THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM CANADIAN HUNTING FORUM


Moderators: Canuck
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
gun law
 Login/Join
 
one of us
posted
I'am wondering what it is that is so bad about canadas gun laws, being from the U S we have had some real humdingers our self , now I am not trying to compare the 2 countries or there respective laws just trying to understand your gun laws and what is good and bad about them from the average person that has to live with them on a daily basis , do you have instant background checks, are they trying to ban gun shows, can you have a semi auto , just very curios about my neighbors in the north .
 
Posts: 114 | Registered: 06 February 2004Reply With Quote
new member
posted Hide Post
voiding political commentary and besides for the fact it is not worth the 2 billion it has costed. It is not too bad. As a hunter I can get normal sporting long guns it takes about 20 min o doo te paperwork (As long as the hold time at the registry is not too bad) Oddly enough I think the registry has saved the gun show /private sale after initial problems tranfsers are dead simple.

Black guns and hand guns are different I am not sure on all those rules. We cannot hunt with them so they are of no interest to me. I had a 1911 A1 but sold it off.

At this point my most annoying law is the US export law. It has choked off suppy so it has kept prices up. and some things are almost imposible to get (Berger bullets 204 ruger brass etc) I can't even buy a scope from cabelas. And I won't say how I got my 204 brass Wink
 
Posts: 32 | Registered: 04 January 2005Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Well, the list of complaints is long, but here are a few of my pet peeves:

1. Despite extensive background checks and 45 years of good citizenship, every time I want to buy a gun, I have to call the gov't for permission to buy it. For a while, it took days to get the authorization to transfer, but since this boondoggle has hit $2Billion, it's now often done on the phone in five minutes. Still gets in my craw, though.

2. That I have to re-apply every five years and answer questions such as "When was the last time you beat your wife" (not exactly, but this is the basic sentiment).

3. I can only own handguns if I can prove that I want them for either collecting (getting more difficult) or for target shooting if I belong to a gun club. Can't hunt with them, either.

4. A firearms officer can search my home ANYTIME, WITHOUT NOTICE AND WITHOUT A WARRANT, with the only justification for the search being the knowledge that I own firearms.

5. We have similar restrictions on "evil looking" guns, as you had.

6. We have regulations in place to make gun shows not worth the trouble any more, but due to the cost over-runs, the feds have backed off them, for the time being.
 
Posts: 2921 | Location: Canada | Registered: 07 March 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Canuck32
posted Hide Post
I guess my biggest complaint is that the gov sold the program as a way to decrease gun crime, but the "program" does not address dealing with crimanls. It only deals with registering guns (which don't have a standarized system for serial numbers).
As for handguns, it is now easier to own and to transport handguns in Canada. Under the old system you went to the local Police office and got a permit to go directly from your house to the gun range and directly home (only at a certain time of day). Now I have a permit for all of my handguns that allows me to transport them anywhere in the province 24 hrs a day, 7 days a week for 3 years.
The basic problem with the gun registry is that is just a giant paper tiger which doesn't/hasn't reduced crime. We now have drive by shootings, bar shootings etc and I have yet to hear of a registered gun being used in any of these crimes. I am positive that if they ever had a time when a regiistered gun was used in crime they would be more than happy to let everyone know, and blow their own horn.


If you have that much to fight for, then you should be fighting. The sentiment that modern day ordinary Canadians do not need firearms for protection is pleasant but unrealistic. To discourage responsible deserving Canadians from possessing firearms for lawful self-defence and other legitimate purposes is to risk sacrificing them at the altar of political correctness."

- Alberta Provincial Court Judge Demetrick

 
Posts: 615 | Location: Alberta | Registered: 17 November 2004Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Our black gun and handgun laws are fairly restrictive, but not too bad depending on the province you live in BC and Alberta have fairly livable laws but Ontario and Quebec have really limited what you can do with handguns and black guns (EI AR-15's) 25 and 32 caliber pistols are prohibited and so are pistols with a barrell length less than 4 inches.

When it comes to long guns you can freely own semi auto's and bolts no caliber restrictions and no restrictions on the number you can own.

You have to be licenced to own firearms and there are different classes of licence for different types of firearms. To transfer firearms it takes about 5 minutes on the phone with the firearms center and the gun now belongs to the buyer.

All firearms in canada are registered unless they are antiques.

We can ship firearms from seller to buyer through the post office though.

We have storage laws that basically say you can't have a loaded firearm in your home and they have to be locked up or stored so that a thief can't easily steal them.

A firearms inspector can only search your home if you have more than 10 firearms registered to that address.

BUT.... You are required to help them search for evidence that will later be used against you in court. Which "should" be against our charter of rights and freedoms but is yet unchallenged in court (a breathalizer test is the samething really).

