BB Gun bill passed in the Senate

The Senate voted 25-14 Tuesday to approve Sen. Roscoe Reynolds' bill. It would allow using such pneumatic weapons when conducted with "reasonable care" to prevent firing outside of the property.

Link: http://www.wavy.com/dpp/news/politics/bill-passed-allowing-air-guns-at-homes

SB757 - Pneumatic guns; regulations, exceptions.

Passed yesterday.

TFred

Good stuff, but now on to the House and signature. Where I imagine this will have trouble is the implementation of the "reasonable care" portion to be defined differently in each county and city.

I admit that I have not been paying much attention to this, but I have a question.

The Bill states quite clearly:

E. As used in this section, "pneumatic gun" means any implement, designed as a gun, that will expel a BB or a pellet by action of pneumatic pressure. "Pneumatic gun" includes a paintball gun that expels by action of pneumatic pressure plastic balls filled with paint for the purpose of marking the point of impact.

However, my Daisy Model 111 lever action carbine BB gun is NOT pneumatic. It expels the BB with a spring plunger.



My boyhood Daisy was a pump action. Same concept: compress a spring, release a spring, expel the BB.



It would seem that these types of BB guns are not addressed in this bill.

Was that by design or by oversight?

USNA69 said:

I admit that I have not been paying much attention to this, but I have a question.

The Bill states quite clearly:

E. As used in this section, "pneumatic gun" means any implement, designed as a gun, that will expel a BB or a pellet by action of pneumatic pressure. "Pneumatic gun" includes a paintball gun that expels by action of pneumatic pressure plastic balls filled with paint for the purpose of marking the point of impact.

However, my Daisy Model 111 lever action carbine BB gun is NOT pneumatic. It expels the BB with a spring plunger.

http://www.howstuffworks.com/question649.htm

My boyhood Daisy was a pump action. Same concept: compress a spring, release a spring, expel the BB.

It would seem that these types of BB guns are not addressed in this bill.

Was that by design or by oversight?

Click to expand...

Addressed very specifically.

The type of BB gun you reference is still a pneumatic or as we used to say, an air gun.

The spring loaded piston is located inside an air tube. The piston does NOT expel the BB by striking it, but rather by forcing a column of air against the BB.

http://www.howstuffworks.com/question649.htm

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_does_the_model_99_daisy_bb_gun_work

My Face Is red

Grapeshot said:

Addressed very specifically.

The type of BB gun you reference is still a pneumatic or as we used to say, an air gun.

The spring loaded piston is located inside an air tube. The piston does NOT expel the BB by striking it, but rather by forcing a column of air against the BB.

Click to expand...

Dang!! It took me nearly 60 years to learn that.

Just goes to show ya ....

USNA69 said:

Dang!! It took me nearly 60 years to learn that.

Just goes to show ya ....

Click to expand...

I'll let you in on another secret.
Spring loaded is more powerful (Energy to expel vs Energy to expel) than pumpup pneumatics.

That's why you see the most expensive and powerful pellet guns are single cock models.

The power in those guns come from the piston superheating the column of air due to friction and why you don't oil the piston. It causes dieseling.
This is in the small bores. In the large bores, .45,.50,.62...they need to be pump up (including dive tank fill) because of the massive amount of air needed.

Lewis and Clark had a .50 pump up (Used a bellows to fill) that they used on Deer sized game.

And when the homeowners start submitting insurance claims for broken windows, the "reasonable care" concept will come under fire.

peter nap said:

The power in those guns come from the piston superheating the column of air due to friction and why you don't oil the piston.

Click to expand...

Ya, but a couple of drops of 3-in-1 oil down tube of the old Daisy made the coolest "smoke"

Lewis and Clark had a .50 pump up (Used a bellows to fill) that they used on Deer sized game.

Click to expand...

Fringe benefits: they didn't require keeping powder dry and were much quieter.

2a4all said:

And when the homeowners start submitting insurance claims for broken windows, the "reasonable care" concept will come under fire.

