General

[Posey]

If I take a air-powered projectile weapon onto a paintball field, sign a waiver, pay a fee, buy and load up with paintballs, even if my marker says "Amazing Vorpal Super Death Kill Cannon - Never point at another living thing lest it explode in a torrent of blood" down the side in big neon yellow letters, if it chronos consistantly at 260 FPS, and shoots paintballs, I'm pretty sure anyone can reasonably infer that the thing in your hand is a paintball gun.

[Mayvik]

I hate to keep saying this..but please read the entire thread before posting. 99.999% of the stuff being said in this thread and the main thread in the Dead Zone section (before it apparently exploded from being 20385028503 pages long) has been said one two or ten times before. Chances are your question has already been answered, or your opinion already voiced.

Please try to keep the clutter and speculation down unless you're posting real data, tech information, or other facts. It's hard enough to get through all the info in the thread without 7 out of 8 posts being someone's opinion about the situation. We'll find out what the skinny is on Monday from the Tiberius side of things.

This is directed at no one in particular. Just a periodic reminder.

[Posey]

He's got a point.

/end running around the block

[shadow_772]

Will do, good advice IMO. I will hold off posting until Tiberious posts again, as my opinion has been voiced too many times as is....

[scrounger]

I saw william77stout post and will attempt to explain further using the example of paintball guns in law enforcement.

First let me set this up. At work we have a pepperball launcher. This is bacially a tippman pro-lite that has a non-adjustable (factory only adjustable) regulator.

Now let me bring in a tippman pro-lite into my facility and have both available when a "situation" comes up that requires me to use pepperbals.

Inevitably I will be called into court by the detainee's lawyer claiming "excessive force".

If I use the pepperball launcher, it is clearly certified under product liability law (and backed by the company) for use in law enforcement applications.
I am protected in the respect I used a device in its authorized capacity.

Now take the same situation and I used a tippman pro-lite. I can try to show it is identical to the pepperball launcher in form and function. I could even show it was set at the same FPS as the launcher.
Then the defence lawyer would rip me apart. Questioning how it was set up, FPS, ect. Then ending with how a RECREATIONAL device is not a law enforcement tool.
To add more problems if there were ANY INJURIES the product liablily law is not on my side and tippman would defend me.

The problem with this SA-8/T8 debate is basic liablility/product use law. In other words the legal system we are under.

No matter what you, I, or anyone thinks; no matter what physical attributes or modifications you put on it....

A SA-8 is CLEARLY MARKED as NON-RECREATIONAL USE and is listed as a pepperball launcher. It is protected under product liability for that use.

A T8 is listed as a paintball gun. It is protected under product liablility for that use.

Any other use (NO MATTER HOW YOU MODIFIED IT) opens up the person, as well as the field owner/event coordinator to enormous liablility without protection.

As for a waiver (as recently suggested by some) is only as good as the lawyer defending it, the jury simpathy, and the stupidity of the situation.

Hope this helps

Scrounger

Please note my legal disclaimer I am not a lawyer and cannot predict every situation.

[Crimson Death]

Has anyone tried returning their SA-8's to Pepperball?

[Stripes]

why do people keep referring to the reg spring as the problem?
the reason it's hard to get down is the BOLT spring
with a softer bolt spring, the pressure in the valve chamber won't have to be as high to overcome the force of the spring when the sear is released.
yes, the vent valve should be addressed, but the main issue here is NOT the regulator, but the bolt spring

[Lohman446]

Originally Posted by Posey

I suppose my answer to you hypothetical situation is this: I truly want to see someone try and win a liability lawsuit against a paintball field in this situation. If the field has the boilerplate release form and takes the proper precautions(chronoing, proper refereeing...) the field would have to have the crappiest lawyer on the face of the earth to lose such a liability lawsuit. Can you prove that the offending projectile came from the SA-8? What if it came from some fool who likes to shoot hot out of his 98C? Didn't the injured party sign a waiver saying that he/she understood and accepted the risks associated with paintball? Need I go on?

That waiver is worthless, as are 99% of waivers. A speedbump for a decent lawyer, but you cannot sign away your rights. And I accepted the risks of paintball. Not the risks of being shot with a less lethal WEAPON. As has been pointed out it would not matter if they were mechanically identical (which they are not) it would matter what they were marketed as. The SA8 was clearly marketed as a weapon.

[Posey]

Originally Posted by Lohman446

That waiver is worthless, as are 99% of waivers. A speedbump for a decent lawyer, but you cannot sign away your rights. And I accepted the risks of paintball. Not the risks of being shot with a less lethal WEAPON. As has been pointed out it would not matter if they were mechanically identical (which they are not) it would matter what they were marketed as. The SA8 was clearly marketed as a weapon.

And if this "weapon" is shooting paintballs at 280 FPS like every other "weapon" on the field, any decent lawyer can paint the plaintiff as a money grubbing gold digger attempting to profit off a semantical difference. If you signed up to play paintball and signed a paper saying you understood the risks, you have very little wiggle room if no one broke the rules.

As Mayvik alluded to, maybe we could see fit to stop until after Tiberius' expected Monday announcement.

[marker]

Originally Posted by Stripes

why do people keep referring to the reg spring as the problem?
the reason it's hard to get down is the BOLT spring
with a softer bolt spring, the pressure in the valve chamber won't have to be as high to overcome the force of the spring when the sear is released.
yes, the vent valve should be addressed, but the main issue here is NOT the regulator, but the bolt spring

Wrong: first you need to understand that the BOLT SPRING only returns the bolt to the cocked position; and then the bolt is held there by the sear. And the sear will hold the bolt there reguardless of how much pressure is in the air chamber(unless there is failure of the sear)

A softer bolt spring will not effect velocities and may not even reset the bolt.

The REGULATOR SPRING on the other hand does determine how much air pressure (C02 in this case) can get into the air chamber which does directly effect velocities.

The PRESSURE RELIEF SPRING when set properly works similarly to the regulator spring in that if too much pressure gets past the regulator (a spike) then it will vent it out safely before it gets dangerous and therefore provides an upper limit on how much pressure can be held in the air chamber.

Between the regulator and the pressure relief they maintain consistant presures in the air chamber from one shot to the next (read that as consistancy of velocity in your marker)

On the SA-8, it is this pressure relief spring being set too high that is the main concern because it does not bleed off until unreasonably high levels are achieved and it can not be adjusted as can be done on the Tiberius T-8 or T-9

The other concerns about air chamber size etc. can affect velocities and efficiency due to volume but as has been noted the SA-8 can be adjusted down to safe velocities by the current regulator