Have States Started Banning Gel Blaster Sales and Use?

Gel blasters, also known as hydro blasters or gelsoft guns, are toy guns that shoot small water-filled gel balls. Marketed as a safe, painless alternative to airsoft guns, gel blasters have grown in popularity in recent years. However, some states and cities have moved to ban or restrict gel blaster sales and use due to concerns over misuse and injuries. This article examines gel blaster bans in Australia and the United States, arguments for and against restrictions, and the future of gel blaster laws.

Gel Blaster Laws in Australia

The most prominent example of a gel blaster ban is in the state of Western Australia. In July 2021, Western Australia banned the sale, possession, and use of gel blasters outside of approved venues following growing concern over their misuse.

Gel blasters had been legal in Western Australia up until this ban. However, police reported a rapid increase in gel blaster-related crimes and anti-social behavior. There were over 600 gel blaster-related offenses in the first half of 2021 alone. Police recovered hundreds of illegally modified gel blasters that closely resembled real firearms.

The WA government ultimately determined that the risk of gel blasters being misused outweighed their benefits as toys. While legal at paintball venues and private property, gel blasters are otherwise prohibited in public in Western Australia. Breaking the gel blaster ban carries fines up to AU$12,000.

Several other Australian territories and states have stopped short of an outright ban but imposed other gel blaster restrictions. Queensland implemented gel blaster laws in 2019 requiring permits to possess certain high-powered gel blaster models. New South Wales classified gel blasters as firearms, mandating registration and safe storage. South Australia prohibits possessing a gel blaster in public or unsafely storing one.

Gel Blaster Regulations in the United States

Gel blasters are generally legal across most of the United States. They are not considered firearms under federal law, since they use water and gel balls rather than gunpowder. However, a patchwork of state and local laws restrict gel blasters to varying degrees.

State-Level Gel Blaster Laws

Very few states have enacted statewide gel blaster bans so far. One exception is New Jersey, which passed a law in 2020 prohibiting the sale and possession of gel blasters. Breaking this ban in New Jersey can lead to fines up to $10,000 and five years in prison.

New Jersey lawmakers cited gel blasters being increasingly used in robberies and other crimes as justification for the ban. Neighboring states like New York and Pennsylvania have introduced bills proposing similar bans, but none have become law yet. For now, gel blasters remain legal to own nearly everywhere else without a license.

Some states regulate gel blasters without banning them. A California law passed in 2022 requires all gel blasters sold there to have fluorescent coloration on the tip of the barrel. Maryland passed a similar law in 2022 mandating clearly marked gel blaster tips so they cannot be confused with real guns. A few other states are considering analogous gel blaster marking laws as well.

Local Gel Blaster Laws

Major cities have taken a lead in gel blaster regulation, even where statewide laws are absent. Chicago city ordinances ban possessing and selling any kind of replica gun that a reasonable person may mistake for a real gun. In 2021, the Chicago Police Department started confiscating gel blasters and issuing citations to sellers.

New York City explicitly prohibits gel blasters unless they have a one-inch wide orange stripe down the barrel. Philadelphia treats gel blasters as firearms, requiring permits for their possession. Washington D.C. classifies gel blasters as dangerous weapons which cannot be carried openly. Several other cities like Boston and San Francisco are eyeing similar gel blaster restrictions as well.

Gel Blaster Safety Concerns

Those advocating for gel blaster bans or stringent regulations emphasize safety issues stemming from gel blaster misuse. While supporters consider gel blasters harmless toys when used properly, critics argue the risks outweigh any benefits.

Risk of Injuries

A core concern is that gel blasters can cause injuries, especially when users modify them to shoot harder. Australia’s Queensland Police Commissioner Katarina Carroll warned that illegally modified gel blasters posed an “unacceptable risk of serious injury or death.” Some modified gel blasters shoot at more than 400 feet per second (fps), roughly 10 times faster than the stock models. At these higher speeds, gel balls can break skin and cause bleeding or bruising.

There are confirmed reports of people losing eyesight or suffering internal bleeding after being hit by souped-up gel blasters. Young children are especially vulnerable to gel blaster injuries. Queensland hospitals reported a more than tripling in eye-related admissions due to gel blasters from 2018 to 2019.

Misuse in Crimes and Threats

Another main concern is that criminals may misuse gel blasters due to their resemblance to real guns. Australian police have responded to multiple armed robberies involving gel blasters instead of actual firearms. The WA government also cited gel blasters being used to terrorize people in public before banning them.

In the US, New Jersey officials noted gel blasters being brandished in two separate armed robberies as impetus for the statewide ban. With gel blasters’ realistic designs, victims often cannot differentiate them from actual firearms when threatened.

There are also concerns over gel blasters being used to intimidate or harass people. Australian media reported multiple instances of gel blaster users firing at pedestrians from cars, for example. US cities like Chicago and Philadelphia cited gel blaster attacks on citizens as a public safety hazard.

Arguments For Gel Blaster Bans

Those in favor of banning or tightly regulating gel blasters make several arguments beyond safety concerns:

Prevent Injuries and Misuse

Proponents contend that banning gel blasters is the most effective way to curb injuries and misuse. Rather than trying to regulate gel blaster modifications and usage, imposing outright prohibitions guarantees reductions in harm according to supporters.

For example, Western Australia Police Minister Paul Papalia credited the statewide gel blaster ban with cutting gel blaster offenses by over 90% in just 5 months. He argued this rapid decline highlights the value of bans over less stringent approaches.

Protect Children

Another common argument is that gel blaster bans are necessary to protect children. Critics allege the marketing for gel blasters irresponsibly targets kids. They also emphasize that children may mistake gel blasters as toys and misuse them dangerously.

