What Personal Liability Do You Face If Your Gel Blaster Causes Injury?

Gel blasters, toy guns that shoot hydrogel beads, have skyrocketed in popularity in recent years. However, with the rise of gel blasters comes the risk of injury if used irresponsibly. This article explores the personal liability you may face if your gel blaster causes harm.

Gel blasters are extremely popular as recreational “toys” for simulated combat games. However, gel blasters are capable of inflicting significant harm if misused. High velocity gel pellets can cause severe eye injuries including blindness if a person is hit in the eye at close range. Untreated eye injuries also risk infection which can further damage vision. In fact, doctors have compared gel blaster eye injuries to the harm caused by air guns and paintball guns. Unlike regular toy guns, gel blasters should not be considered suitable for unsupervised use by young children.

With great ability to cause injury comes legal responsibility. Most people assume gel blasters are harmless fun without fully realizing the safety issues. But if your gel blaster causes harm, you may be held personally liable for any resulting damages. The extent of your liability depends on factors like the severity of injury, circumstances of the incident, and applicable laws. Liability may arise from criminal charges, civil lawsuits, or both depending on the situation. Understanding the potential legal consequences is essential for gel blaster owners.

Criminal Liability for Gel Blaster Injuries

Using a gel blaster recklessly or intentionally harming someone could result in criminal charges. The specific criminal offenses and penalties vary significantly between jurisdictions based on how gel blasters are regulated under the law.

In New South Wales, Australia, for example, gel blasters are classified as firearms. Simply possessing a gel blaster publicly or privately in NSW carries severe penalties up to 14 years imprisonment. Other Australian territories classify gel blasters as toy guns but ban their use in public. As a result, injuring someone with a gel blaster in public may still lead to criminal prosecution in those jurisdictions even if possession itself is not a crime. Criminal offenses could include assault, battery, reckless endangerment etc. The more serious the injury, the harsher the potential criminal punishment. Permanently damaging someone’s vision through gel blaster misuse would be treated as a very serious crime with penalties to match.

Unlike Australia, gel blasters are unregulated at the federal level in the United States. But state and local laws restrict gel blaster possession or use in some jurisdictions like California and New Jersey. Most U.S. gel blaster injuries result in civil rather than criminal lawsuits. However, injuring someone intentionally with a gel blaster could potentially be prosecuted as assault or battery depending on the circumstances. Reckless misuse of a gel blaster resulting in severe injury may also warrant criminal charges for endangerment and negligence in some cases. In general, the greater the degree of intentional harm and recklessness, the more likely criminal liability becomes.

Parents may also be criminally responsible if their minor child injures someone with a gel blaster. Child endangerment charges are possible if parents allow unsupervised use despite the risks. Outside the home, parents must closely supervise children and ensure proper gel blaster use.

Civil Lawsuits for Gel Blaster Injuries

Injuring someone by mistake with a gel blaster likely won’t lead to criminal penalties. But victims can pursue civil lawsuits to recover compensatory damages for medical bills, lost income, and other financial impacts. The legal basis for such lawsuits is negligence – the failure to exercise reasonable care. Plaintiffs must prove:

• The defendant owed them a duty of care under the circumstances
• This duty of care was breached through negligent gel blaster use
• The plaintiff suffered actual harm and damages
• The breach of duty directly caused their injury and damages

For example, say you allow your nephew to play with your gel blaster unsupervised at a family gathering. He ends up shooting your sister Jane in the eye causing a torn cornea. Jane sues you for negligence alleging you had a duty to properly supervise gel blaster use at the event. Your breach of duty resulted in a serious eye injury needing corrective surgery and extended recovery. Jane’s damages include $15,000 in medical bills and three weeks of missed work. Your nephew’s reckless behavior also indicates negligent supervision on your part. Unless you have a convincing defense, you will likely be found liable for Jane’s damages in this scenario.

The duty of reasonable care standard applies to anyone possessing or using a gel blaster around others. Reasonable care means exercising caution appropriate for the foreseeable risk of harm. Leaving a loaded gel blaster unattended where children could access it clearly breaches reasonable care. Failing to wear eye protection when playing organized gel blaster games may also qualify as negligence if an eye injury results. Even if the victim was also negligent and ignored safety rules, the defendant can still share in liability. This concept is called comparative negligence – damages are apportioned between the plaintiff and defendant based on fault percentages. Say the victim wasn’t wearing eye protection either. The court may find you 75% at fault and the victim 25% negligent for their own injury.

Assumption of risk is a common defense in gel blaster injury lawsuits. Participants in recreational combat games assume the inherent risks of gel blaster use. But operators still owe a duty of reasonable care to minimize risks. Providing eye protection, enforcing safety rules, checking velocities, and banning head shots all demonstrate reasonable care. While plaintiffs assume risks, defendants aren’t completely absolved of negligence through liability waivers alone. Waivers provide some protection but can be voided if gross negligence is proven.

Unlike criminal law, parents face almost strict civil liability for any harm caused by their minor children. This includes gel blaster injuries. There are limited exceptions. For example, parents aren’t liable if the child disobeys clear safety instructions or uses the gel blaster without parental knowledge. But mere negligence in supervision isn’t a defense against parental liability. Say your 12-year old sneaks your gel blaster from the garage without permission while you aren’t home and injures a neighbor kid. You likely bear civil liability despite not actively enabling the behavior. Supervising children around gel blasters or securely storing them when not in use is crucial for avoiding liability.

