What Cities Have Implemented Gel Blaster Registration Systems?

Gel blasters, also known as hydro blasters or gel ball blasters, have surged in popularity in recent years. However, ambiguity around how these toy guns should be regulated has led to a patchwork of laws across different cities and regions.

This complex legal landscape prompts the question – which cities have implemented gel blaster registration systems and what impact has this governance strategy achieved?

The Controversial Rise of Gel Blasters

Gel blasters originated in Australia in the 1980s as a safer, less painful alternative to airsoft guns for recreational combat games. Using hydrogel beads as ammunition, they quickly became popular toys. However, their rapid proliferation and resemblance to real firearms soon raised concerns.

With gel blasters largely unregulated initially, police reported an uptick in crime committed using the toys as imitation weapons. Robberies, assaults and intimidation offenses imitating firearms spiked. High-powered gel blaster models also caused eye and skin injuries at close range.

These incidents triggered calls for tighter regulations by law enforcement and local government officials in Australia. But opinions diverged on how heavily to restrict gel blasters balanced against impact on legal owners.

By the 2010s, several Australian territories classed high-fps gel blasters as firearms. New South Wales, South Australia, Queensland and Western Australia mandated registration, safe storage and age limits. But other jurisdictions like Victoria and Tasmania regulate gel blasters identically to paintball markers or even toys.

Why Does Ambiguity Around Gel Blaster Regulation Exist?

Varying classification of gel blasters stems from their niche status somewhere between harmless water guns and lethal weapons. A balancing act emerges between reasonable precautions and overzealous restrictions.

Key factors making gel blaster regulation contentious include:

• Realistic appearance – Many models visually mimic assault rifles and pistols. Modifications like metal components exacerbate verisimilitude. This facilitates gel blaster misuse in crimes. Registration can deter this by improving tracking.
• Ammo differences – Gel pellets have less injury risk than metal/plastic airsoft BBs which some consider inadequate rationale for blanket firearms classification of all gel blasters. Restrictions focused on limiting muzzle velocity may be more reasoned.
• Recreational appeal – Like airsoft and paintball, gel blasters are used heavily for legal skirmishing activities. Preventing overreach that limits recreational use is a factor in avoiding excessive regulation. Registration systems allow ownership with oversight.
• Crime statistics – Rates of gel blaster offenses compared to firearm crime informs appropriate legislative response. Low instances of gel blaster crime suggest targeted measures like increased penalties or marking requirements may suffice over universal bans.

This nuance across issues explains localized variance in how cities implement gel blaster regulation – from outright bans to virtually no restrictions.

How Australian Cities Regulate Gel Blasters as Firearms

Australian territories with the strictest gel blaster laws classify them as Category A/B firearms. This mandates registration and licensing for acquisition and possession. Let’s examine key jurisdictions:

New South Wales

In New South Wales, gel blasters are considered airguns under firearm law. Their possession requires:

• Firearms license issued by NSW Police
• Registration of each gel blaster
• Secure storage per regulations
• Medical clearance and background checks
• Minimum age 18 years

Additionally gel blasters cannot resemble military weapons – coloration must differ from real firearms. NSW has over 3,400 registered gel blaster owners as of 2021.

Queensland

Queensland similarly classifies gel blasters as weapons subject to firearm regulation. Requirements include:

• Weapons license issued by Queensland Police
• Registration for each gel blaster
• Mandated safe storage standards
• Minimum purchase age 18 years

However gel blasters are classified as Category H firearms subject to less regulation than Category A/B firearms. Global gel blaster manufacturer Gel Ball Armory is based in Queensland.

Western Australia

Western Australia prohibits gel blaster possession without a firearm license. General requirements consist of:

• Firearm license issued by WA Police
• Registration of individual gel blasters
• Storage per WA firearm regulations
• Proof of identity, residency, and age over 18

Licenses must be renewed every 5 years. Gel blaster use is only permitted on private property. WA law imposes fines up to $4000 for violations.

South Australia

South Australia classifies gel blasters as firearms, with additional specific regulations:

• Paintball marker license required for ownership
• Use only allowed at paintball fields or private property
• Gel blasters cannot resemble real guns after gun amnesty period ended
• Translucent color for trigger guards required

SA law also caps gel blaster muzzle energy at 5.7 joules for pistols and 7.5 joules for long arms. Fines up to $20,000 apply for illegal use.

Insights on Gel Blaster Registration Effectiveness

Jurisdictions categorizing gel blasters as firearms and requiring registration aim to balance oversight with individual liberties. But does registration curb crime without limiting legal use? Key impacts:

Benefits

• Registration deters criminal misuse through improved tracking and individual accountability.
• Licensing mandates safety training and background checks for owners.
• Registration allows recreational use under controlled conditions.

Drawbacks

• Regulatory burden predominantly affects law-abiding owners rather than criminals.
• Extensive registration procedures can discourage newcomers.
• Harder to enforce registration requirements on modified/homemade gel blasters.

While definitive causation is unclear, NSW police report a notable dip in gel blaster crime since its registration system rollout. However, critics argue registration focuses on law-abiding owners rather than criminals who can evade rules.

Opinions diverge on optimal gel blaster regulation – from municipal bans to unrestricted legality. Firearms-style registration occupies blended middle ground attempting to balance public safety concerns against individual liberties. This nuanced approach aims to provide oversight without prohibitive restriction.

