[Lizana]

To the people saying the shield is a "prop" then he would have to file a request with the sheriff of the county he would be traveling to and request for it to be used as such prop. And plastic or composite materials are listed in another section of the legal code as prohibited as well. Also even if they dont consider the shield a weapon (even though i can clearly be classified as such by the law) the gauntlets would fall under the same category. Unfortunately California does not allow for "relic" versions of "metal knuckles" as most states do, because then you would have a valid loophole.

[Berith]

Just make the spikes interchangeable with dummy foam spikes. Not just the shield, but ALL the spikes. If they are bolted on you can simply swap them around with a screw driver.

[Lizana]

Source: Berith Just make the spikes interchangeable with dummy foam spikes. Not just the shield, but ALL the spikes. If they are bolted on you can simply swap them around with a screw driver.

Still would not chance the metal gauntlets, those would still be considered a weapon under the law

[cen1]

I still don't understand why they can't workout having an escort or a segregated area of the convention... what's one more security guard??

[Lizana]

Source: cen1 I still don't understand why they can't workout having an escort or a segregated area of the convention... what's one more security guard??

14 bucks an hour x 12 hours a day x 3 days = $504 min for everyone that wants to bring their "real" armor. When you have a subscriber base of over 11 million people you have to draw the line somewhere and make it a firm line otherwise you set the expectation of your customer that you can get special treatment if you spend enough money. Also keep in mind its not just a security guard, there's also legal issues to haveing someone with access to weapons at a large gathering, also just the liability of having it in worn there. If an accident did happen, and no mater how many precautions you take accidents can and will happen, blizzard and the convention hall would be liable for the people in attendance. These may be rules that blizzard has to abide with due to their contract with the convention hall or to get the necessary permits to hold to con at all

[Berith]

Source: Lizana Still would not chance the metal gauntlets, those would still be considered a weapon under the law

It surprises me that in a country that has no problem with their general population owning automatic weapons that have no other use then to shoot people, that a metal costume gauntlet would be considered a weapon.

Just one of life's little ironies that in Canada a metal gauntlet would never be considered a weapon. (Unless you strapped a shot gun to it)

[TomHuxley]

I think some people are over-interpreting CA law here. Anything made from box-construction (including the gauntlets) cannot be considered a serious weapon, as it would buckle under impact. A well-wielded garden trowel would be a greater potential threat (let alone a baseball bat or crowbar). There is NO WAY this would hold up in a court of law as a weapon. Harping on about the spikes (which are also box construction) is like trying to classify a table with sharp corners a weapon.

Legality aside, obviously Blizzard can choose to allow or disallow whatever costumes they want. I can easily see why Blizz wouldn't want a costume like this on the general floor, where the pointy bits could leave a nasty scratch or inadvertantly poke an eye, but I would also think they'd want to show something this cool on stage. Celebrating fan enthusiasm is always a good thing for your product, and I think if the right people were contacted they would want to help you show off the costume in an appropriate venue.

Edit: Perhaps the title "Real Life Onslaught Armor" is throwing some people who don't know what box construction is?

[bludwork]

it's cool but I doubt you can wear that thing anywhere. If you really want to show it off as blizzcon use a manicur (or whatever the call it) those lifeless things they use in store departments to show off dresses. That might get it through, wearing it though.. good luck. I wouldn't want that potentional to be sued either.

[TomHuxley]

Source: Lizana Still would not chance the metal gauntlets, those would still be considered a weapon under the law

No, they wouldn't. I urge you to learn more about box construction. You could not consider box-constructed anything a weapon, as it simply will not function that way. You'd be better off with a pair of cloth gloves to protect your knuckles as you punch someone.

[qygibo]

Source: TomHuxley No, they wouldn't. I urge you to learn more about box construction. You could not consider box-constructed anything a weapon, as it simply will not function that way. You'd be better off with a pair of cloth gloves to protect your knuckles as you punch someone.

