!! NewsFlash !!

On this page I would like to post information about states, counties, and municipalities who are attempting to outlaw, ban, or restrict our sport.  If you know of any such legislation, please email me ALL the information that you can so that I can write it up.  If you could email me a scan of a newspaper article, or even snail mail me the article (email me for my address), that would be very helpful.

3/22/01  Connecticut
On March 22, the General Law Committee of the General Assembly will hold a hearing to discuss SB 1326, An Act Concerning Paintball Safety.  This bill would do two things, make it illegal to play paintball without wearing approved safety goggles, and authorize the Commissioner of Consumer Safety to determine what criteria would be used to approve goggles for paintball use.

3/22/01  Legislative Office Building, Hartford, CT
Here is the excerpt from the Public Hearing held by the Joint Committee on General Law on March 22, 2001.  Please read it - especially the testimony by the Doctor who spoke in favor of the bill.  See what misconceptions are being promoted by the opponents of our sport.  I would like to thank Jessica Sparks who helped the three of us who spoke against the bill prepare our testimony.  I would also like to thank Melissa Webster and Amy "The Girl" Chantry who came out on that rainy Thursday to testify against the bill.

REP. FOX: We're going to move on to S.B. 1326. Dr. Joel Geffin. Good
afternoon.

DR. JOEL GEFFIN: Good afternoon. Or perhaps I should say good evening,
Senator Colapietro and Representative Fox and other members of this
Committee. My name is Joel Geffin. I'm an ophthalmologist who practices in
Windham County, Connecticut and I'm here to represent the Connecticut
Society of Eye Physicians to speak in favor of S.B. 1326 AN ACT CONCERNING
PAINT BALL SAFETY.

          First, I'd like to give you a little bit of background on paint ball
          guns and what they're used for and what they can do. Paint ball in
          the past, at least, was an organized game and essentially an adult
          version of tag.

          Generally, the game was played outside in large, open and/or wooded
          areas and there were two opposing teams. Each player on each team
          was armed with a paint ball gun and the basic point of the game was
          to eliminate other players by tagging them with a shot of paint.

          Paint balls themselves are perhaps about slightly smaller than the
          tip of this microphone, about the size of a large marble and what
          they're made of is a plastic coated ball of paint. If you have, for
          instance, a sort of inflatable raft that one uses in the summer in
          the pool or a pond, the coating of the paint ball is made of
          something roughly similar to that and the inside is filled with a
          brightly colored paint which on impact explodes, leaving an obvious
          mark on the target and the intent is, the target is a person.

          Because of the long range and the high degree of accuracy needed to
          play this game, the paint ball gun uses a cartridge of compressed
          gas that fires the paint ball at several hundred miles per hour. A
          good quality paint ball gun will fire a paint ball at 1,000 feet per
          second. That's in one second the paint ball will travel greater than
          the distance of three football fields, in one second.

          So while it isn't as fast as a typical gun coming out of a bullet,
          it certainly moves along with a very significant velocity. In order
          to play the game, at least the way adults do, they should be wearing
          heavy clothing and most importantly, a protective facial mask to
          prevent against injury.

          Now, until recently, paint ball games were played mostly by adults
          in organized settings and often in professionally run facilities
          where people would get instruction on how to play the game, both in
          terms of the rules and most importantly safety and there were
          professionals in the area who were sort of teaching people how to do
          it.

          The cost for an individual at that time to get the equipment was
          several hundred dollars on their own, and so most people played in
          these organized arenas or outdoor fields and paint ball injuries
          were extremely rare and only occurred when people had taken off
          their masks for one reason or another.

          Recently, however, there has been an alarming increase in the number
          of serious and blinding injuries seen in emergency rooms and in
          ophthalmalogists offices. In our experience, this dramatic increase,
          and this is very interesting actually, this dramatic increase in
          injuries, especially among teen aged children, and this was not
          something that teen aged children did until this point, this
          increase in injuries to teen aged children occurred coincidentally
          with the widespread availability of these paint ball guns in mass
          merchandisers.

