Dear Elfie -
Have you played paintball before with the markers in current use? At 300 ft/second, there's already quite a difference between being marked with a high quality ball (Ouch!) and a low quality "rec ball" or "practice ball" (OUCH!!!!). The rec balls are usually a little more heavily constructed - less likely to break in the barrel but also less likely to break on the recipient. What you're suggesting is taking that up several orders of magnitude. Making the projectile conical and having a stronger base and side walls, even if you keep the velocity the same, is going to have probable safety issues. No child is going to get shot in the torso with something like that and look down and laugh! Maybe a Hussar warrior child could, though.
Seriously, I second the opinions that you seek some legal council on the viability of this product idea before you go sinking a bunch of money into it. They're experts, were just a bunch of guys with keyboards and internet access.
Have you played paintball before with the markers in current use? At 300 ft/second, there's already quite a difference between being marked with a high quality ball (Ouch!) and a low quality "rec ball" or "practice ball" (OUCH!!!!). The rec balls are usually a little more heavily constructed - less likely to break in the barrel but also less likely to break on the recipient. What you're suggesting is taking that up several orders of magnitude. Making the projectile conical and having a stronger base and side walls, even if you keep the velocity the same, is going to have probable safety issues. No child is going to get shot in the torso with something like that and look down and laugh! Maybe a Hussar warrior child could, though.
Seriously, I second the opinions that you seek some legal council on the viability of this product idea before you go sinking a bunch of money into it. They're experts, were just a bunch of guys with keyboards and internet access.
