Legal Timeline

The legality surrounding gel blasters in Western Australia has always been in muddy waters. Officially a “grey area” legally, they were never formally legal or illegal (despite what the police say).

The following is a rough timeline of Gel Blasters and the documentation surrounding them.

15 August 2017

Hon Aaron Stonehouse gave notice that at the next sitting of the house he would move — (1) A select committee, to be known as the Personal Choice and Community Safety Committee, is established. (2) The select committee is to inquire into and report on the economic and social impact of measures introduced in Western Australia to restrict personal choice “for the individual’s own good”, with particular reference to — (a) the sale and supply of alcohol, including any impact on the wellbeing, enjoyment and finances of users and non-users; (b) risk-reduction products such as e-cigarettes and heat-not-burn tobacco product, including any impact on the wellbeing, enjoyment and finances of users and non-users; (c) skirmish games such as airsoft, paintball and laser tag as well as projectile-based toys such as Nerf guns and gel blasters, including any impact on the wellbeing, enjoyment and finances of users and non-users; (d) outdoor recreations such as cycling, fishing and aquatic leisure, including any impact on the wellbeing, enjoyment and finances of users and non-users; and (e) any other measures introduced to restrict personal choice.

NOTES: No real outcome for this one. There’s no record of Stonehouse creating this committee. But at least he mentions “gel blasters” in Parliament.

15 August 2018

POLICE — FIREARMS — GEL BALL GUNS
580. Hon AARON STONEHOUSE to the minister representing the Minister for Police:
I note that there has been confusion across a range of Australian jurisdictions in the past 24 months about the legality of gel ball guns, which are sometimes known as gel blasters.

(1) Are gel blasters legal in Western Australia?

(2) If yes to (1), can the minister confirm that the WA firearms branch has no active interest in their sale or possession?

(3) If no to (1), can the minister inform the house about the level of correspondence her office has received on this issue since the government came to power, and what changes, if any, she proposes to introduce around gel blaster sales and ownership?

Hon STEPHEN DAWSON replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. The following information has been provided to me by the Minister for Police.

(1) No.

(2) Not applicable.

(3) The Minister for Police has received minimal correspondence in relation to gel ball guns, which are sometimes known as gel blasters. These firearms will be considered for discussion within the recommendations from the Law Reform Commission of Western Australia’s review of the Firearms Act 1973.

Click here to see the Law Reform Commission of Western Australia’s review of the Firearms Act 1973

NOTES: For starters, the link to the Law Reform Commission above shows that not only do they never mention “gel blasters” (being that it was written in 2015 likely) but also the Firearms Act has yet to see any reform based on the review.

Secondly, despite Stephen Dawson’s claims that gel blasters are not legal and referring to them as “firearms” he, nor any Police representative, has never documented what law gel blasters break.

IF THEY AREN’T LEGAL, WHICH LAW ARE THEY BREAKING? This has never been addressed.

21 August 2019

POLICE — GEL BLASTERS — LEGAL STATUS
890. Hon RICK MAZZA to the minister representing the Minister for Police:
I refer to gel blasters, which are plastic toy guns that shoot water-filled gel balls at around 250 feet per second.

(1) What is the legal status of gel blasters in Western Australia?

(2) If gel blasters are classified as firearms, is any consideration being given by the WA Police Force to change their status?

Hon STEPHEN DAWSON replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. The following answer has been provided to me by the Minister for Police.

(1) The Western Australia Police Force advises that gel blasters are not legal in Western Australia.

(2) The Western Australia Police Force is reviewing the legal status of gel blasters, taking into account their status in other states and territories.

NOTES: Another year, another set of questions, another list that Stephen Dawson makes the same claims yet doesn’t back them up in any way.

SPOILER ALERT: By “reviewing the legal status” immediately after claiming they are “not legal” you would think that the outcome would be to leave their status alone if they wanted to crack down on gel blasters. But the opposite happened. By reviewing them, they BANNED them, and moved to make them illegal by law.

WOULDN’T THAT MEAN THAT, BY DEFAULT, THEY WERE, IN FACT, LEGAL BEFORE? Another question never addressed.

8 October 2020

Email from Nick Holberton, Senior Constable 7714, Licensing Enforcement Division, WAPOL

“Currently the Licensing Services Firearms Branch deems a Gel-blaster as a firearm as described under Section 4 of the Firearms Act 1973 and cannot be legally possessed as there are no provisions to licence one under the Act.

The matter is being reviewed by the Legal Services Unit, the WA Police Force and the Minister of Police. Until that matter is determined the Licensing Services will continue to deem them a firearm that cannot be possessed legally. It is envisaged that the results of the review will be publicly released in the near future and clear policy directives given to officers on the street.”

NOTES: So they’re a firearm? Because they fit the definition by “missile can be discharged” and a gel ball is a “missile” by definition that it’s a “solid substance or liquid chemical” that’s “capable of causing physical injury”.

Okay. Then by definition so is every Nerf blaster ever made. So is a water pistol with ammonia inside. There are no provisions to license either of these, so they are therefore also as illegal as gel blasters.

This also directly contradicts the verifiable fact that no charges for possession of gel blaster have ever been brought in a WA court.

21 October 2020

Email from Justin Grant, Senior Constable 12396, Corporate Licensing, Licensing Enforcement Division, WAPOL

“No direction has been provided by the Government in relation to Gel Blasters and currently as a result of no direction, Licensing Services does not, at this time, deem them to be a firearm.

Currently unless they are used in a manner to cause fear or harm to a person there are no offences to possess a Gel Blaster.”

NOTES: Wait. So they’re NOT a firearm? 2 weeks previous and they’re a firearm, now they’re not because (rightfully considered) the Gov’t hasn’t given direction?