          Until quite recently, the equipment was expensive. Now you have kids
          who can go to certain, I won't mention any of the stores by name,
          but you've all been there, the big mass merchandisers and discount
          retailers and you can buy a paint ball gun for $20, $19.95. The mask
          that goes with it is also $20.

          Consequently, the paint ball games are now being played by teen aged
          children as an unorganized and often unsupervised backyard activity.
          The ocular injuries we are seeing are without exception, severe and
          often result in the permanent loss of vision and blindness in the
          involved eye. The vast majorities of these injuries are now among
          teen aged males who are not using facial protection and while it is
          not surprising to see that these young men, generally boys as young
          as about 10 or 11 years old are getting these guns for Christmas and
          the holidays and their birthdays, it's not surprising to see kids of
          that age taking risk taking behavior.

          And I can tell you that in every single injury we've seen, if these
          children were wearing protective facial equipment, they would not
          have suffered an injury. And most of these kids will be left with
          permanent damage for the rest of their life.

          Alarmingly, our local police department tells us that in order to
          enhance the accuracy and range of paint balls, some of the kids are
          freezing them. So now rather than having a soft thing hitting you,
          you have something the hardness of a marble, because if you freeze a
          paint ball, as it goes through the air at 300 or 400 or 500 miles
          per hour it doesn't get deformed. It stays in its round, hard shape
          and it flies better, further and more accurately. It doesn't tumble.

          Needless to say if you get shot with a frozen paint ball, even if
          it's not in the face it's going to hurt. And I would imagine,
          although I don't have any scientific data that it would shatter a
          protective mask.

          So in conclusion what I'd like to say is that with the widespread
          availability of inexpensive paint ball guns at mass merchandisers
          and the coincident dramatic increase in severe ocular paint ball
          injuries it is critical to promote and insure the appropriate use of
          protective facial equipment and thus I urge you to support S.B.
          1326. Do you have any questions?

REP. FOX: Yes, Rich.

REP. FERRARI: Thank you, Doctor for your testimony. And I have no doubt that
you're absolutely correct. But how does this bill stop a kid from taking the
mask and not using it?

DR. JOEL GEFFIN: Well, I mean, it's an excellent question because you know,
I think one of the limitations of this bill is that there really is no
penalty and how do you control what kids do in their backyards anyway?

          I think perhaps the most important part of this bill is to raise
          public awareness that these things are dangerous. These things are
          really far more dangerous than BB guns. And things who have any sort
          of common sense don't shoot each other with BB guns.

          But they think because paint balls are designed to be shot at each
          other that they can't be that dangerous because it's part of the
          game. And so they run around without the appropriate protective
          facial wear shooting at each other. And like I said, I think the
          important thing, this is not directly addressing your question is
          that this has gone from sort of a corporate retreat sort of adult
          game at an organized facility with several hundred dollars' worth of
          equipment to kids running around shooting each other in their
          backyards.

REP. FERRARI: Certainly, it's a war game.

DR. JOEL GEFFIN: Yeah, it is.

REP. FERRARI: And you play war without getting hurt, which is a problem to
begin with. But in any case, it says a violation of a subsection would be an
infraction. I don't know what that means --

DR. JOEL GEFFIN: I don't either.

REP. FERRARI: -- infraction and who would the infraction be against, the
shooter or the shootee.

DR. JOEL GEFFIN: Can't answer that.

REP. FERRARI: Okay.

DR. JOEL GEFFIN: Perhaps the parent, if it's a minor. But I mean, I think
that obviously, we've seen cases in which civil damages have been filed. You
know, we're not lawyers but we're aware that that process is going on.

REP. FERRARI: Okay, I appreciate that. And I don't dispute the need for it.
I just don't know how we can educate people and certainly the thing with the
freezing them, that sounds like something a ten year old would do just to
make it a better --

DR. JOEL GEFFIN: It's probably the 16 year olds that are doing that and they
teach the 10 year olds.

REP. FERRARI: Thank you very much.

REP. FOX: Doctor, thank you very much. Appreciate it.

          We have three individuals to speak against that if they're here.
          They might come up together, Michael Dodge, Melissa Webster and an
          Amy Chantry.

MICHAEL DODGE: Mr. Chairman, we all have separate points and we'd really
prefer to address things individually.

REP. FOX: That's fine.

MICHAEL DODGE: Thank you Honorable Committee Members. My name is Michael
Dodge. I have been playing the sport of paint ball for 15 years. I would
first like to address the testimony just given, because quite frankly, most
of it is completely erroneous and totally false.

          In 15 years of playing paint ball, I have never seen a paint ball
          gun. They're not guns. Guns kill. Markers mark. I have never seen
          a paint ball marker that is capable of firing a paint ball more than
          350 feet per second and the reason I know this is because we use
          radar to track the speed of paint balls and to make sure they are
          not going by excessive force.

          Also, it is a wide fallacy that you can freeze paint balls. They do
          not freeze. The liquid inside, if it freezes, expands and the
          gelatin, it's not a plastic capsule, it's a gelatin capsule, breaks
          and the paint ball is useless. The capsules are made of gelatin, the
          same exact gelatin that is used in Nyquil day caps and other drug
          manufacturers. In fact the leading paint ball manufacturer, R. P.
          Schryer is a drug manufacturer. They are not filled with paint. They
          are filled with a water and saccharin based fill that has dye in it
          which essentially food coloring like FD&C yellow or FD&C red.

          When it comes to safety standards both in goggles, warnings on the
          paint ball markers themselves and paint ball field operations, the
          industry has very strict standards and I've in my written testimony
          which hopefully you all have, I have gone into greater detail on
          what exactly these standards are.

          But I would like to say that they do not only cover the structural
          strength and integrity of the lens, they cover other important
          aspects such as field of view, luminous transmittance, prismatic
          deviation, refractive power and visual function impairment.

          On the structural side, the individual goggle components are tested
          in conditions that are much more extreme and will never be achieved
          on any paint ball field. And according to the American Medical
          Association's Journal of Ophthalmology, there have been no reported
          eye injuries by players wearing goggles that meet these standards.
          The standards are laid down by the American Society for Testing of
          Materials. They are a well known and well respected testing body and
          it took them six years to develop these standards.

          You are asking the Department of Consumer Protection to develop
          standards in nine months. My feeling is that these standards that
          the Department of Consumer Protection would create would be
          substandard. I don't know how you can, in nine months, recreate what
          it took professionals six years to create.

          And if these standards are below what the industry has already
          embraced and already uses, you may see an increase in eye injuries
          where people find other goggles, whether they be ski goggles or
          industrial safety glasses that may meet some standards set forth by
          the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection but they do not
          meet the ASTM standards.

          There are standards on paint ball fields which mandate and these
          standards, following these standards is a key requirement for a
          paint ball field to get insurance. If they do not follow the
          standards, they do not get insurance, they do not operate.

          One of the key, in fact the key requirement, is that all goggles
          worn at any time, must meet ASTM standards and these goggles must be
          worn in all areas where paint balls may be fired and there are
          additional safety precautions against accidental discharge as well.

          I would be happy at this time to answer any questions you have on
          the ASTM standards, on paint ball safety, on paint ball the sport in
          general, any questions you have whatsoever.

REP. FOX: Shawn.

REP. JOHNSTON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Michael, how much do goggles cost
that meet ASTM standards?

MICHAEL DODGE: I believe the retail markets that the Doctor talked about,
his price was fairly correct. You can buy ASTM goggles in the vicinity of
$25.

REP. JOHNSTON: And would you support this bill if it was structured so that
instead of the Department of Consumer Protection coming up with standards,
the standards are just the ASTM standards already set forth.

MICHAEL DODGE: If it were the ASTM standards set forth, I don't know why we
would need the bill. Every paint ball goggle manufacturer in this country
follows the ASTM standards. You would be legislating something that already
occurs. In fact, 60% of the goggle manufacturers in this country do
additional testing above and beyond the ASTM standards.

REP. JOHNSTON: Thank you.

SEN. COLAPIETRO: I'm just a little curious. Why would you object to wearing
glasses that would protect your eyes.

MICHAEL DODGE: I don't object to wearing goggles. I think a set of paint
ball goggles is the single most important piece of paint ball equipment you
will ever buy.

          What I object to is asking the Department of Consumer Protection to
          spend the time and money to duplicate something which the industry
          has already embraced and I also have some concerns that will be
          addressed by the people who come after me about the enforceability
          of this law and how much it would cost the taxpayers of the State of
          Connecticut to create these standards, to enforce these standards to
          train law enforcement on these standards.

          But like I said, there will be someone coming after me who's going
          to talk about this more than I would.

SEN. COLAPIETRO: Would you prefer that we adopt those AS, whatever
standards?

MICHAEL DODGE: I would prefer, the thing about the ASTM and there is, you
all received as part of your written testimony from the ASTM on who they
are, what they do.

          These standards are constantly updated. If you perhaps said the
          latest version of the ASTM standards, the latest version presently
          is standards F-1777-99a. If they were to come out with new standards
          this year, they would be F-17701-a.

          If you were to make this law that it applies to the most recent ASTM
          standards, I would be much more in favor of that than the law as it
          is written now. I just fear that the Department of Consumer
          Protection will not have the time to adequately develop standards
          and this bill may relate in more eye injuries that would result from
          people wearing goggles that again, meet the Connecticut standards
          but don't meet the ASTM standards.

SEN. COLAPIETRO: So we'd be better off if we adopted the ASTM standards.

MICHAEL DODGE: Yes, we would.

SEN. COLAPIETRO: Thank you. No further questions.

REP. FOX: Okay, thank you, Sir.

MICHAEL DODGE: Certainly. Melissa Webster. Good afternoon.

MELISSA WEBSTER: Good afternoon. My name is Melissa Webster. I'm here in
opposition of Raised S.B. 1326 AN ACT CONCERNING PAINT BALL SAFETY. I'm a
paint ball player myself. I've been playing for about two years now.

          My opposition to this bill is not because I don't believe in eye
          safety. I actually support eye safety. The reason I don't support
          this legislation is because it will have no real impact on eye
          safety and in the end run it will just cost taxpayers money.

          The reason that this bill is unnecessary and unneeded, is because
          the industry self-regulates itself already and the frequency of eye
          injury in the sport of paint ball are so low and there's also a need
          for education. And this need for education is not something that
          will be addressed by this bill and thus, nothing will really happen
          with eye injury with this bill.

          The industry of self-regulations aren't even addressed so I will not
          even be covering that for time reasons. What I will be addressing
          instead is frequency of eye injury as well as education.

          Eye injury is a serious topic, as well as any injuries. Paint ball
          sport does not have a high rate of eye injury. A player paying paint
          ball has a 1/100th of 1% of a chance of getting an eye injury while
          playing paint ball. That means one out of every roughly 9,600 people
          who play paint ball receive an eye injury, nationwide. This is a
          very small number.

          What is even more interesting is the chance of receiving an eye
          injury playing baseball or hockey is greater. A person playing
          baseball is one out of 2,278 person chance of getting an eye injury.
          A person playing hockey has a one out of 3,484 chance of getting an
          eye injury.

          Basically, if you're playing baseball you're four times more percent
          chance of getting an eye injury and if you're playing hockey, three
          times more likely to get an eye injury than playing paint ball.