United States Cities Implementing Gel Blaster Bans

With gel blasters still relatively new to the American market, few federal or statewide policies exist regulating their sale and use. But some cities have banned gel blasters in response to perceived public safety threats.

Detroit, Michigan

• Detroit prohibited the sale, possession and use of gel blasters in 2021.
• The ban aimed to counter use of gel blasters to commit crimes like intimidation and robbery.
• Detroit Police demonstrated the ability to easily modify gel blasters to fire live ammunition.
• Violations carry up to 90 days jail and $500 fine. Detroit authorities conduct buyback programs to collect gel blasters.

Maryland Counties

• Multiple Maryland counties including Prince George???s County and Charles County banned gel blasters in 2021.
• Gel blaster robberies and threats generated concerns about public safety risks.
• Under the bans, gel blaster possession can lead to misdemeanor charges and 60-day jail sentence.
• These bans apply to projectile gel blaster toys and water bead blasters. Airsoft guns remain legal with coloration requirements.
• Gun rights groups oppose the bans as overreaching restrictions against legitimate gun owners.

Are Complete Bans on Gel Blasters Justified?

US cities banning gel blasters aim to eliminate perceived threats to public safety they can pose in criminal hands. But are total prohibitions defensible considering drawbacks?

Arguments Supporting Gel Blaster Bans

• Eliminates ability to use gel blasters for criminal intimidation or attacks.
• Removes risk of injuries from gel blaster misuse.
• Simple to enforce as all gel blaster possession becomes illegal.

Reasons Questioning Justification of Total Bans

• Mainly restricts legal recreational use with minimal impact on criminal misuse.
• Criminals may simply substitute gel blasters for other imitation firearms.
• Enforcement diverts police resources away from violent crimes involving actual guns.
• More reasonable regulation targeting specific risks may suffice.

While gel blaster bans arise from reasonable public safety objectives, total prohibition could excessively limit personal liberties of responsible owners. Alternate approaches like enhanced penalties for criminal misuse or marking/coloration requirements may achieve benefits with less imposition on legal use.

United Kingdom – Implementing Reasonable Restrictions Over Bans

The United Kingdom regulates gel blasters distinctly from airsoft guns and firearms. Rather than bans or registration mandates, the UK applies targeted restrictions grounded in differentiation according to risk levels.

Key Gel Blaster Regulations

• Classified as low-powered air weapons distinct from firearms.
• Exempt from explicit age limits or licensing requiring only retailer due diligence.
• Permitted for use on private property with owner consent.
• Must comply with VCRP coloration requirements and maximum legal muzzle energy (1.3 joules for pistols, 2.5 joules for long guns).
• Subject to standard firearm prohibitions on public brandishing.

This approach limits excessive restriction of gel blasters based on lower objective risk assessments specific to their ballistic performance. UK regulations balance public safety with recreational hobbyist liberties through a proportionate framework.

Implementing Gel Blaster Registration – Striking a Reasonable Balance

Approaches to regulating gel blasters vary widely across different cities and countries. Opinions diverge around appropriate policy calibration to address public risks without overreach against lawful owners.

Key considerations for reasoned gel blaster regulation include:

• Evaluating specific risks based on injury data, crime statistics, and ballistic performance.
• Targeting demonstrable harms from criminal misuse through marking requirements or enhanced penalties.
• Limiting restrictions on low-risk recreational use by legal owners.
• Considering feasible enforcement burdens on officials and gun owners.
• Allowing forms of non-criminal ownership through conditional registration models.

An emerging consensus holds outright prohibition as unbalanced against lawful gel blaster owners. But absence of any oversight poses risks from criminal misuse. Conditional registration can potentially strike a functional compromise – enhancing safety through accountability while permitting legal ownership.

As gel blasters proliferate worldwide, more cities will grapple with formulating policies balancing public risk management against individual liberties. Registration arguably provides a measured middle path. While debate continues around appropriate safeguards, blanket bans seem increasingly draconian considering gel blasters’ recreational appeal and niche risks contrasting firearms lethality.

With sound rationale and prudent enforcement, registration mandating safety procedures could facilitate lawful gel blaster ownership under controlled conditions. However achieving this balance remains nuanced given the complex factors around realistic appearance, injury potential, and use prevalence specific to gel blasters. Striking the right policy balance ultimately requires assessing these factors relative to a jurisdiction’s sociocultural values and preexisting firearm laws.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which cities in the US have banned gel blasters?

While no federal US laws exist regulating gel blasters, a few cities have implemented local bans. Detroit and some Maryland counties prohibit gel blaster sale, ownership and use citing concerns about potential misuse in crimes.

What requirements exist in Australian states mandating gel blaster registration?

Australian states classifying gel blasters as firearms require police-issued firearm licenses, individual registration of each gel blaster, safe storage compliance, background checks, and minimum age limits of 18 years in most regions.

Could registration requirements spread to more US states in the future?

As gel blasters become more prevalent across the US, more states may consider establishing registration systems if instances of criminal misuse escalate. However political will for additional gun regulations in the US remains low.

Are DIY homemade gel blasters subject to the same laws?

Regulations often focus on manufactured gel blasters, but homemade models typically fall under similar restrictions on possession and use if they achieve comparable functionality. However enforcement is more challenging for DIY gel blasters.

Why are complete bans on gel blasters criticized by some groups?

While improving public safety, critics argue blanket bans excessively prohibit lawful uses by responsible owners. Reasonable regulation targeting criminal abuses may provide sufficient protections according to opponents of outright bans.