It is thought that the Canadian firearms act is in violation of roughly 17 rights we have in the charter of rights and freedoms.
 
Posts: 968 | Location: British Columbia | Registered: 29 May 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
My list of complaints is everything these guys said and what I find most agravating is no 50BMG no AR-15, magazine capacity restrictions and no hunting with hand guns.


HAVE FAITH IN GOD.
 
Posts: 206 | Location: Alberta ,Can | Registered: 29 October 2004Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
At the risk of pissing someone off....you really have no idea what real gun control is. The laws in the UK are probably the most draconian in the world and a contributing reason for my planned emmigration to Canada is you're much fairer laws.
In the UK: no handguns, no semiautos (with exception of 22rf and that was because they forgot to add them to the restriction..doh), forget full autos and the local police dictate how many guns you may have - usually 4 or less. Further, before purchase i must send my certificate away and literally beg for a slot for that specific gun and calibre. Sell the firearms and you must again send the cert. away!

Question: what is the legal position in Canada if you were to shoot a burglar and can you use a gun for home defence? (forget it in UK - a farmer was recently imprisoned for shooting a burglar).
 
Posts: 157 | Location: Scotland at the mo. | Registered: 27 February 2005Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Scotts please dont take this as legal advice but as far as I know self defence is not usualy accepted as a reason to obtain firearms in Canada there is something on the books for exeptions dont know of anyone ever getting the firearms for defence permit from the government as far as deadly force or any force for that matter only if you are threatened.


HAVE FAITH IN GOD.
 
Posts: 206 | Location: Alberta ,Can | Registered: 29 October 2004Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
4. A firearms officer can search my home ANYTIME, WITHOUT NOTICE AND WITHOUT A WARRANT, with the only justification for the search being the knowledge that I own firearms


MMMM. Not quite. They do need a warrant if you don't agree to the 'inspection'. See 104 below.

Please. Don't make our laws sound any worse than they are.

quote:
INSPECTION

Definition of "inspector"


101. In sections 102 to 105, "inspector" means a firearms officer and includes, in respect of a province, a member of a class of individuals designated by the provincial minister.

Inspection


102. (1) Subject to section 104, for the purpose of ensuring compliance with this Act and the regulations, an inspector may at any reasonable time enter and inspect any place where the inspector believes on reasonable grounds a business is being carried on or there is a record of a business, any place in which the inspector believes on reasonable grounds there is a gun collection or a record in relation to a gun collection or any place in which the inspector believes inspector believes on reasonable grounds there is a prohibited firearm or there are more than 10 firearms and may

(a) open any container that the inspector believes on reasonable grounds contains a firearm or other thing in respect of which this Act or the regulations apply;

(b) examine any firearm and examine any other thing that the inspector finds and take samples of it;

(c) conduct any tests or analyses or take any measurements; and

(d) require any person to produce for examination or copying any records, books of account or other documents that the inspector believes on reasonable grounds contain information that is relevant to the enforcement of this Act or the regulations.

Operation of data processing systems and copying equipment


(2) In carrying out an inspection of a place under subsection (1), an inspector may

(a) use or cause to be used any data processing system at the place to examine any data contained in or available to the system;

(b) reproduce any record or cause it to be reproduced from the data in the form of a print-out or other intelligible output and remove the print-out or other output for examination or copying; and

(c) use or cause to be used any copying equipment at the place to make copies of any record, book of account or other document.

Use of force


(3) In carrying out an inspection of a place under subsection (1), an inspector may not use force.

Receipt for things taken


(4) An inspector who takes any thing while carrying out an inspection of a place under subsection (1) must give to the owner or occupant of the place at the time that the thing is taken a receipt for the thing that describes the thing with reasonable precision, including, in the case of a firearm, the serial number if available of the firearm.

Definition of "business"


(5) For greater certainty, in this section, "business" has the meaning assigned by subsection 2(1).

Duty to assist inspectors


103. The owner or person in charge of a place that is inspected by an inspector under section 102 and every person found in the place shall

(a) give the inspector all reasonable assistance to enable him or her to carry out the inspection and exercise any power conferred by section 102; and

(b) provide the inspector with any information relevant to the enforcement of this Act or the regulations that he or she may reasonably require.

Inspection of dwelling-house


104. (1) An inspector may not enter a dwelling-house under section 102 except

(a) on reasonable notice to the owner or occupant, except where a business is being carried on in the dwelling-house; and

(b) with the consent of the occupant or under a warrant.


Authority to issue warrant


(2) A justice who on ex parte application is satisfied by information on oath

(a) that the conditions for entry described in section 102 exist in relation to a dwelling-house,

(b) that entry to the dwelling-house is necessary for any purpose relating to the enforcement of this Act or the regulations, and

(c) that entry to the dwelling-house has been refused or that there are reasonable grounds for believing that entry will be refused

may issue a warrant authorizing the inspector named in it to enter that dwelling-house subject to any conditions that may be specified in the warrant.

