- Oct 20, 2012
- 5,101
- 1,668
Because a TAG round is a launched explosive missile that's actually illegal in the hands of your average joe, not classified as your regular firework and a grenade is a pyrotechnic (that is governed under the same laws as fireworks) and is legal. I'm not saying that makes sense, but that's how it is to insurers. This shouldn't need explaining - it's obvious from an insurers point of view and that's my point.Actually - yes.
Let's say you fire a pyro at someone from a launcher. You hit someone a reasonable distance away and it goes off with the force of a MK5. You then throw an actual MK5 at someone again at a sensible distance and it just happens to go off when it reaches them. They both have the same explosive force and are both in a similar proximity to the target. So tell me - what is the difference in terms of risk of personal injury?
Edit for further reading
There was a thread on Arnies that a few people who frequent this forum will remember too. As far as I'm concerned, I think the whole launched projectiles things needs clarification. As it stands, explosive projectiles like TAG are one headline away from having serious consequences on the game we all love. Imagine a 14 year old getting hit by one and having even the slightest burns on their face - that would be going straight to the Daily Mail.
tl;dr Kinetic or 'marker' ones are fine, but the explosive ones you see advertised in videos are most certainly not.
I love the concept (never seen one used outside of YouTube videos), but we need to tread carefully.
Last edited by a moderator: