Well this is going to be controvesial

Would it not be classed as an air weapon regardless of the projectile? Or can it be argued that it is a bow?

For the purposes of the firearms legislation, an airgun is a weapon with a barrel through which a missile is discharged by the use of compressed air or carbon dioxide. It must be borne in mind, however, that not all airguns can be classed as "firearms".

Section 57 of the Firearms Act 1968 defines a firearm as a lethal barrelled weapon capable of the discharge of any shot, bullet or other missile. Thus, in order to be classed as a firearm, an object must be a weapon, it must have a barrel through which some kind of missile is fired and the effect of the missile on the target must be lethal. Lethality is defined as "capable of inflicting a more than trivial injury"—a trivial injury being one in which only superficial damage such as bruising occurs. In essence, if the pellet from a particular gun is capable of penetrating the skin, that gun is a firearm.
 
Yeah I can see that. There are companies selling the Crosman Airbows in the UK without any licence requirements. Maybe its only a matter of time before the rules are tightened up. I'm guessing it would also hit pneumatic spearguns.
 
Regardless of what the infantilised urban anti-gun establishment think if it, and obviously they'll hate it because they're frightened of anything with a trigger - what's the point of it?

I guess where legal to use it, it's easier and potentially more accurate and more powerful than a compound bow.
 
I don't think any society in any country can consider itself free of idiocy, you only have to see how quickly people follow a bad idea, having done no research as to the legitimacy or factual content of its claims.
I'm a Canadian , we're considered by most to be a fairly sensible place , Justin Trudeau excepted . Unfortunately , we're hip deep in glue eating mouth breathers just like everywhere else . We do have the advantage of severe weather and large carnivores however , it tends to thin out the really stupid ones a bit . Turns out , Darwin was right , who knew .
As to the featured article , it's legal here and you don't need a license unless it sends a projectile/arrow faster than 500 fps , if it does , it's classed as a firearm ( really ) and would be legal to hunt with . There's been a few versions over the years . They never caught on up here as they tend to freeze up in the cold , bows don't . Interesting concept though .
AB
 
Last edited:
I guess where legal to use it, it's easier and potentially more accurate and more powerful than a compound bow.
I doubt it's more powerful or more accurate than a bow except at very close range. Requires little skill to use though so I guess it's fun. The arrow-shooting equivalent of a plinker but as a hunting tool I can't see the relevance.

All good fun however, and nothing against it, but if you're going to put a stock to your cheek and press a trigger, to my mind you may as well have a bang stick that shoots lead.
 
Great video His muzzle awareness is a bit flakey though Nice touch to cock the crossbow and then demonstrate the torch and laser to the camera :oops:
 
Great video His muzzle awareness is a bit flakey though Nice touch to cock the crossbow and then demonstrate the torch and laser to the camera :oops:

That made me shudder too. :scared: However, I assume the camera was on a tripod.
 
Good point Although the white van driving past on the public road just to left of his target in one of the last sequences on full auto also a bit dodgy!

S
 
Just remember all of us are judged by many, not on the merits of the best amongst us,, but the absolute worst. often by those who only look for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Max
Back
Top