Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Guns & Ammo Discussion

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #211  
Old 03-20-2017, 03:38 PM
catnthehat's Avatar
catnthehat catnthehat is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ft. McMurray
Posts: 31,739
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Throttle_monkey1 View Post
Section 17:

S 17 Subject to sections 19 and 20, a prohibited firearm or restricted firearm, the holder of the registration certificate for which is an individual, may be possessed only at the dwelling-house of the individual, as recorded in the Canadian Firearms Registry, or at a place authorized by a chief firearms officer.

And section 20 deals with ATCs:

20 An individual who holds a licence authorizing the individual to possess restricted firearms or handguns referred to in subsection 12(6.1) (pre-December 1, 1998 handguns) may be authorized to possess a particular restricted firearm or handgun at a place other than the place at which it is authorized to be possessed if the individual needs the particular restricted firearm or handgun

(a) to protect the life of that individual or of other individuals; or

(b) for use in connection with his or her lawful profession or occupation.

Again there is nothing on discharge, but this is from the firearms act. I don't
have an ATC and have never seen one in person so I can't comment on the language within the ATC itself.
I do not know how a person with an ATC would use a restricted weapon
in the case of (A) or (B) without firing it unless they beat something over the head with the hand gun.
That seems pretty self explanatory to me.
Cat
__________________
what power? FFP--SFP?paralax? Heck with it, I'm screwing on the Centrals and diopter- pass me my single point sling!
  #212  
Old 03-20-2017, 03:41 PM
Norwest Alta Norwest Alta is online now
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,333
Default

Had a ATC. They are allowed for protection not for shooting the heads of dandelions.
  #213  
Old 03-20-2017, 04:14 PM
Throttle_monkey1 Throttle_monkey1 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 184
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by catnthehat View Post
I do not know how a person with an ATC would use a restricted weapon
in the case of (A) or (B) without firing it unless they beat something over the head with the hand gun.
That seems pretty self explanatory to me.
Cat
I agree Cat, I was trying to answer 700-223 above me that asked about it.

Norwest Alta- do you remember the wording on the ATC itself? I've never seen one so I have no idea what they say.
  #214  
Old 03-20-2017, 04:16 PM
700-223 700-223 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Throttle_monkey1 View Post
Section 17:

S 17 Subject to sections 19 and 20, a prohibited firearm or restricted firearm, the holder of the registration certificate for which is an individual, may be possessed only at the dwelling-house of the individual, as recorded in the Canadian Firearms Registry, or at a place authorized by a chief firearms officer.

And section 20 deals with ATCs:

20 An individual who holds a licence authorizing the individual to possess restricted firearms or handguns referred to in subsection 12(6.1) (pre-December 1, 1998 handguns) may be authorized to possess a particular restricted firearm or handgun at a place other than the place at which it is authorized to be possessed if the individual needs the particular restricted firearm or handgun

(a) to protect the life of that individual or of other individuals; or

(b) for use in connection with his or her lawful profession or occupation.

Again there is nothing on discharge, but this is from the firearms act. I don't
have an ATC and have never seen one in person so I can't comment on the language within the ATC itself.
Thanks, that's interesting. Anyone have an ATC they could share the wording on?
  #215  
Old 03-20-2017, 04:18 PM
700-223 700-223 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by catnthehat View Post
I do not know how a person with an ATC would use a restricted weapon
in the case of (A) or (B) without firing it unless they beat something over the head with the hand gun.
That seems pretty self explanatory to me.
Cat
I hear you - OTOH logic, reason, and self-explanatory is not an assumption I make with regards to our firearms laws.
  #216  
Old 03-20-2017, 04:23 PM
Norwest Alta Norwest Alta is online now
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Throttle_monkey1 View Post
I agree Cat, I was trying to answer 700-223 above me that asked about it.

Norwest Alta- do you remember the wording on the ATC itself? I've never seen one so I have no idea what they say.
Yep goter right here in front of me. What would you like to know?
  #217  
Old 03-20-2017, 04:29 PM
Norwest Alta Norwest Alta is online now
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,333
Default

I guess the one condition that may be applicable is a blanket condition.

"The firearm shall only be drawn from the holster when the holder of this authorization believes it may be necessary for the protection of his/her life or the lives of others".
  #218  
Old 03-20-2017, 04:29 PM
Throttle_monkey1 Throttle_monkey1 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 184
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norwest Alta View Post
Yep goter right here in front of me. What would you like to know?
Just wondering what it says for conditions, how specific it is for when it's applicable etc.
  #219  
Old 03-20-2017, 04:31 PM
700-223 700-223 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 265
Default

Does it list specific conditions where discharge is lawful?
  #220  
Old 03-20-2017, 04:32 PM
Throttle_monkey1 Throttle_monkey1 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 184
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norwest Alta View Post
I guess the one condition that may be applicable is a blanket condition.

