Using tag rounds

[Spartan09]

14 minutes ago, Sneaky said:

The kick charge look more more user friendly when it comes to getting them ready, which I’m all for.

it does look more user friendly...  but the other big issue he didnt mention in the video (aside from the possible legality issues here in UK that have already been raised by @SeniorSpaz87) is how much those rounds and launch shells are going to cost....

im going to stick with my Mk2s and CO2 shells thank you...

 

[JimFromHorsham]

7 minutes ago, Hatchet said:

To be fair, with your throwing arm you don't really need a TAG launcher anyway...

 banned from using it from elevated positions was a career highlight of mine 😛 

[Spartan09]

Just now, JimFromHorsham said:

 banned from using it from elevated positions was a career highlight of mine 😛 

not sure thats a good thing though....
 

[Druid799]

52 minutes ago, Rogerborg said:

 

They should have.  Rate of fire limits and running round corners spiky-thing first are pretty obvious risks that can be mitigated by saying "Not at this site, chaps."

Rates of fire ok yes you could but how do you mitigate adrenaline ? Normally I do see you as one of the voices of reason but this occasion I do feel your rather digging your heals in for what ever reason as your now trying control the uncontrollable ’freak’ accidents of the game ?

[JimFromHorsham]

10 minutes ago, Spartan09 said:

not sure thats a good thing though....
 

ha ha, being punished because I can throw things further and get them where I want them , I’ll take that as a win lol.

[Spartan09]

11 minutes ago, Druid799 said:

Rates of fire ok yes you could but how do you mitigate adrenaline ? Normally I do see you as one of the voices of reason but this occasion I do feel your rather digging your heals in for what ever reason as your now trying control the uncontrollable ’freak’ accidents of the game ?

 sorry @Rogerborg but im going to have to side with druid here...   you cant control freak accidents.

your argument is the same as someone knocking on your door and saying "im revoking your drivers licence and crushing your car, because there is a small chance that you might run someone over if they step in front of you from between 2 parked vehicles and you couldn't see them until the last second"..   

rate of fire, yes,  that is an issue that, TBH,  ALL sites need to look at...   there is no reason to have the same rate of fire as a minigun from a little cut-down m4....   but then again, at what point do you draw the line?  (and this also harkens back to the argument about DMRs from a few weeks back)

26 minutes ago, JimFromHorsham said:

ha ha, being punished because I can throw things further and get them where I want them , I’ll take that as a win lol.

ok..  now im curious WTF happened in this incident...
aside from what you just said in your last message...

 

[JimFromHorsham]

@Spartan09ha ha , nothing more than my god given ability to throw things a lot further than most other people can , the opposition assumed we had something mechanical launching ball grenades so a Marshall was sent to investigate , he laughed when he saw it was just me and a big box of pyro , called it in but alas the other team said it was cheating so I was removed   

 

it was something like a 60+ kill streak I had going on lol . 
 

goodtimes and good fun . 

[Rogerborg]

3 hours ago, Druid799 said:

as your now trying control the uncontrollable ’freak’ accidents of the game

 

Look at it this way: would you be OK with someone running around with a steel bayonet fitted?  It's OK, they promise not to stab anyone with it on purpose.

 

I'd assume not, since the risk is easily foreseeable.

 

And once a spiky muzzle device has caused an injury, we can't pretend to not know that it's capable of it.

 

I did some H&S training which hammered on the point that the absolute worst thing you can do from a liability perspective is to not mitigate a known risk.

 

So is it reasonable to shrug and say "Well, I'm glad that will never happen again" ?

 

I don't know, but I'd rather not be the next person to get impaled by one.

[SBoardley]

5 hours ago, Druid799 said:

Rates of fire ok yes you could but how do you mitigate adrenaline ? Normally I do see you as one of the voices of reason but this occasion I do feel your rather digging your heals in for what ever reason as your now trying control the uncontrollable ’freak’ accidents of the game ?

I was a Marshall at ground zero when a freak accident happened; a young lad had a 12g bfg land down his draw vest. Many years ago. It exploded and he suffered powder burns to his chest. It wasn’t funny. It was a freak accident which led to 12g being banned across the country believe.  Now I love 12g, still gutted you can’t use them anymore but I do understand why they were banned. Imagine if he was blinded. 

[Tactical Pith Helmet]

6 minutes ago, SBoardley said:

It exploded and he suffered powder burns to his chest. It wasn’t funny. It was a freak accident which led to 12g being banned across the country believe.  Now I love 12g, still gutted you can’t use them anymore but I do understand why they were banned. Imagine if he was blinded. 

12g black powder?!

4 hours ago, JimFromHorsham said:

@Spartan09ha ha , nothing more than my god given ability to throw things a lot further than most other people can , the opposition assumed we had something mechanical launching ball grenades so a Marshall was sent to investigate , he laughed when he saw it was just me and a big box of pyro , called it in but alas the other team said it was cheating so I was removed   

 

Did they suspect you of being on performance enhancing drugs?  Seriously, they may as well ban keen cricketers from sites.

[SBoardley]

1 minute ago, Tactical Pith Helmet said:

12g black powder?!

Dynatex bfg used to use 12g cartridges. Whatever they used, the kid had black burns radiating from the middle of his chest outwards. He had to go to hospital to get looked at. 

[Tactical Pith Helmet]

Just found them online.  They use a standard 209 primer.  That will certainly burn you if not channelled correctly. 

[Rogerborg]

I should be clear that I'm not having a "Ban ALL the things rant" since I know it's futile, but I consider Mk5s and even 9mm blanks too loud for indoors given the likelihood of them going off close to ears in an enclosed space.

 

There are a lot of fun things that are bad for you, but when bad means irreversible hearing loss, and when you can have fun with merely naughty things instead, I'm struggling to find a justification for them.  My core problem with the fun-but-hazardous things in airsoft is that they're a risk not to the owner but to other people, including, well...

 

 

 

[SBoardley]

11 hours ago, Tactical Pith Helmet said:

Just found them online.  They use a standard 209 primer.  That will certainly burn you if not channelled correctly. 

I know I have 2. They are both 9mm or .209. But the original ones circa mid 2000 used 12 gauge blank or 9mm with adapter sleeve. Like I said the kid had the 12 gauge explode down his top and it vented over his chest!

[Sneaky]

3 hours ago, SBoardley said:

I know I have 2. They are both 9mm or .209. But the original ones circa mid 2000 used 12 gauge blank or 9mm with adapter sleeve. Like I said the kid had the 12 gauge explode down his top and it vented over his chest!

Ok, I’m happy without that then.

[Cannonfodder]

I've only used them once, but the disposable pyros by TAG are definitely more spicy than the average mk5

[Sneaky]

7 hours ago, Rogerborg said:

I should be clear that I'm not having a "Ban ALL the things rant" since I know it's futile, but I consider Mk5s and even 9mm blanks too loud for indoors given the likelihood of them going off close to ears in an enclosed space.

 

There are a lot of fun things that are bad for you, but when bad means irreversible hearing loss, and when you can have fun with merely naughty things instead, I'm struggling to find a justification for them.  My core problem with the fun-but-hazardous things in airsoft is that they're a risk not to the owner but to other people, including, well...

 

 

 

I get your point, but there is risk with everything. I do not wear a full face mask and I have scars on my face. That is my choice.  The real solution for me would be not to play airsoft- that’s not going to happen.

 

As any guardian knows, the emperor protects and provides HIS guiding light.

[Rogerborg]

1 hour ago, Sneaky said:

I get your point, but there is risk with everything. I do not wear a full face mask and I have scars on my face. That is my choice.

 

Which is rather the point that I'm beleaguering. What gets sent downrange is the choice of the finger behind the trigger rather than the face at the other end.

 

Eh, never mind me, mild tinnitus makes me kind of grumpy about pretty much anything that goes bang.

 

 

1 hour ago, Sneaky said:

As any guardian knows, the emperor protects and provides HIS guiding light.

 

I wish His standard armour covered a little more of my vulnerables, I took a lot of deaths in His name from rib-shots.

 

[Danno46]

Interestingly no one’s mentioned mortar rounds, Possibly just as hazardous as Tag rounds especially the multi bang ones which in theory could land right on top of you?

[Rogerborg]

30 minutes ago, Danno46 said:

Interestingly no one’s mentioned mortar rounds

 

I can old-man-yells-at-cloud about them too, it's just that we hadn't got there yet.  I've seen a few pyro-lobbing-things described as "mortars" and "airsoft", but they seem even more niche than TAGs, and mostly just talked about for, well, this.

 

[Tommikka]

I’m with @Rogerborgon mitigating the less common potential problem

 

If it’s foreseeable then it needs to be balanced

 

 

Back in the day it was mk9s for everything, then mk5s, mk3s, and onto thermobarics and different recipes & card/paper roll pattern for various combinations of fast/slow detonation, volume/flash etc

 

In paintball the rules have always been that goggles are to be worn as designed with no modification, with chin strap fitted etc.  But players put in a second head strap and cut off or don’t fit the chin strap.

 

 

The extra head strap if fitted properly tightens the goggle.  But if fitted improperly tensions the back of the head, and causing the goggles to fly away if making a superman dive into a tournament snake or running and tripping on a tree root.

Rare and unlikely - but as photographer I’ve watched too many marshals jumping onto a mask less player - and failed to take the photo worrying about if they will land before balls hit 

But it took the freak accident of two players to pop around an inflatable, poke barrel into face and flick goggles off. The damage was ‘only’ a circular cut below the eye

This then prompted enforcement of chin straps - for a couple of seasons 

 

 

It’s been noted that the discussion is about tag rounds but not mortars.  The relevant point is the projectile.

What is the risk of that projectile, on its potential flight?

The same stands for a mortar - which isn’t directed, so you can argue that if it’s unobstructed on the way up then it’s ‘fine’ on the way down …… but that’s good to depend on it’s mass …

does it carry a payload?

what could it do to head/face protection?

[Tactical Pith Helmet]

10 hours ago, SBoardley said:

I know I have 2. They are both 9mm or .209. But the original ones circa mid 2000 used 12 gauge blank or 9mm with adapter sleeve. 

Bloody silly things to use in a game.  They must have been loud enough to cause hearing damage.

 

I forget to tell a mate that my garage was fitted with a 12g alarm mine once.  Was fitted...

[Lozart]

The point that's being missed by some is that it isn't about what YOU are happy with as a personal risk level, but what the sites insurance will or won't cover. If the insurance says "nothing over MK5 due to risk of hearing damage" then you start lobbing TAGs about, if someone does get hearing damage it'll be YOU that gets the bill, not the site.

 

Some of us will remember the strict "below the knee" rule for BFGs at The Mall. Lots of whingeing about how they should always stay on the same floor and never be sent down the stairs. Not everyone knew why though - it was because before those rules were enforced and it was up to people to be sensible, someone dropped a BFG over the balcony from the upper level and it hit someone in the head on the ground level. That ended up with the recipient being in hospital in a coma for two months and the person that dropped the grenade being sued for damages.

 

These days, that's the sort of thing that will get a site shut down.

[Rogerborg]

40 minutes ago, Lozart said:

If the insurance says "nothing over MK5 due to risk of hearing damage" then you start lobbing TAGs about, if someone does get hearing damage it'll be YOU that gets the bill, not the site.

 

Eh, maybe.  The site won't want to admit liability and their insurer won't want to indemnify them, but in the event where someone gets rekt, courts like to make awards against the deepest pockets to ensure that the rekee isn't left hanging.  For example, motor insurance that doesn't cover the type of use at the time, or even when vehicles are stolen and crashed, or are sold on without cancelling the policy.  The underwriter is generally obliged to pay out, and can then come after the policyholder to try and recoup their losses if they made a fraudulent declaration or neglected to tell them something material.

 

There's nothing to stop you naming the individual and the site in the suit though.  Vowles vs Evans and the Welsh Rugby Union is the precedent that keeps coming back to mind, where an unpaid volunteer referee was held to have a duty of care to ensure players' safety (and had failed it).  In that case, the WRU's insurers paid out.

 

I'm generally agreeing with the point though.  I'm there to get shot with low energy plastic BBs, and accept that there will be loud but not deafening bangs, and that I might catch a metal BFG in the shins.  If I suffer a life changing injury due to a higher energy projectile, or an earball bursting explosion, I'm not just going to shrug it off and say "Well, who could possibly have foreseen that?"

[Tommikka]

@Lozart

@Rogerborg

 

Without going into a quote edit session …. What these guys just said 

 

 

A site manages to run under the criteria within their risk assessment, associated mitigations and the insurance premium that comes with them 

 

The disclaimers signed state that players understand what’s happening and agree to comply

 

In the event of an accident the liability is not offset by any content signed up to in the disclaimer, but it’s factored in

 

If John Smiths actions injure Fred Bloggs then Fred’s first point of call is the site

The NHS will pick out the start of it, then Fred will be seeking private follow up treatment.

Ideally the sites insurance will pay out, and the NHS could pursue costs as well

 

 

(I even received a bill once from the Highways agency for clearing the road following an accident - handed it to my solicitor and I could forget about it)

 

John Smith could be pursued by the sites insurers - which flags the potential need for personal insurance in case you’re found liable