          Yet, presently in Connecticut, there are no laws mandating eye
          protection for hockey, baseball or any sport whatsoever.
          Furthermore, in the last 12 years not a single law was proposed
          mandating eye protection in any of these sports or any sports.

          What is really needed is not a law that will codify what is already
          in place, but what is needed is education and awareness programs.
          This proposed law does not address the real reasons why paint ball
          players fail to wear proper eye protection.

          While this reason is distinctly different amongst each individual,
          the rules are similar. Simply put the public view's paint ball
          markers as toys. The public view's paint ball is a sport and like
          most sports, they see it as relatively harmless. This misconception
          is unfortunately stereotyped by Hollywood.

          Several recent episodes, including CBS's comedy, Kings and Queens
          and MTV's Staria, has shown characters playing paint ball without
          masks. And any paint ball player who plays paint ball knows that the
          first thing you do is wear that mask and keep that mask on at all
          times. And that's something that is amplified to anybody who plays
          the game.

          Basically with the popularity of this sport growing, steps must be
          taken to counter these misconceptions of paint ball markers being
          toys and paint ball markers being harmless. These attitudes that
          must be addressed in order to reduce pain ball related eye injury
          must be taken and not reinventing codifying laws that are already
          followed by the whole industry.

          Thus, instead of spending money on regulations for eye protection
          and forcement of wearing eye protection as this proposed law
          suggests, I say advocate for funds that instead would be used for
          educational programs that are already in place. Only by educating
          the public of the possible dangers associated with the sport of
          paint ball, as well as the necessity for safety precautions can we
          reduce or negate these dangers and can we truly begin to address the
          issue of eye injuries.

          Public education is the key. Without any attempt to educate the
          public about the proper safety precautions that must be followed,
          even this bill will not have the desired effect on eye injuries in
          paint ball. I'll take any questions if there are any and I
          appreciate you listening to my testimony.

SEN. COLAPIETRO: Now I understand why you didn't want to testify together.
One wants to save us money and one wants us to spend money.

MELISSA WEBSTER: I don't want you to spend money.

SEN. COLAPIETRO: Well, programs would cost an arm and a leg.

MELISSA WEBSTER: We realize that, but if the money's going to be spend
anyway to impose this law, which money would be needed to develop
regulations in the Department of Consumer Protection and also to fund police
supervision of these games.

          I mean, throughout the state, there's numerous fields playing an
          average of seven to twelve months a year, at least on the weekends
          if not during the week days. And plus all the various, which you
          would call back yard games where people get together and play paint
          ball, but they're not on commercial fields.

          In a given weekend in the summer, I can't count, I mean there must
          be a good 40, 50, 60 paint ball games going on. The police are
          supposed to monitor each one of these games? It's going to cost a
          lot of money to do that.

          What we're advocating for, if you want to do that, fine. But we'd
          rather you see the money go to education for programs that are
          already in place.

          I know nationally, there's a program, I believe the PCCC, it's in
          your testimony that we submitted and this program called Goggles On
          which kind of like the drug programs were, they encourage kids not
          to do drugs. Well, this encourages kids to wear goggles which should
          be done anyway. These programs are already in place. Why do we need
          to pass laws to basically codify what's already there.

SEN. COLAPIETRO: This is what makes me wonder. Everybody's in favor of
something but they don't want to tell them to put it on. That seems to be
basically what you're both say it. We're all in favor of it, we want it, but
don't tell me to put them on.

          It's like your seat belts.

MELISSA WEBSTER: We're not telling them that.

SEN. COLAPIETRO: Your other argument about all these sports and everything.
I think there's plenty of coverages you know, for bike riders, for people to
go on in-line skates. There's all kinds of things where you've got to wear
elbow pieces, helmets. In baseball, you have to wear a helmet.

MELISSA WEBSTER: Yeah, but it's not mandated. It's only --

SEN. COLAPIETRO: (Inaudible-two speaking at once) So I mean, I don't buy
that argument. Maybe somebody else might.