Click to expand...

If anyone is stupid enough to shoot out the neighbors windows...
A. They're too dumb to own any type of gun.
B. They are going to be charged with shooting into an occupied building.
C. They didn't take the time to set up a cardboard box full of newspapers with a carpet backstop.

Shooting a pellet gun safely ain't rocket science.

peter nap said:

If anyone is stupid enough to shoot out the neighbors windows...
A. They're too dumb to own any type of gun.
B. They are going to be charged with shooting into an occupied building.
C. They didn't take the time to set up a cardboard box full of newspapers with a carpet backstop.

Shooting a pellet gun safely ain't rocket science.

Click to expand...

It may be simple, but that doesn't ensure compliance. Shooting at paper targets is far less interesting than seeing if you can hit the stray cat on top of the privacy fence, or a squirrel in a tree. The kid who owns the gun will likely get some safety training, but when he invites his friends over, fun will trump safety. Eager kids won't be too concerned about where the bb goes if they miss the cat.

2a4all said:

It may be simple, but that doesn't ensure compliance. Shooting at paper targets is far less interesting than seeing if you can hit the stray cat on top of the privacy fence, or a squirrel in a tree. The kid who owns the gun will likely get some safety training, but when he invites his friends over, fun will trump safety. Eager kids won't be too concerned about where the bb goes if they miss the cat.

Click to expand...

Going by your philosophy, the antis had a good argument. That was one of them. No supervision.

Rules are important. Supervision is important. The fear of being grounded for the next 99 years is important.
If Johnny can't be trusted to follow range rules in the back yard, Johnny may have to take up video games instead of hunting.

peter nap said:

Going by your philosophy, the antis had a good argument. That was one of them. No supervision.

Rules are important. Supervision is important. The fear of being grounded for the next 99 years is important.
If Johnny can't be trusted to follow range rules in the back yard, Johnny may have to take up video games instead of hunting.

Click to expand...

There is already a law, passed last year, that makes it a crime to 'shoot' into a persons house. I will try to find the statute so that I can show the cite, but I remember this. I remember thinking that a kid playing baseball accidentally breaks a neighbors window and becomes a felon, how sad.

§ 18.2-279. Discharging firearms or missiles within or at building or dwelling house; penalty.

If any person maliciously discharges a firearm within any building when occupied by one or more persons in such a manner as to endanger the life or lives of such person or persons, or maliciously shoots at, or maliciously throws any missile at or against any dwelling house or other building when occupied by one or more persons, whereby the life or lives of any such person or persons may be put in peril, the person so offending is guilty of a Class 4 felony. In the event of the death of any person, resulting from such malicious shooting or throwing, the person so offending is guilty of murder in the second degree. However, if the homicide is willful, deliberate and premeditated, he is guilty of murder in the first degree.

If any such act be done unlawfully, but not maliciously, the person so offending is guilty of a Class 6 felony; and, in the event of the death of any person resulting from such unlawful shooting or throwing, the person so offending is guilty of involuntary manslaughter. If any person willfully discharges a firearm within or shoots at any school building whether occupied or not, he is guilty of a Class 4 felony.

(Code 1950, §§ 18.1-66, 18.1-152; 1960, c. 358; 1975, cc. 14, 15; 1992, c. 738; 2005, c. 143.)

Click to expand...

nuc65 said:

There is already a law, passed last year, that makes it a crime to 'shoot' into a persons house. I will try to find the statute so that I can show the cite, but I remember this. I remember thinking that a kid playing baseball accidentally breaks a neighbors window and becomes a felon, how sad.

Click to expand...

I already said that Nuc:

If anyone is stupid enough to shoot out the neighbors windows...
A. They're too dumb to own any type of gun.
B. They are going to be charged with shooting into an occupied building.
C. They didn't take the time to set up a cardboard box full of newspapers with a carpet backstop.