Confusing, but this makes more sense. Although Senior Constable Justin Grant needs to talk to Senior Constable Nick Holberton a little more so they can get on the same page.

8 December 2020

Email from Justin Grant, Senior Constable 12396, Corporate Licensing, Licensing Enforcement Division, WAPOL

“The matter of Gel Blasters is currently under review by the WA Government. WA Police are unable to comment any further at this time. Any additional correspondence should be directed towards the WA Government. (Please bear in mind that the WA government is currently in prorogation and will not resume until after the election which occurs on the 13th of March 2021.)”

NOTES: Barely 2 months later and they’ve gone to “No comment”. Did Justin Grant get told off for saying they’re legal? Maybe, but the copy+paste response above came from multiple emails to multiple officers and WAPOL representatives.

17 June 2021

POLICE — GEL BLASTERS — LEGAL STATUS
305. Hon MARTIN ALDRIDGE to the minister representing the Minister for Police:
I refer to the minister’s media statement of Monday, 14 June 2021, titled “Government moves to outlaw gel blasters
in Western Australia”.

(1) Of the 500 high-level responses nationally quoted in the statement, how many have occurred in Western Australia?

(2) Will the minister please table the request of the WA Police Force to the government seeking gel blasters to be listed as a prohibited weapon?

(3) Will the government consider a buyback scheme to accompany the amnesty period, recognising that owners have lawfully purchased these guns?

(4) From what date will gel blasters be considered a prohibited weapon, and when and how will the amnesty occur?

Hon STEPHEN DAWSON replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. The following information has been provided to me by the Minister for Police.

(1)–(4) The Western Australia Police Force advises that officers responded to 147 responses involving gel blasters during 2020. Cabinet considered the police recommendation to regulate gel blasters as prohibited weapons.
The WA Police Force sought this important reform in the interests of community and officer safety for a range of reasons, including gel blasters’ resemblance to conventional firearms; their proliferation in the community and increased use in armed shooter incidents, leading to concerns that a person wielding a gel blaster or their victim could be shot; gel blasters’ ability to be converted to create workable firearms; and intelligence regarding criminals’ use of gel blasters, including to create illegal firearms. The Western Australia Police Force advises that there is no provision in the new legislation for any buyback, as the possession of these weapons is arguably a criminal offence and they remain illegal to import into Western Australia. The reforms are on schedule to commence from 3 July 2021. People currently in possession of a gel blaster are encouraged to hand it in to police. Section 6(2) of the Weapons Act 1999 supports the amnesty by enabling the delivery of items to police without fear of prosecution for its possession.

NOTES: Where to even begin?

This data is STILL yet to be verified as neither the Minister for Police, nor WAPOL will cite the source, claiming “internal intelligence”. Freedom of Information searches give “no results” yet they have ignored this when it’s been presented to them.
Everything they claim can be debunked:
- Claims of increased incidents are debunked by their own data when they claim 1,559 incidents from July 2017 to July 2019 yet only 147 in 2020. This would be a substantial decrease of 82% based on their own data.
- Claims of fear that someone’s going to be shot is overblown and false. If that were an actual consideration there are several other avenues to address this that they have conveniently and deliberately ignored in favour of a blanket ban.
- Workable firearm? WRONG. Anyone in the industry already knows, the only way a gel blaster can “be converted to a workable firearm” is if they mean an Airsoft Marker, and even that can’t happen within our current import laws. This is factually untrue.
- “Intelligence regarding criminals’ use of gel blasters” is more claims based on something they themselves cannot quantify nor cite effectively. Very convenient. But AGAIN, if a criminal were to “create illegal firearms” they would need to be converting gel blasters to Airsoft markers, which, as shown above, isn’t possible with our current import laws.
No provision for a buyback based on their claim that “possession of these weapons is arguably a criminal offence and they remain illegal to import into Western Australia”. If it’s arguable that it’s a criminal offence, why has NOT ONE SINGLE CHARGE ever been lain? Despite hundreds of gel blasters being seized in the past few years, why have nearly ALL of them been returned with no associated charges filed? Why have they been labelled by the Ballistics Branch of WAPOL as “Toy guns” when they were tested to see if they were indeed firearms?Legality for Import is based on the B709 which is for the Australian Border Force but is based on the State/Territory laws regarding the item. In short, it has to be legal in your state. WAPOL has never allowed a B709 for gel blasters into WA yet has no verified and documented law/regulation to back their claim that “gel blasters aren’t legal.” For a B709, they don’t have to have proof, whereas if they’d charged you for an offense they would have to show specifically which laws you were breaking.So, their claim that there doesn’t need to be a buyback because gel blasters haven’t been legal to import is FALSE. Because they ARE legal to import in Queensland, which is where people in WA get the majority of them. This is just WAPOL claiming “not legal” yet again while providing no proof.

The long and the short of this is that WAPOL can claim all day up and down that gel blasters are “not legal” yet they’ve never charged anyone for possession of one, they’ve never cited the law or regulation that possession of a gel blaster would violate, their own Ballistics Department classes them as “toy guns” and they’ve returned the overwhelming majority of the ones they’ve seized (prior to this ban, that is).

If they were “not legal” then they’d have to lay charges.

If they were “not legal” they wouldn’t have to give them back.

If they were “not legal” they would have to cite which law/regulation they are in violation of.

If they were “not legal” they wouldn’t have to try and shove a regulation change through the last days of Parliament, give a showy-but-false press conference and then threaten the public with jail time and fines if they don’t hand their blasters in.

We’ll add more as we come across it. Be sure and Email us ([email protected]) if you have found something else that would fit in this timeline and we’ll add it in there.