Canadian airsoft case law

[acorn_giblet]

Originally Posted by tunabreath

I apologize for stirring the pot some more, but the first few posts have me confused all over again...

It's stated several times that if something fires at more than 407fps, it is considered a firearm. I thought to meet the definition of a firearm, it needed both a velocity over 500fps AND a muzzle energy of 5.7 Joules.
It was my understanding that the 407fps lower limit was for defining replicas, not for defining firearms; ie, below 407fps is considered not high enough to cause significant bodily harm, ergo, it would be a replica if it meets the appearance definitions of a replica. However, if it is above 407fps, it is not yet considered a firearm.

I was under the impression that this gap was specifically to give exception to air rifles/pellet guns, and the existence of PAL rated airguns firing at or over 500fps, along with non-PAL airguns below 500fps in Canada correlates with this.

So then, are there air rifles in Canada firing below 407fps? If so, how do they avoid the replica definition? If an airsoft gun were purpose built from the manufacturer to fire between 407 and 500fps, what would it be considered?
(This shouldn't limit them to semi-auto/5 rounds because they aren't PAL classified firearms at >500fps and >5.7 Joules)

I'm basically wondering how air rifles avoid being considered replicas (notably all those CO2 NBBs), seeing as how they do look like firearms, but aren't.

I'd be interested to hear the answer to that too... I have a Umarex P99 that look almost as good as the real thing, it fires under 500fps ( around 399 if I remember correctly ) and it was bought legally without a license of any kind...

[The Saint]

Actually, just read this: http://www.airsoftcanada.com/showthread.php?t=51609

[Danke]

Say the words "I like guns" anywhere today and you'll be treated with all the respect kindness those accused of being witches were in the Dark Ages, heretics during the Inquisition and so on.

CBSA, RCMP, etc take all the items under dispute as to if they are guns or replicas and so to highest spot in the Hawaii and toss them into a volcano.

If they float above the magma they're OK to posses and are returned to the owner. If they sink and melt they were prohibited. Additional punishments may be assessed at that point also.

Make sense?

[tunabreath]

Ah, looks like I glossed over the Al Pacino part when I read HoJo's FAQ. Thanks Saint, that answers it about as well I expected anything could.