Safety Kills Are Misused in Airsoft
Surrender, safety, bang bang. Whatever you may call it, I’m sure you know exactly what I’m talking about and are already typing a lengthy rant on how it’s either necessary for safety or the bane of airsofters everywhere.
However you may feel about safety kills, I would suggest reading this article. Many believe that it would be better to do away with safety kills altogether, but I plan to argue a new implementation of the rule that I believe should be universally adopted, as well as explain why I believe the safety kill is the most improperly utilized rule in all of airsoft.
To start, just in case there is anyone either new to the sport or is simply confused about what exactly I mean by safety kill, I want to review the rule, how it is typically used, and how I would change the rule to make it worth keeping. While there are many ways fields around the United States have implemented the safety kill rule, most are variations of two primary methods of implementation.
From my experiences both on the field and interacting with others online in the larger airsoft community, the most common way the safety kill rule is used is when an MED, or minimum engagement distance, is established at the field. For example, if a field establishes an MED of 10 feet, a player is not allowed to shoot another player unless they are at least 10 feet away. In this example, safety kills would be implemented to cover that MED, so players can still eliminate the other team if they are within 10 feet of each other. In this case, safety kills would be mandatory to accept, as there is no other form of elimination allowed within that range (with the possible exception of melee kills, which would require a harmless fake weapon).
While this rule seems well intentioned, and often is put in place with safety in mind, it is quite often abused by players who are too cowardly to risk getting shot or are all too keen on arguing “well technically” to get what they want. What often ends up happening is players will start to run around, especially going around corners or through doors, yelling “safety! safety!” or “bang bang!” blindly just hoping to get as many kills as possible without risking getting shot. If off of technicality, a safety kill within the MED has to be called at all times, spamming the kill word at the top of your lungs going around corners or into rooms is an inevitability. This can also lead to players trying to safety kill others outside of the established range, either out of ignorance/the inability to tell distances without measuring or in an attempt to get a kill without getting close to the enemy player. This behavior of rule abuse is incredibly toxic and has been the instigating factor of many fights on the airsoft field. It singlehandedly works to kill the morale of players and increases the chances of them leaving early or not returning to the field at all in the future. This level of detriment to the airsoft community is part of why I believe the rule should be changed and implemented universally.
The other widely used method of implementing safety kills is often used at fields that do not have an established MED. In this ruling, safety kills are entirely optional. They are not enforced by staff, and it is up to the discretion of the player being safety killed to decide if he or she will accept it or not. This is the ruling that I have personally seen at local fields that do not have an MED, and is preferred method among the two current options. Under this ruling, it is entirely up to the players that show up that day on whether or not a safety kill is accepted, and is even more so decided on an individual basis. While this eliminates the safety spamming issue that the first method allows, there can still be issues that come up on the field.
The issues that arise from not enforcing safety kills come from players who opt to use safety kills as a mercy kill. There are a lot of players that find themselves in a position to shoot an enemy up close, but choose to attempt a safety kill instead. This is either to avoid potentially shooting a soft spot and inflicting unnecessary pain or to avoid the potential of both players getting eliminated in a 50/50 scenario. While one of these two rationales comes from a respectful place, it can quickly become a point of contention as there is no rule enforcing that method of elimination. Players in 50/50 scenarios who get safety killed can opt to shoot as a response, as they have no obligation to accept the safety kill, and players who get outplayed can be petty and shoot the other player under the guise of “technically I don’t have to call it.” This can cause players to walk back to spawn feeling salty at best, start a fight at worst, and realistically lead to players going from safety kills out of caution to overshooting to never have that scenario happen again.
Looking at these two methods and their issues, contention from safety kills seems to come from the rules allowing it to either be spammed or ignored entirely, and I believe that I have a solution that can meet in the middle and satisfy both situations.
Personally, I view safety kills as, and believe that they should always be seen as, a courtesy kill if you have the drop on someone. For example, if I were to turn a corner to find an enemy player with his gun down, facing away from me, or both, I could safety kill him from a close distance or tap my barrel on/against them and go about my way. To clarify, if I am in a position where I have the drop on an enemy player and there is no way that they could shoot me before I could shoot them, I believe a safety kill can and should be taken. Unless you have the drop on someone, safety kills should never be used. In situations where an MED is in place, fields should incorporate melee kills (with actual fake weapons, not just a player’s hand) and not allow safety kills in situations other than the one described above.
To recap, safety kills should be implemented in the following manner:
No Field MED- Safety kills are mandatory to take, but can only be used if a player has a clear drop on an enemy player, where there is no possible argument that the encounter was a 50/50 situation. Melee kill rule is optional as players can shoot and be shot from any distance.
Field MED- Implement melee kill rule to provide an in MED elimination option. Otherwise, safety kills are mandatory to take, but can only be used if a player has a clear drop on an enemy player, where there is no possible argument that the encounter was a 50/50 situation.
I believe that the key to making this new ruling successful is a widespread, universal adaptation of it. If every field is this explicit about safety kills, and there is no variation between fields on what is allowed and not allowed, the general community’s understanding of safety kills will shift from the old “anything goes depending on where you’re playing” to “safety kills can only be done this way.” If that established understanding can be made across the entire community, safety kills could become something like an execution in Call of Duty: an earned bragging opportunity if you get the drop on someone, and something you actively strive to not be on the receiving end of. This would drastically reduce the potential of arguments and confrontations over safety kills, and could change the safety kill from a problematic rule into one that uplifts players and grants bragging rights if you can successfully pull one off. Increasing the requirements a situation needs to satisfy to allow for a safety kill to take place will allow them to be mandatory without the risk of them getting spammed.