I've read through this for a while and just my two cents here, but from reading through the law it doesn't matter if it was intended as a weapon or not, it could still be viewed as a weapon and the law would apply to it nonetheless.

[Tatt]

Qygibo you do not understand what box construction is. Box construction CANNOT be intended to be a weapon ebcause it is not physically capable of being one. It would be like saying that a feather duster could be considered a weapon. It collapses under very light duress.

[Shierky]

wow all this hostile negitivity because of a misunderstanding in a law, for those who do not know Box Construction is use for movie props all the tmie and I do not see film companies going to the shariff everytime they want to make a film useing armor, second it is going to buckle whichhas been mentioned a thousand times already.

King build the suit, send a pic to the heads of Blizzard and see about getting the invite, the idea of Blizzcon is to promote Blizzard to gain more fans and costumers, turning you away because of a prop would not be a smart move on there part when they can show off the suit along side the game version so people can it.

Rock on man the shield will look awesome when it is completed and the brutilizer all I can say is "DAMN"

[qygibo]

And I'm saying that it doesn't matter what the intent of the construction is, I'm pretty sure all that matters is what it's interpreted as according to the law.

[Shierky]

Law is simple you have to prove it is a weapon designed to be a weapon, box construction can not be a weapon it is to weak to sustain any force.

[Warwench]

Not a weapon.

[qygibo]

And then he would take that up with the Sheriff's Department in the county in which he is wanting to bring the armor and they could determine whether it would be considered a weapon or not.

[Tatt]

IT CANNOT BE A WEAPON!!! You could do as much damage with an empty coke can as with box constructed armor. Please go to wiki or something and look it up before you comment again, you are not adding anything to this conversation.

[Shierky]

Dude it's a prop, thousands of people everyday buy props, it is designed to be a costume nothing more.. to many na sayers I tell ya. Get over it, and go back to the wow forums to troll.

[qygibo]

I post based on this:

PROJECT ON HOLD! My first response in e-mail from Blizzard doesn't seem hopeful. I really don't understand it, but I guess they really do consider spiky armor a weapon. As such, I'm really hesitant to spend so much on something that will sit in my living room and never be seen by anyone other than me, my wife, and my cat. What I'm planning right now is to go 100% complete, paint and all, on the axe and shield. My down payment should cover that. I will have them shipped here to San Diego and take them to Blizzard to show them exactly what I'm planning. If they give the green light for something involved at BlizzCon, then we will continue as planned. If not, well at least I have a pretty awesome axe and shield. Wish me luck! I really didn't expect this to end this way. I hope it doesn't and you all see the awesomeness that is the real life Onslaught Armor somewhere at BlizzCon in 2010.

Blizzard does not want the armor in the contest because they seem to view the spiky armor as a weapon. You all can say all that you want about how it is a prop and how it couldn't realistically do any damage, but you know what? Your opinion in the end doesn't really matter, because you don't run Blizzard or BlizzCon. The only people who would probably be able to turn the tide to get Blizzard to change their mind would be the police department in the area, because it sounds like Blizzard is interpreting the law the same as Lizana and others are interpreting CA law. What it actually is meant to do doesn't matter, how it is viewed does matter.

[TomHuxley]

Source: qygibo Blizzard does not want the armor in the contest because they seem to view the spiky armor as a weapon. You all can say all that you want about how it is a prop and how it couldn't realistically do any damage, but you know what? Your opinion in the end doesn't really matter, because you don't run Blizzard or BlizzCon.

Whoa, hold on there. That's a totally separate part of discussion. We have people claiming that it could be considered a weapon under CA state law, which is completely false. How Blizzard wants to classify it under their rules and if they let it in to their convention is a different matter, and one that has no bearing on the issue whether it is a weapon in the legal sense.

Blizzard makes its rules not because of state law (although of course it must observe those too) but because of what it views as prudent to run a safe, fun, and non-actionable (read: lawsuit free) conference. Those are important considerations to Blizzard, but not relevant to the issue of what is legal to carry in the state.