"The firearm shall only be drawn from the holster when the holder of this authorization believes it may be necessary for the protection of his/her life or the lives of others".
That one is very specific about when you can draw. I guess if someone really wanted to push the limit they could shoot some cans with the holster still on lol.
  #221  
Old 03-20-2017, 04:34 PM
Norwest Alta Norwest Alta is online now
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Throttle_monkey1 View Post
That one is very specific about when you can draw. I guess if someone really wanted to push the limit they could shoot some cans with the holster still on lol.
Lol swivel holster for the quick draw McGraw guys that can't get'er up.
  #222  
Old 03-20-2017, 04:35 PM
Norwest Alta Norwest Alta is online now
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 700-223 View Post
Does it list specific conditions where discharge is lawful?
No. Can't find anywhere were it says I can discharge it
  #223  
Old 03-20-2017, 04:55 PM
Norwest Alta Norwest Alta is online now
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 700-223 View Post
Does it list specific conditions where discharge is lawful?
It don't say anything about discharging it or not on my att either.
  #224  
Old 03-20-2017, 06:05 PM
700-223 700-223 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 265
Default

Thanks Northwest.
  #225  
Old 03-20-2017, 07:08 PM
TomCanuck TomCanuck is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,495
Default Here's One Lawyers take on the Matter

http://www.plourdelaw.com/blog/2015/...-ontario.shtml

"As one of the few lawyers in Canada specializing in firearms law, I am quite often asked legal questions about firearms law in the various firearm Facebook groups in which I participate, including the one for Canada's National Firearms Association, NFA Reloaded. The question I get asked the most often is "where can I shoot my restricted firearms?" or some variation of that question. When I give my answer, the next question is usually something like "where can I find a source that says this?", to which my answer is "you can't really" because the answer depends on a legal analysis of a number of different sources. I present the analysis here."

If you want to shoot restricted firearms off your back porch you want to be discrete about it, because it could land you in court. There's more to it than the CC of C. Even if you manage to win in court, it will cost you.
__________________
Pacifists exist at the pleasure of the more aggressive, or by the sacrifices made by the less passive.
  #226  
Old 03-20-2017, 07:22 PM
700-223 700-223 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 265
Default

Now that's interesting. Doesn't apply to me as I live in the city, but does seem this lawyer thinks it is legal for SOME firearms owners.
  #227  
Old 03-20-2017, 07:26 PM
TomCanuck TomCanuck is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,495
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 700-223 View Post
Now that's interesting. Doesn't apply to me as I live in the city, but does seem this lawyer thinks it is legal for SOME firearms owners.
Yup, and he'll be more than happy to defend them in court. Win or lose LOL.

I agree, there is no black and white prohibition of it in the CC, but like they say, the process is the punishment.
__________________
Pacifists exist at the pleasure of the more aggressive, or by the sacrifices made by the less passive.
  #228  
Old 03-20-2017, 07:57 PM
West O'5 West O'5 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: W5
Posts: 381
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newview01 View Post
This thread is like a long boring book.

But it would be helpful if a serving LEO would let us know what the charge would be, or if there is precedence of some sort.
Yet here you are....still reading.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomCanuck View Post
http://www.plourdelaw.com/blog/2015/...-ontario.shtml

"As one of the few lawyers in Canada specializing in firearms law, I am quite often asked legal questions about firearms law in the various firearm Facebook groups in which I participate, including the one for Canada's National Firearms Association, NFA Reloaded. The question I get asked the most often is "where can I shoot my restricted firearms?" or some variation of that question. When I give my answer, the next question is usually something like "where can I find a source that says this?", to which my answer is "you can't really" because the answer depends on a legal analysis of a number of different sources. I present the analysis here."

If you want to shoot restricted firearms off your back porch you want to be discrete about it, because it could land you in court. There's more to it than the CC of C. Even if you manage to win in court, it will cost you.
AMEN!!

Hate to say I toad a so.......oh who am I kidding...I toad a so.
__________________
The toughest thing about a zombie apocalypse is pretending I'm not excited.
  #229  
Old 03-20-2017, 09:30 PM
Bushrat's Avatar
Bushrat Bushrat is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,839
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Throttle_monkey1 View Post
I'm not twisting any agenda or taking anything out of context. You're saying an ATC makes one exempt from "the regulations that require restricted firearms to only be legally fired at an approved range". What regulation is that? Section 19?

The one that basically says says a person who has their RPAL may be authorized to transport their firearm for any good and sufficient reason such as:

i) for target practice at an approved range. (Paraphrased).

Section 19 is about being authorized to transport and what criteria need to be met to obtain authorization/approval to transport. So of course target practice at an approved range would be a valid reason for authorization to transport. And you would not be authorized to transport it to your friend's house to plink. But the rural homeowner who has his restricteds licensed to that address who shoots from his house/dwelling in an area where there are no discharge bylaws doesn't require any authorization to transport to do that.

Do you guys honestly not understand that?
An ATT allows you to transport restricted firearms from your home (where your allowed to possess and store them) and transport them to a certified range where it is legal to shoot them, then transport them back home where your allowed to clean, fondle, admire, and store them.....You can wish, hope, pray all you want but you can't legally shoot them there.

I think you don't understand that if you live where bylaws allow for the discharge of firearms in a rural area, you want to shoot from your house and you don't have to transport your gun as it is already there so no authorization to transport is required is true. That doesn't somehow make your residence and back forty an approved range where it is legal to fire restricted weapons.
They give you an ATT so you can take your restricted firearms from where it is legal store them to where it is legal to shoot them.
  #230  
Old 03-20-2017, 10:47 PM
catnthehat's Avatar
catnthehat catnthehat is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ft. McMurray
Posts: 31,739
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by West O'5 View Post
Yet here you are....still reading.


AMEN!!

Hate to say I toad a so.......oh who am I kidding...I toad a so.
There was nothing proven in the post you cut and pasted except what the lawyer said in the last paragraph - shooting a restricted firearm on your property in an jnsporov d range COULD land you in court and IF you win it is going to cost you money .
If someone is so sure about it they should go ahead and do it and see where the results gets them and report back
Cat
__________________
what power? FFP--SFP?paralax? Heck with it, I'm screwing on the Centrals and diopter- pass me my single point sling!
  #231  
Old 03-20-2017, 11:13 PM
TomCanuck TomCanuck is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,495
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by catnthehat View Post
There was nothing proven in the post you cut and pasted except what the lawyer said in the last paragraph - shooting a restricted firearm on your property in an jnsporov d range COULD land you in court and IF you win it is going to cost you money .
If someone is so sure about it they should go ahead and do it and see where the results gets them and report back
Cat
Actually, I made the comment about it landing you in court, not the lawyer. Based on common knowledge / sense, not any advanced legal training.

Tom
__________________
Pacifists exist at the pleasure of the more aggressive, or by the sacrifices made by the less passive.
  #232  
Old 03-20-2017, 11:22 PM
catnthehat's Avatar
catnthehat catnthehat is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ft. McMurray
Posts: 31,739
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomCanuck View Post
Actually, I made the comment about it landing you in court, not the lawyer. Based on common knowledge / sense, not any advanced legal training.

Tom
I was answering the person who cut and pasted your quote not you
And no, I won't be going anywhere near court for shooting my restricted hand guns , because I don't do that anywhere but a CFO approved range and will not hunt with anyone that does think they can get away with it
Cat
__________________
what power? FFP--SFP?paralax? Heck with it, I'm screwing on the Centrals and diopter- pass me my single point sling!
  #233  
Old 03-21-2017, 02:07 AM
700-223 700-223 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomCanuck View Post
Yup, and he'll be more than happy to defend them in court. Win or lose LOL.

I agree, there is no black and white prohibition of it in the CC, but like they say, the process is the punishment.
Agreed, not worth the risk.
  #234  
Old 03-21-2017, 02:22 AM
700-223 700-223 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by catnthehat View Post
There was nothing proven in the post you cut and pasted except what the lawyer said in the last paragraph - shooting a restricted firearm on your property in an jnsporov d range COULD land you in court and IF you win it is going to cost you money .
If someone is so sure about it they should go ahead and do it and see where the results gets them and report back
Cat
I was curious more than anything about wording etc. Think we'd all agree, it's not logical or reasonable that you can't target shoot on your own land with a restricted firearm in a location you can legally possess the firearm and safely do so. If you can legally and safely target shoot with non-restricted firearms on your property you should be able to do the same with restricted. That's NOT the case however and while you MAY get away with it, you are taking a big risk.