MELISSA WEBSTER: There are no laws, though. I mean the baseball and
football, hockey, there are no laws for eye protection, no laws for any type
of safety protection for these sports and you're more likely to get eye
injury in baseball.

SEN. COLAPIETRO: But what I'm saying is, in your paint all games, you have a
shield, is that what it is? Not a goggles? I'm not understanding.

MELISSA WEBSTER: Actually, we have brought a mask, if I could have one of
our colleagues bring it up. It's a full face mask which protects the eyes,
the ears and basically, they come in several colors. This one's in black.
They come in greens and purples.

          : Would anybody care to see it? I could bring it up to you.

SEN. COLAPIETRO: No, no, I'm just trying to understand. You say you would
prefer that as opposed to goggles.

MELISSA WEBSTER: Those are goggles. Those are the goggles that are used.

          : This is required on paint ball games.

MELISSA WEBSTER: That's required on every paint ball field I've ever been on
and every paint ball field I've talked to anybody who has ever been on. That
is what must be worn at all times, not only by players but by spectators as
well, because safety is a number one concern and it already is occurring, so
why spend money to have the state tell us we have to do something that we're
already doing.

SEN. COLAPIETRO: I understand, I think I understand. It's not a mandate but
that's what you're doing.

MELISSA WEBSTER: It's not a mandate but that's what we're doing. It's just
common sense. The same as in baseball, it's common sense to wear a helmet so
you do so.

SEN. COLAPIETRO: Would you prefer that over goggles, I mean.

MELISSA WEBSTER: Actually, it is a mandate. This is a mandate on any paint
ball field. This is the goggles that we're talking about. This is what the
goggles are.

SEN. COLAPIETRO: You mean an organized field?

MELISSA WEBSTER: Organized field, unorganized field. This is what you must
wear. This is a paint ball goggle set up.

SEN. COLAPIETRO: Who says?

MELISSA WEBSTER: Who says?

SEN. COLAPIETRO: I want to know who mandates it.

MELISSA WEBSTER: Who mandates it? The industry, commercial operators,
noncommercial operators, anybody who has insurance for paint ball. Anybody
with any common sense.

SEN. COLAPIETRO: How about the kids in the back yard?

MELISSA WEBSTER: Kids in the back yard, if they have common sense will be
wearing this. If they don't, you can't legislate common sense and they're
still not going to wear the goggles even if you pass the law, if they're
already not going to do it to begin with. So this law doesn't help that.

SEN. COLAPIETRO: They said that about the bicycle helmets. They're wearing
the helmets.

MELISSA WEBSTER: Not all of them. I know many kids that don't wear bicycle
helmets.

SEN. COLAPIETRO: If you get caught without them, you get a $20 fine.

MELISSA WEBSTER: But how often is that enforced? There is no fine.

REP. FOX: Okay, thank you.

MELISSA WEBSTER: Other questions?

REP. FOX: Oh, I'm sorry, go ahead.

REP. FERRARI: Could you use this law, this bill as a method of enforcing the
efforts of, so you have people out on the field playing the game and you can
tell them, you now, you can't take that off because it's a state law that
says you can't take that off.

MELISSA WEBSTER: The thing is that they already don't take it off and who's
going to enforce it? Are you going to have a police officer at every paint
ball game? That's going to cost a lot of money.

REP. FERRARI: Well, actually you would enforce it as the referee or
whatever.

MELISSA WEBSTER: We already enforce is as in you don't take your goggles
when players are playing and you don't take it off ever.

REP. FERRARI: One other thing. Has the organization tried to work with the
Wal-Marts and the Big-Ys, wrong store, the K-Marts and those kinds of things
to try to insure that when they sell these things that they sell them with
the proper safety advice and so on, to parents, particularly, who buy these
things for the children.

