Quote:
Originally Posted by Throttle_monkey1
Again the Section you just posted references CFO approval for approving a transfer of a restricted or a 12(6) handgun and the conditions that must be satisfied. So if farmer Joe meets those criterion and belongs to a gun club and all that good jazz and the transfer is approved, what part of Section 28 deals with him shooting from his house/dwelling in a rural area that doesn't have any firearm discharge restrictions?
Basically the way I see it is that there is NO way they want anyone doing that and the law wasn't written with the intent to allow it, but when you cobble together 100+ pages of poorly-written legislation that controls lawful firearm ownership/use, with very little focus on criminal misuse of firearms, there are bound to be some omissions and screw ups
|
It is in black and white as to why you are allowed to own a Restricted/ prohibited firearm and their uses. In multiple sections, this is one it refers to
(a) for use in target practice, or a target shooting competition, under specified conditions or under the auspices of a shooting club or shooting range that is approved under section 29;
It does not matter what section of the act it is posted in, It is posted. at no time in the act does it state you can use a restricted or prohibited firearm outside of what is written.
You are giving very poor advice to which you have shown no substance on your end. Other then to troll and try to set a person up who may not know better and who takes your view of between the lines you have as law. To which they may be charged with unlawful use of a firearm along with other charges.
If you can provide any actual documentation to the difference I would be very interested. But skirting around and trying to say because it isn't transporting or it isn't transferring or borrowing that the subsections do not apply is simply wrong. They do apply as to the intent of owning the firearm.
If you want change then you need put pressure on the Government and the CFO to change the rules.