Liability Waivers, Terms & Conditions

Many gel blaster sellers and event organizers require customers to sign waivers releasing them from liability. Waivers shift responsibility solely to the user if a gel blaster injury occurs. However, waivers have limitations and exclusions under the law. They don’t protect against damages caused by gross negligence, recklessness, or intentional wrongdoing.

For example, if a gel blaster facility allows head shots despite the risk of eye injuries, their liability waiver may provide little protection. The waiver was predicated on reasonable care being exercised. Allowing head shots would be considered reckless disregard for customer safety. Plaintiffs could argue the waiver is therefore invalid and hold the facility liable for negligence. Waivers also cannot waive liability for intentional misconduct. So if an employee deliberately misuses a gel blaster to harm someone, the waiver likely offers no shield against liability.

When purchasing a gel blaster, buyers commonly agree to terms and conditions which often include liability disclaimers. Similarly, gel blaster warranties may limit liability for injuries. While these provisions can strengthen a defense, they do not provide absolute immunity. Courts scrutinize the specific circumstances and may rule that disclaimers are unenforceable for public policy reasons. The degree of negligence and any power imbalance between the parties are also considered. But written disclaimers still carry legal weight and are preferable to having no defined terms at all.

Insurance is another option for mitigating gel blaster liability risks. Homeowners insurance usually covers injuries arising from recreational activities on one’s property. Gel blaster operators should have commercial general liability policies covering participant injuries, and require proof of insurance from any third party vendors. While insurance picks up covered defense costs and damages, premiums rise following claims so risk reduction is still imperative.

Avoiding Liability for Gel Blaster Injuries

With proper precautions, gel blasters can be used safely for recreation with minimal liability risk. Some tips for reducing legal exposure include:

• Treat gel blasters as seriously as real firearms in terms of supervision, storage, and general handling. Never allow unsupervised use by minors.
• Follow all manufacturer safety guidelines and local laws regarding gel blaster purchase, possession, and use.
• Do not modify gel blasters to increase velocity beyond the original design limits.
• Provide and mandate eye/face protection for all participants. Prohibit headshots.
• Limit gel blaster use to designated safe areas away from uninvolved bystanders. Set reasonable safety boundaries.
• Inspect gel blasters regularly for issues and maintain velocities within recommended ranges.
• Ensure gel blaster projectiles comply with safety standards and won’t cause harm if ingested. Don’t freeze ammo.
• Enforce safe gel blaster handling rules rigorously. Quickly correct any dangerous behaviors.
• Check participants’ ages and evaluate maturity levels to identify supervision needs. Keep gel blasters locked away when not in use.
• Purchase adequate insurance in case an injury occurs despite precautions. Maintain coverage for premises liability, product liability, etc.

While gel blasters can lead to serious legal liability if misused, following safety best practices, using common sense, and putting safety first allows enthusiasts of all ages to enjoy the hobby responsibly. Being informed on potential civil and criminal liability will motivate gel blaster owners to exercise caution. With greater awareness and care, we can promote safer recreation while reducing associated risks.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can you get in trouble for shooting someone with a gel blaster?

Yes, you can potentially face both criminal charges and civil liability for shooting someone with a gel blaster, especially if injury results. Reckless gel blaster use against other people constitutes assault in many jurisdictions. If injury occurs, you may be criminally charged with assault and battery. Victims can also sue for negligence and damages in civil court. It’s crucial to only shoot gel blasters at consenting participants in designated areas with protective gear.

What is the hazard of gel blaster?

Gel blasters can cause severe eye injuries and even blindness if gel pellets strike unprotected eyes. The impact can damage the cornea and retina. Although gel pellets contain water rather than paint, they still travel at sufficient velocity to potentially penetrate eye tissue if shot within 50 feet. ricochets also pose an eye hazard. Extensive bleeding, impaired vision, and infection are other potential gel blaster hazards requiring emergency medical care.

What happens if you shoot someone in the eye with a gel blaster?

Shooting someone in the eye with a gel blaster can cause blindness and permanent loss of vision. The gel pellet can rupture the cornea and damage the iris, pupil, lens, retina, and other ocular structures resulting in blindness. Aside from blindness, a gel blaster eye injury may cause bleeding inside the eye, cataracts, glaucoma, and infection. Surgery and extensive follow-up care are typically required. Victims may have vision impairment even after treatment. Firing gel pellets at the face or head is extremely dangerous and can lead to criminal prosecution and lawsuits.

Can you return a gel blaster?

Most gel blaster retailers have return policies specifying requirements for returns and refunds. Return windows are often only 5-30 days after purchase. Items must be unused and undamaged with original packaging and accessories. Restocking fees from 10-25% are common. Beyond initial return periods, warranties through manufacturers cover certain product defects – but this is different than a return. Consumers should understand gel blaster return policies before purchasing, especially since many jurisdictions prohibit returns after use. Returns ultimately depend on where the blaster was purchased.