Shooting a pellet gun safely ain't rocket science.

Click to expand...

peter nap said:

I already said that Nuc:

Click to expand...

I agree that you said it, I only enhanced the cite a little and offered an enhancement of my opinion a little bit.

I remember spending a lot of time shooting some little metal cutouts in my friends basement, he had a target air gun (very high end) and a target metal box with metal cutouts that we spent many hours in the evening having competitions.

nuc65 said:

There is already a law, passed last year, that makes it a crime to 'shoot' into a persons house. I will try to find the statute so that I can show the cite, but I remember this. I remember thinking that a kid playing baseball accidentally breaks a neighbors window and becomes a felon, how sad.

Click to expand...

§ 18.2-279. Discharging firearms or missiles within or at building or dwelling house; penalty.

If any person maliciously discharges a firearm within any building when occupied by one or more persons in such a manner as to endanger the life or lives of such person or persons, or maliciously shoots at, or maliciously throws any missile at or against any dwelling house or other building when occupied by one or more persons, whereby the life or lives of any such person or persons may be put in peril, the person so offending is guilty of a Class 4 felony. In the event of the death of any person, resulting from such malicious shooting or throwing, the person so offending is guilty of murder in the second degree. However, if the homicide is willful, deliberate and premeditated, he is guilty of murder in the first degree.

I think the kid playing baseball with his buddies is in little danger of becoming a felon from accidentally breaking the neighbor's window pane. First, he would have to be tried an an adult; second, the prosecutor would have to show "malicious" intent.

Even in the case of the adult, local hoodlum deliberately/maliciously breaking your picture window with a BB gun or thrown rock while you slept upstairs would be a stretch for this law - the other necessary criteria are not present.

BTW - this is the Code that is frequently used when someone is charged for having fired a gun while inside a building (within) or as an add-on charge when premeditated murder occurs therein.

Grapeshot said:

I think the kid playing baseball with his buddies is in little danger of becoming a felon from accidentally breaking the neighbor's window pane. First, he would have to be tried an an adult; second, the prosecutor would have to show "malicious" intent.
.

Click to expand...

But, from the next paragraph:

"If any such act be done unlawfully, but not maliciously, the person so offending is guilty of a Class 6 felony; and, in the event of the death of any person resulting from such unlawful shooting or throwing, the person so offending is guilty of involuntary manslaughter. If any person willfully discharges a firearm within or shoots at any school building whether occupied or not, he is guilty of a Class 4 felony. "

roscoe13 said:

But, from the next paragraph:

"If any such act be done unlawfully, but not maliciously, the person so offending is guilty of a Class 6 felony; and, in the event of the death of any person resulting from such unlawful shooting or throwing, the person so offending is guilty of involuntary manslaughter. If any person willfully discharges a firearm within or shoots at any school building whether occupied or not, he is guilty of a Class 4 felony. "

Click to expand...

Still see it as an extreme stretch - the "kid" would still have to be tried an as an adult + playing baseball is not in and of itself "unlawful". That said, prosecutors can do pretty much whatever they want to do - see Skidmark's Surry debacle.

Grapeshot said:

Still see it as an extreme stretch - the "kid" would still have to be tried an as an adult + playing baseball is not in and of itself "unlawful". That said, prosecutors can do pretty much whatever they want to do - see Skidmark's Surry debacle.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but it's not too hard to define breaking a neighbors window as "unlawful" ...

The whole thing with Skidmark is a disgrace....

Roscoe

roscoe13 said:

Yeah, but it's not too hard to define breaking a neighbors window as "unlawful" ...

The whole thing with Skidmark is a disgrace....

Roscoe

Click to expand...

That is precisely my point. Attempting to make a kid a felon for a non-malicious act (playing baseball and breaking a window) would be "disgraceful," misapplication of the law, and abuse of power - all my opinion.

Also recognize we are on the same side of the fence and just talking about technical unlikelihoods .......... unless your first name is Skid. :uhoh: