How to amend Firearms Act to give NSW Gel Blasters?

So I’ve been looking at the legislation in NSW for Firearms and why they technically classify a gel blaster as a firearm, and I think it wouldn’t be too hard to come up with an amendment which could then be shopped around to politicians to try to get them to pass it.

air ■■■ means a ■■■ that:
(a) can propel, or is designed to propel, a projectile:
(i) by means of any gas or mixture of gases, including air but not including
a gas or mixture of gases generated by an explosive, or
(ii) by means of a spring, and
(b) is operated or designed for operation by means of a trigger or similar device.
■■■■■■■■■■ includes:
(a) any article consisting of a cartridge case fitted with a primer and a projectile, or
(b) any article consisting of a cartridge case fitted with a primer and containing a
propelling charge and a projectile, or
© blank cartridges, airgun pellets, training cartridges or gas cartridges, or
(d) any other article prescribed by the regulations for the purposes of this

So realistically, there’s two ways to change this so gel blasters are not classified as air ■■■■.

Simply changing the word “projectile” to “air ■■■ pellets” would mean a gel blaster is not an airgun because is doesn’t propel air ■■■ pellets.

We could also add a definition of gel blaster to the act, and then simple add

Blockquote and
(e) is not a gel blaster under the definition of a gel blaster

And then define a gel blaster in the legislation.

Just not sure how to define a gel blaster with technical details though.

1 Like

I was under the impression that they were only illegal because they fall under the replica firearms law.
That being because gel balls do not count as ammunitions.
That is also what takes a nerf blaster out of falling under the airgun definition


I believe they are being treated as more than the toys they legally are said to be… because the LOOK so real. Many gel blaster people are determined to make their toys as real looking as possible… and the average person in the street are terrified by them… even if neighbors see someone running around their own back yard, they will likely dial 000 and you may be visited by the local SWAT team…

We need to start making them look more unrealistic, like star wars blasters or brighter colors. On the field when playing sport with them, they can easilly be wrapped in cammo stock wrap… but in the back yard, blue, pink, orange or whatever would likely avoid the SWAT team visit…


Yes, the stupid VIC & NSW appearance laws are the main thing banning them in these states.
Not going to change any time soon either, I’m afraid.

I’m pretty sure it was because the had an “expert ballistics determination” that gel balls are ■■■■■■■■■■?

1 Like

It’s the appearance hurdle.
And then it’s the air hurdle.
Gel hurdle.
Responsible use owning hurdle.

Basic concept of a standarized appearance that gets away from looking like the real deal.
Short, medium, and long. For play.
Customize parts be, sites or wat hav you that wouldn’t detract from appearance.
Clear distinction between real deal.

Air, hav to be in a class of joule or fps.
Clear differentiation between air rifle.

Then a differentiation of gels to hard projectiles also.

A thing of classification of Adult Toy,
Not the kinky sort
Ages between 16 to 18, permit or guardian adult approval, ages under 16 no alow to own Personaly,
Use of at fields or private etc. Under supervision.


?? My head hurts after that.



to the blaster gods… that dickheads don’t cause problems with the public (media) eager to quash our sport… calmdown sf-fight killa

Dunno about praying.
Needs some action.
Who really inquire about way forward.
Or watch qld.

No, @Arty_Marty is 100% correct. It’s the replica issue for both NSW and VIC, and VICs replica licensing was only introduced a few years ago. NSW has the stupidest laws. There are also actual ■■■■ that NSW disallows that QLD couldn’t care less about E.g Tacticool, Folding Stocks, pre 1900 collector(License not even required in QLD), now I’m not 100% sure but I think NSW is even tracking ■■■■■■■■■■ purchases like SA does to attempt to prevent stockpiling.

But the main thing is, I wish those other states all the luck bringing some common sense into the firearms laws.


Replicas or not, the fire arms act simply states that a pistol has a trigger, is less than 65cm in length, uses gas or air to propel ammuniti0n. If it meets this criteria it is illegal.

Totally true, ive been sayng for as long as i can remember to make them look like toys. if this can happen we could even start getting soft air happening.

but nerf fits in this category.

you guys seen those bugassaults.
like a fly swatter killing salt shooter. that thing should probably be banned in NSW then.

I wonder if the appearance rules means that, if you get a real gn and make it look like a toy… it is no longer a real gn? … Like, put a real .22 rifel into a nerf g*n body?icon_e_ugeek laughing%20(1)

@Ben Good thing gel blasters don’t fire ammuniti0n then!
It has been ruled in an Australian court of law that a gel ball can not be classified as ammuniti0n

@Calcifer probably best not to suggest things like that. The law also states that a firearm is a firearm no matter what it looks like or what colour it is.

1 Like

The definition of ammuniti0n is what matters. It’s anything propeled by a pistol. Australian court maybe, but it depends what state you are in and the laws in that state.

True, but it seems to be a case of a ‘made up rule’ to suit THEM… very unfair. To have a rule that says if a 'non gn’ that looks like a real gn is counted as, and prosecuted as if it were real under a law that says if it looks real then it IS real.

Same as, as far as I am aware, if someone puts their hand in their pocket and pokes their finger to look like a g*n… and says “this is a stick up” is a fire arms offence.

It seems like the law could go the other way too? If someone had a real g*n that looked like a ball point pen… the most trouble they would have is trying to sign a cheque without blowing a hole in the cheque book? :rofl: