were thrown out because the Crown failed to establish the requisite mental element required for the criminal code offenses.

Despite a lengthy discussion of whether airsoft guns are replicas, the judge ultimately avoided making a decision in this regard and relied upon the mental aspect, "intent".

The is a lower court decision in BC. Courts do not have to follow this decision. It is mildy pursuasive in BC and less so in other provinces. For this reason it may better for Airsoft if the crown tried to appeal this case. A win (for airsoft) in the court of appeal will carry much more weight.

Last edited by Fuzzy; January 15th, 2012 at 05:00..
Fuzzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 15th, 2012, 04:36   #15
Fuzzy
 
Join Date: May 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaciekA View Post
Would you be able to speculate on what the necessary mechanism would be for this decision (if, as you say, not appealed) to actually go about changing the status of airsoft guns in Canada? Would it be other cases of litigation using this case as a precedent? Bills being written? etc?

I guess what I am asking is... Should the outcome of this case serve to embolden various participants in the airsoft ecosystem to push the envelope further and "bring on the heat" to test where the limits of the law lie now, or is that crazy talk? Since it sounds crazy to me, how does one get laws actually written/edited/removed without stirring up trouble or unwanted attention?
You are asking how the codified laws (statutes and regulations) can be changed based on court decisions.

Short answer is they don't. Court decisions are the court interpretation of the laws to a particular fact scenario. They basically give meaning to the statute. As stated by a previous poster, the case law will together with statutes and regulation form the body of law in Canada.

The statute would only change if parliament was really not happy with a court decision (ie different policy) or if the statute was unconstitutional.

A third option (and the only option for you) would be to contact your MP and see if they would proceed with a private members bill to change the firearms act to specifically exclude airsoft guns. Firearms are touchy subjects so it may be difficult to find someone willing to go to bat for you. Private members bills are also rarely passed.

Last edited by Fuzzy; January 15th, 2012 at 13:03..
Fuzzy is offline   Reply With Quote
ReplyTop


Go Back   Airsoft Canada > General > General

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Airsoft Canada
BuyAirsoft

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:26.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.