I just went up through ND and into Manitoba in October, no problems what-so-ever. I had the forms filled out before I arrived at the border and Canadian customs. Unlike my Spring trip across the boarder I did NOT need to have the firearms visually inspected and measured.
One thing that happened this trip was that U.S. Customs requested the firearms serial numbers upon return to the U.S. I was told by the U.S. Customs folks that I should have registered my firearms with U.S. Customs BEFORE I left the U.S. I've never encountered this before on the many times I've crossed the border. I guess it's a result of the Sept 11 events.
quote:Originally posted by Dave King: One thing that happened this trip was that U.S. Customs requested the firearms serial numbers upon return to the U.S. I was told by the U.S. Customs folks that I should have registered my firearms with U.S. Customs BEFORE I left the U.S. I've never encountered this before on the many times I've crossed the border. I guess it's a result of the Sept 11 events.
Not really -- it has been a standard procedure for a long time. I've frequently taken photographic equipment, especially professional motion picture and video cameras, out of the US. In every case, I've found that it helps if you register the equipment and its serial numbers with US Customs before you leave the US. This shows, among other things, that you did not buy the equipment while you were out of the US -- if you did so, you would need to declare it and possibly pay duty on it.
Posts: 5883 | Location: People's Republic of Maryland | Registered: 11 March 2001
LE270 is right about the Customs complaint. They only care about the potential for duties and illegal importation of a firearm. The declaration form 4457 is just for your own protection against getting hassled on return.
Returning only days after Sept 11, I did have a couple of problems at the border. Apparently, some Canadian border officials are not conversant with their actual regulations and have a few extras of their own invention. Among these are: removing the bolt and putting it in another piece of luggage (not carryon!) and storing the ammo in a locked case. Neither of these provisions is actually required but I was chastised for not doing them. If you caught someone like this on entry and they were in a bad mood you might actually have problems. Given that i was returning, and all the Canadians were greatly disposed to treat Americans with sympathy I just got a mild admonition. I attempted to impress upon these folks that they ought to coordinate with the people posting regulations on the website so we knew what was expected but I don't think that message sank in.
I went through Customs in Sarnia, On. days after the WTC event. I had the permit filled out before the border, and had the U.S. Customs forms for bringing back Caribou filled out before the border. This was one of the easiest border crossings both ways I've ever had.
A Japanese camera; a rifle made in Belgium. The US customs inspectors has no way of knowing that you didn't buy them abroad unless you register them on exit. I have never been a customs inspector but I can see where they could get an attitude.
Posts: 2037 | Location: frametown west virginia usa | Registered: 14 October 2001
quote:Originally posted by Harald: [S]ome Canadian border officials are not conversant with their actual regulations and have a few extras of their own invention. Among these are: removing the bolt and putting it in another piece of luggage (not carry on!) and storing the ammo in a locked case. Neither of these provisions is actually required but I was chastised for not doing them.
Actually, they were probably correct and you were indeed treated kindly. The Criminal Code of Canada was amended by our federal anti's and now governs firearms storage and ownership. In my own home I must either have a trigger lock on OR store guns in a locked gun safe OR store them disassembled (ie. bolt out & elsewhere). Ammo must be under lock and key separate from the guns. And that is a real pain when you live rural. It is costing law abiding guys domestic pets and livestock.
Cheers!
[This message has been edited by BBBruce (edited 11-18-2001).]
Posts: 36231 | Location: Laughing so hard I can barely type. | Registered: 21 April 2001
I believe that residents in rural areas such as farms or ranches with livestock etc. are allowed to have a loaded firearm(rifle) at ready access without trigger locks or such devices. As a side note, the failure of the registration system is evident as the feds are giving rebates to those that have already registered in the hopes that this will attract more people to register arms. What a waste of resources and money. And on something that will not deter crime in any way. Just my redneck opinion; here's to us and those like us.
A lot of people have been fooled in this country about the need for strong gun control. And the lies from the Liberals continue....check out the Canadian Firearms Centre web site. They say 1400 people are killed in Canada each year with firearms. Then, when you look at Statistics Canada site, you see that in 1999 (the last year shown), there were 166 firearms deaths in Canada. Those stats don't also mention that 67% of those deaths were with handguns (a major portion of which are unregistered guns that were smuggled across the US border). Another telling stat is that over 60% of the murders in Canada already had a criminal record when the homocide occurred. It is obvious that spending 600 million (so far) on these new gun laws is a gross waste of money but the anti's in Canada have a strong and vocal base of support.
quote:Originally posted by Daryl Elder: I believe that residents in rural areas such as farms or ranches with livestock etc. are allowed to have a loaded firearm(rifle) at ready access without trigger locks or such devices.
Hi Daryl,
No. Cops are mostly gunners and will generally turn a blind eye in the boonies, but its still illegal. If something happens to force them to notice, you're at risk of being charged.
Posts: 36231 | Location: Laughing so hard I can barely type. | Registered: 21 April 2001
BBBruce, I stand corrected but will nevertheless attempt to sift through the steaming piles to see what the statutes say. But, therein lies part of the problem: laws are enforced at the discretion of the officer. Unreasonable laws should be challenged in court and repealed is need be; not ignored. I guess spitting on sidewalks is a good example.(?)
Section 86 of the Canadian Criminal Code. Storage of Non-restricted Firearms 4.(1) a person may store a non-restricted firearm only if the non-restricted firearm (a) is unloaded; (b) is (i) rendered inoperable by the secure locking device or by the removal of the bolt or bolt-carrier, or (ii) stored in a container, receptacle or room that is kept securely locked and that is constructed so that it cannot readily be broken open; and (c) is not stored with cartridges, unless the cartridges are stored in a container or receptacle described in subparagraph (b)(ii).
(2) Paragraph (1)(b) does not apply to any person who stores a non-restricted firearm temporarily if the person reasonably requires the non-restricted firearm for the control of predators or other animals in a place where the firearm may be discharged in accordance with applicable federal and provincial Acts and regulations and municipal bylaws.
Posts: 176 | Location: Saskatchewan | Registered: 14 January 2001
When I went to Canada two years ago I was treated beautifully by every Canuck I ran into. It was probably the most hospitable country ive ever been in.
The Canuck custom's just waved me right thru, with a "good hunting eh". The eastern coastlines of the place were breathtaking, I'd go back in a minute......................10