Advocates point to multiple cases of children being disciplined for bringing gel blasters to Australian schools and tout bans as preventative. Since gel blaster injuries disproportionately affect minors, banning them protects children according to supporters.

Public Safety Over Recreation

Those backing gel blaster prohibitions argue recreation is secondary to public safety. They say hobbies like gel blaster competitions need to be sacrificed if restricting access reduces injuries and crime.

Critics allege gel blaster supporters put their own enjoyment over community wellbeing. While gel blaster enthusiasts suggest regulations short of bans, advocates counter that public safety should take priority over recreation.

Arguments Against Gel Blaster Bans

Those against banning or heavily regulating gel blasters offer several counterarguments:

Gel Blasters Are Safe When Used Properly

Opponents stress that gel blasters are not inherently dangerous, but only pose risks when users modify them or misuse them. They argue properly used gel blasters have an excellent safety record.

For instance, a leading Australian gel blaster seller emphasized over 100,000 gel blasters sold nationwide caused few verified injuries when following guidelines. Enthusiasts argue banning all gel blasters is an overreaction given their high degree of safety with responsible use.

Focus on Misuse, Not Possession

Critics contend prohibiting possession of gel blasters misses the point. They say bans take away gel blasters from law-abiding owners rather than targeting illegal misuse.

Opponents argue for cracking down directly on illegal modifications and negligent or criminal misuse without preventing responsible owners from enjoying gel blasters. For example, many suggest increased fines for gel blaster crimes rather than possession bans.

Regulations Preferable to Bans

Rather than outright bans, many argue that strong regulations strike a better balance. Rules requiring registration, safe storage, and limiting public brandishing allow responsible use while deterring misuse according to critics.

Opponents point to states like New South Wales that tightly regulate gel blasters without banning them. They say effective regulations minimize safety risks but let Australians responsibly own gel blasters.

Economic Harm

Banning gel blasters affects small businesses and the wider industry according to critics. Australia’s gel blaster business is estimated to be worth $90 million annually. An outright ban damages manufacturers, sellers, and proponents claim thousands of jobs.

Gel blaster industry advocates argue that with proper regulation, gel blaster businesses can operate safely. Bans unnecessarily harm these companies for little added public safety benefit in their view.

The Future of Gel Blaster Laws

The debate over gel blaster laws boils down to balancing public safety against recreation. More regions may restrict gel blasters to curb misuse. However, total bans are unlikely to proliferate given countervailing pressures. The future of gel blaster laws depends on several key factors.

Regional Differences

Each jurisdiction has its own context, so gel blaster laws will vary across the US, Australia, and other countries. Western Australia banned gel blasters in response to a surge in crimes, but such problems are less acute elsewhere currently. Areas with rampant issues may ban gel blasters, while others implement lighter restrictions.

Responsible Use Recognition

Gel blaster advocates are promoting safe practices to underscore that gel blasters are not intrinsically dangerous. Guidelines include registration, licensing, avoiding modifications, and proper storage. If gel blaster fans demonstrate they can self-regulate, governments may see bans as excessive.

Business Lobbying

As gel blasters gain popularity, they become a lucrative market. The growing gel blaster industry will likely lobby against outright bans given the economic stakes. With business influence, policymakers may balance public safety with protecting this emerging sector.

Legal Challenges

Court cases will also shape gel blaster laws. Several Australian sellers are already challenging local bans. US gun rights organizations may contest bans as well. If courts overturn prohibitions, it could dissuade wider crackdowns.

Frequently Asked Questions

Are gel blasters banned anywhere in the US?

The only state with a total ban is New Jersey. However, major cities like Chicago, Washington DC, New York City, and Philadelphia prohibit or heavily restrict gel blaster possession and use. So far, bans are isolated to certain states and municipalities rather than being widespread nationally.

What are common gel blaster restrictions short of bans?

Instead of outright bans, some places mandate brightly colored markings, licenses for possession, safe storage rules, and restrictions on public brandishing. Allowing gel blasters under such stricter regulations is a middle ground approach between bans and minimal oversight.

Do gel blaster bans reduce gel blaster crimes and injuries?

Proponents argue bans like Western Australia’s have rapidly decreased offenses and injuries. However, others dispute the impact or contend reductions could be achieved through other means like penalties for misuse rather than blanket prohibitions.

Why do critics say gel blaster bans are excessive?

Opponents stress that properly used gel blasters are safe and bans penalize responsible owners rather than just criminal misuse. They argue increased regulations and enforcement against modifications and misuse could address concerns without preventing legal possession.

Are gel blaster bans likely to spread further?

It depends on the jurisdiction, but nationwide bans are unlikely since many view that as excessive. More local bans in problematic areas may occur. But with industry opposition and legal challenges, an outright prohibition in every state seems improbable. The trend will likely be toward greater regulation without banning possession everywhere.

What precautions can make gel blaster use safer?

Safety tips include using gel blasters only on private property or designated fields, wearing protective eyewear, avoiding any modifications, safely storing them, reporting illegal use, properly marking gel blasters with bright colors, and supporting reasonable regulations. Responsible use is key to demonstrating gel blasters do not need to be banned outright.

Could governments mandate safety training for gel blaster owners?

Some jurisdictions could consider requiring safety courses and licenses to own certain gel blaster models, similar to gun licenses. Proper use training would ensure owners understand how to handle gel blasters safely. This regulatory approach allows ownership while reducing misuse risks.

How could gel blaster laws balance recreation and public safety?

Combining registration, mandatory training, safe storage rules, increased penalties for misuse, and limits on public brandishing in public could allow enjoyment of gel blasters while deterring injuries and crimes. With common-sense regulation rather than outright bans, policymakers can accommodate both recreation and community safety.