Areas that may be inspected


(3) For greater certainty, an inspector who is carrying out an inspection of a dwelling-house may enter and inspect only

(a) that part of a room of the dwelling-house in which the inspector believes on reasonable grounds there is a firearm, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device, prohibited ammunition, a record in relation to a gun collection or all or part of a device or other thing required by a regulation made under paragraph 117(h) respecting the storage of firearms and restricted weapons; and

(b) in addition, in the case of a dwelling-house where the inspector believes on reasonable grounds a business is being carried on, that part of a room in which the inspector believes on reasonable grounds there is ammunition or a record of the business.

1995, c. 39, s. 104; 2003, c. 8, s. 53(F).

Demand to produce firearm


105. An inspector who believes on reasonable grounds that a person possesses a firearm may, by demand made to that person, require that person, within a reasonable time after the demand is made, to produce the firearm in the manner specified by the inspector for the purpose of verifying the serial number or other identifying features of the firearm and of ensuring that the person is the holder of the registration certificate for the firearm.


If It Doesn't Feed, It's Junk.
 
Posts: 408 | Location: Sechelt, B.C., Canada | Registered: 11 December 2001Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
So far as I can see, the gun law only serves as a method of harrassing legitimate gun owners. It does absolutely nothing to thwart criminals who aren't likely to register their guns anyway. It's like the guy in Alberta who recently killed the 3 mounties. Apparently he had a history of mental instability, and a police record, yet he still had firearms. I'll guarantee you he didn't have a FAC either. The guys committing these crimes have very little to live for and don't mind dying, but unfortunately they take a lot of good people to the grave with them. We've spent 2 billion on this law, and it's not working for us. What else can be said? Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal


Cal Sibley
 
Posts: 1866 | Location: Montreal, Canada | Registered: 01 May 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of NBHunter
posted Hide Post
The government told us that the reason for registering guns was not so they could just take them away from us later. Well several months ago the Canadian government "pushed to immediatly prohibit the ownership of the Ruger Mini-14 rifle". Fortunatly after much e-mail,mail,and phone calls we were able to stop this but it does show that they have a plan that is not in our best interests.


---------------------------------

It's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it
 
Posts: 741 | Location: NB Canada | Registered: 20 August 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of Cariboo
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by AOWM:
My list of complaints is everything these guys said and what I find most agravating is no 50BMG no AR-15, magazine capacity restrictions and no hunting with hand guns.


You can own 100 rifles chambered for the .50 Browning if you wish. The AR-15 is restricted not prohibited and is no harder to own than a handgun.
 
Posts: 277 | Location: McLeese Lake, B. C. Canada | Registered: 06 June 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Thanks for the correction Caribou sooooo I gess its time to go Gun shopping Smiler


HAVE FAITH IN GOD.
 
Posts: 206 | Location: Alberta ,Can | Registered: 29 October 2004Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of Gatehouse
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by ScotsGun:
At the risk of pissing someone off....you really have no idea what real gun control is. The laws in the UK are probably the most draconian in the world and a contributing reason for my planned emmigration to Canada is you're much fairer laws.
In the UK: no handguns, no semiautos (with exception of 22rf and that was because they forgot to add them to the restriction..doh), forget full autos and the local police dictate how many guns you may have - usually 4 or less. Further, before purchase i must send my certificate away and literally beg for a slot for that specific gun and calibre. Sell the firearms and you must again send the cert. away!

Question: what is the legal position in Canada if you were to shoot a burglar and can you use a gun for home defence? (forget it in UK - a farmer was recently imprisoned for shooting a burglar).


In Canada, you are clearly able to defend yourself.

Hopwever, you are supposed to use "reasonable" force to counter the force you encounter. Cool

So if a 150lb kid breaks into the home of a large male like myself, wiht no weapon, I wouldn't be justified in shooting him.

If I was an old lady,m and the punk was threatening towards me, then yeah, shooting him is legal.

If you are confronted with an armed assailant, then you are justified for shooting him.. Big Grin


375 Ruger- The NEW KING of the .375's!!
 
Posts: 3082 | Location: Pemberton BC Canada | Registered: 08 March 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
the worst part of the canadian firearms law is
this is only (i won't say first step ) but one
of many steps toward all out prohibition
 
Posts: 136 | Location: s.e. bc | Registered: 16 January 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Omega
posted Hide Post
Gun purchases are up 62% and handgun purchases over 300% in the last year. Not what the Liberals thought would happen. But it only takes 20 minutes to buy a gun, with the card you are preapproved and can't be refused.

It is 4 mounties, my son worked with 3 of them. This obsenity only proves how very little value gun control has.
 