MELISSA WEBSTER: I can't really speak to that because I did not speak with
Wal-Mart, K-Mart, but the vast majority of paint ball players, while yes it
is seen in the mass markets as this plastic kind of toy gun, toy marker type
thing, it's not.

          The majority of paint ball markers are metal markers that cost
          several hundred dollars each and almost everyone I know has one of
          those markers, they don't have these plastic things from Wal-Mart
          that don't really work, to be honest with you. But I honestly do not
          know off the top of my head if it's been done with Wal-Mart, etc.,
          K-Mart, etc. because I did not talk with them.

REP. FERRARI: It may be one way that the industry or the, I don't know
whether you call it an industry or not, but, that you could help insure
safety through the proper safety. I realize that children don't use their
head when they think about those things and frankly, I didn't either when I
was that age.

MELISSA WEBSTER: I'm not here on behalf of the industry, I'm here on behalf
of myself and as a concerned citizen so I can't speak to what the industry
does.

REP. FERRARI: Okay, thank you very much.

REP. FOX: Thank you very much. How about Amy Chantry.

AMY CHANTRY: Hello.

REP. FOX: Good afternoon.

AMY CHANTRY: I'll be brief. I just prepared a small testimony.

REP. FOX: (Inaudible)

AMY CHANTRY: This is mine, this is my personal method I chose to bring with
me because it's my opinion that the general population and people outside
the sector of paint ball, don't understand what it's really about and how we
play and the equipment that we use, so I took it upon myself to come down
here to educate you or to leave myself open for questions because I do find
that the general public doesn't understand the game.

          But, my name is Amy Chantry and I am a Connecticut resident and a
          paint ball player. And let me start out by saying that I commend
          this Committee for taking an interest in paint ball safety. Not much
          is known about the game. Event though paint ball has been around
          since 1981, it's only been recently that the general public has
          recognized it. And with interest comes questions and concerns.

          I, myself, had them when my husband and I start playing four years
          ago. But I found out very quickly that paint ball is a safety
          conscious sport. We have had the opportunity to visit several fields
          in different states and found that the number one rule universally,
          is goggles on. And those goggles have to meet standards, as you've
          heard, from the ASTM.

          A far cry from the early days when people would wear wood shop type
          goggles. Paint ball has come a long way and it's reached intentional
          proportions. In the late eighties paint ball fields started opening
          in places like Brazil and Aruba. Tournaments are now held in all
          countries with professional players competing.

          In 1992, the National Paint Ball Players League was founded,
          providing tournament players with rules and guidelines to be
          followed in tournament play. Recreational players follow similar
          guidelines.

          In 1998, an International Paint Ball Players Association was founded
          and according to their data, 980,000 people played paint ball at
          least once last year. I know these things because I am a paint ball
          player. I have been properly educated on rules and guidelines that
          it takes to play the game.

          The public doesn't need protection from paint ball. It needs time,
          time to evolve in the public's eye as a safe and fund sport that it
          truly is. Perhaps public service announcements, outreach programs, I
          don't know how to tell you to spend your money but I just figure
          that with each person that you talk to and educate and let them know
          that this is what you need to play the game and this is how you play
          the game that it will reach

After the Public Hearing, we were able to speak with Rep. Johnston, Sen. Colapietro, and Sen. Cappiello directly.  After explaining to them, in more detail, the sport of paintball and why we opposed the bill, they actually came around to support our side!

March 27, 2001  Hartford, CT

Thanks to our testimony opposing the above bill, the bill died in Committee and never again saw the light of day.

April 30, 2001  Hartford, CT

Perhaps due to the defeat of the anti-paintball bill in the General Assembly, Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal today held a news conference where he blasted paintball markers as being too realistic looking.  AG Blumenthal proposed that all paintball markers be required to have a bright orange ring around their barrel so that Police Officers will know they are not real guns.  Fortunately, the Attorney General does not have the power to make such requirements.  I presume, however, that one of his cronies in the General Assembly may propose a bill next legislative session to require exactly what the AG recommended.