As far as the lawyers article, I note he also refers to 'regular and structured' target shooting not being allowed unless it is a recognized range. Something to think about it you make a regular habit of practicing at home. Since they aren't defined in the regulation, I suppose we won't know what that means for sure until the precedent is set in case law.
  #235  
Old 03-21-2017, 03:32 AM
ctd ctd is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,710
Default

Not all ranges are certified for restricted firearms.
  #236  
Old 03-21-2017, 06:37 AM
Bushrat's Avatar
Bushrat Bushrat is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,839
Default

I think most here realize the intention of the laws. Some folks want to talk about possible loopholes that they construe as a way to let them get away with shooting restricted firearms at non authorized places are playing a game that could very well wind them up in court if they get caught doing it. That's fine with me.
  #237  
Old 03-21-2017, 06:55 AM
West O'5 West O'5 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: W5
Posts: 381
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 700-223 View Post
Agreed, not worth the risk.
And THAT is exactly the cowardly and defeatist attitude that keeps not only CDNS ,but all "free" citizens oppressed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by catnthehat View Post
There was nothing proven in the post you cut and pasted except what the lawyer said in the last paragraph - shooting a restricted firearm on your property in an jnsporov d range COULD land you in court and IF you win it is going to cost you money .
If someone is so sure about it they should go ahead and do it and see where the results gets them and report back
Cat
I didn't say anything was "proven".
I said "I toad a so"(Trailer Park Ricky quote)in reference to lawyers answer that you WILL NOT FIND permission to shoot at home written in black and white,rather it is a legal interpretation of many regs,and fwiw,you also WILL NOT FIND it written in black & white that it is illegal,nor that a CFO approved range is the ONLY place that you can legally shoot....despite what countless "experts" contributing to this might post and repost,the wording simply does not exist in the law.....I repeat,THERE IS NO LAW THAT PROHIBITS SHOOTING RESTRICTED FIREARMS AT ANY PLACE OTHER THEN CFO RANGE.....rather instead,there are laws that govern where one might TRANSPORT their restricted firearm for authorized purposes.
The ENTIRE ARGUMENT is if you do not TRANSPORT your restricted,then you haven't broken any laws,because again,there is nothing to define nor prohibit locations where one might actually discharge a restricted firearm.......and after 8 pages if internet lawyer nonsense,not a single person has been able to post any evidence to the contrary.....and AGAIN....save your breath posting Sections 19,28,or any other TRANSPIRT regs,they simply are irrelevant and non-applicable as the scenario of discharge at home negates any kind of TRANSPORT regulations compliance.


There's a very simple solution to end the debate once and for all for those that are so adamantly certain that one can ONLY discharge a restricted at a CFO range AND/OR that all other locations are prohibited.....post the relevant section of the Act...simple,yes?
Tell ya what....hint;I'll save you a metric tonne of dry and boring legalese reading,in fact,one of the few LAWYERS in Canada that SPECIALIZES IN FIREARMS LAW has already saved you a ton of reading....NO SUCH REGS EXIST!!
__________________
The toughest thing about a zombie apocalypse is pretending I'm not excited.

Last edited by West O'5; 03-21-2017 at 07:08 AM.
  #238  
Old 03-21-2017, 11:19 AM
deaner deaner is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 80
Default

If anyone is interested in what the people at the canadian firearms program have to say, i had to call them this morning on a different matter but asked them about the topic of this thread and their answer is the only place a restricted firearm may be legally discharged is at an approved range.
  #239  
Old 03-21-2017, 11:33 AM
Throttle_monkey1 Throttle_monkey1 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 184
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by deaner View Post
If anyone is interested in what the people at the canadian firearms program have to say, i had to call them this morning on a different matter but asked them about the topic of this thread and their answer is the only place a restricted firearm may be legally discharged is at an approved range.
Would you normally expect people working at a call centre to give you legal interpretation?
  #240  
Old 03-21-2017, 12:30 PM
West O'5 West O'5 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: W5
Posts: 381
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Throttle_monkey1 View Post
Would you normally expect people working at a call centre to give you legal interpretation?
Exactly.Your typical CFC call center worker has a high school education and is bilingual as a result of growing up in a bilingual region of NB.That hardly qualifies them to interpret complex federal legislation.
Similarily,there are countless threads here on AO of people calling SRD and not having their questions answered satisfactorily and/or receiving outright incorrect information.
Might as well just ask an RCMP Constable fresh out of Regina.
__________________
The toughest thing about a zombie apocalypse is pretending I'm not excited.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.