Posts: 72 | Location: Alberta | Registered: 01 October 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Wooly ESS
posted Hide Post
Thanks to Mauser98 and Cariboo for setting the record straight. As has been advised, lets not make this any worse than it is.

In my experience, the C68 legislation has not affected my ability to own and use firearms any more than was previously possible. What it has done is added considerable bureaucratic hassle to gun ownership for legitimate gun owners without seriously impacting the illegimate use of firearms. It has accomplished this non-result at horrific public expense.

In Canada, one is allowed to defend him/herself by any reasonable means. Many cases exist to support this. In a recent Calgary example a German tourist was attacked in his camper by a deranged individual. The tourist fought him off using a brick, and in the scuffle the attacker was killed. Not only were no charges laid, the tourist was allowed to return promptly to Germany.

However, the reality is, should you kill a threatening intruder with a combat equipped, Colt .45 Auto you will likely have to answer more questions than if you had used a nearby lamp stand.

The current gun legislation desperately needs overhaul, but it will take a new government to accomplish this I think.


The truth will set you free,
but first it's gonna piss you off!
www.ceandersonart.com
 
Posts: 574 | Location: The great plains of southern Alberta | Registered: 11 March 2005Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
No, let's not make them sound worse than they are. However, let's not sugarcoat them, either.

Plain and simple, the gun registry is a feel good exercise designed to buy votes from urbanites and women's groups. It serves no other purpose.

To me, a law that is designed not to protect the public, but simply make the uninformed public "feel" safe, is the most dangerous law of all. It is the work of a government that is pandering to the irrational fears of its constituents, instead of serving them properly - say by maybe dealing with criminals appropriately??? So, yeah, it's a terrible law, and while it could get much worse, it's plenty bad as it is. Kinda like being "a little bit pregnant", a bad law is still a bad law. It is simply the next step in the road to totalitarianism.

Things are moving better at the CFC - my last transfer took just 5 minutes. So what? I still resent that as a law-abiding citizen, who despite being forced to submit to instrusive inquisitions in order to get my PAL in the first place, I still have to ask permission from "Big Brother" every time I want to buy another piece of machinery! "Pretty please, may I have more??" The only reason for the improvements is that the Mandarins got caught with their hands in the cookie jar and couldn't keep pouring money into the hole. Otherwise, the bureaucrats would be quite happy to continue to spend their days making life as miserable as they can for us uneducated rednecks.

(Actually, that's the biggest joke of this whole fiasco - that the gov't vilified hunters and gun owners as rednecks in order to get the public to buy into their sorry scheme. Then they blamed the rednecks for screwing up the whole registry. Which then leads me to think that - if a bunch of uneducated rednecks could outsmart all those high-priced, "edjimicated" lawyers and bureaucrats in the Justice Dept., then this government really is as stupid as we all think they are. roflmao )

AFA the warrantless inspection of my home, Yes, I do have the right to refuse entry. So, guess what the grounds that they apply for the warrant will be? - "The registrant refused a voluntary inspection of his firearms storage facilities, as permitted by the regulations. Therefore, the applicant requests a warrant to search the registrant's premises to determine whether there is a violation of the Firearms Act."

Same shit, different day.

Rant off! Mad
 
Posts: 2921 | Location: Canada | Registered: 07 March 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
The gun law seems like an effort to appease the womens groups ....especially after the Marc Lapine incident where he shot the gals who had publically humiliated him. I also assume the Liberal govt thought it would be a way to tax gun owners. In the beginning they tried to charge to have the guns registered then had to back down and do it for free, when people refused to register. I can gurantee in the future they will have a charge for guns that will have to be paid on an annual or maybe 5 yr. term. They will justify this by saying "well it cost 2 billion dollars to register these guns and now the users have to pay." Of course the non gun users in the country will agree and it will be rammed down our throats. People have a short memory and most people will forget that it was supposed to subvert crime they will prefer to villify the gun owners. People will get pissed off at having to pay for example $50.00 every five years per gun and sell the guns --then the antis will have won. Sad isn't it? The natives and metis will be able to keep their guns without paying the fee like the rest of us,because they don't have to pay now as it is. Since we will not be able to hunt anymore we will lose interest in our conservation efforts and you can bet that the indians and metis won't put any money into conservation. There will be no hunters in the back woods keeping an eye on what big business is doing (such as oil companies, and lumber companies) they will run roughshod over the land and people wont see or care what they do. And people wonder why we're so damned scared to register our guns. It's not the registration that's so bad --it's the aftermath. No I'm not a conspiracy therorist I can just put 2 and 2 together and see the future of what I love to do so much.

the chef
 
Posts: 2763 | Registered: 11 March 2004Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Yea what Fisher said thumb


HAVE FAITH IN GOD.
 
Posts: 206 | Location: Alberta ,Can | Registered: 29 October 2004Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia