Indoor private handgun shooting range?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Seems that many despite the ouvert complaining in truth love the security of the Canadian nanny state and are glad they can go through their whole lives without having a single independent thought or having to make a single decision on their own. True freedom and the absence of the social welfare safety net are the stuff Canadian nightmares are made of. Just let the nanny state control your whole life, thought, body and soul and she will take care of you. Security at the expense of liberty. Guess it works for some.
It explains the power that the socialist Liberals have in this country.
 
We here in Edmonton recently had a mass domestic homicide by a guy long known to police.:(. He shot all his victims and no one in the quiet suburban neighbourhood heard a thing.
And the house was just your normal everyday house.
 
EdGCNM said:
I find it irritating that so many shooters believe that the law says you can only shoot a restricted firearm only at an approved range. I believe many RPAL instructors teach this, so it is understandable, but it is not true. Nothing in the federal Firearms Act says this. People are confusing the conditions of their ATT, which does clearly state that you can only transport your restricted firearm to an approved range, with the idea that it can only be fired at an approved range. The distinction is subtle, but very significant, especially when you are talking about a firing range at your home, making the ATT irrelevant (you aren't transporting the gun).

All of the other arguments apply and have to be considered, as well as common sense safety, but you won't find a clause in the FFA that says you must shoot a restricted or prohibited firearm only at an approved range.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be looking in the firearms act, but the CCC. Section 86(1) seems relevant....
 
I think there is a CFO policy in place that says it's illegal to fart down wind for public safety reasons.
Makes for serious frost bite on the ass cheeks when you go for a crap when ice fishing.
But the law is the law and I must obey.
 
86. (1) Every person commits an offence who, without lawful excuse, uses, carries, handles, ships, transports or stores a firearm, a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device or any ammunition or prohibited ammunition in a careless manner or without reasonable precautions for the safety of other persons.
Click to expand...

Hitzy said:
I wouldn't be looking in the firearms act, but the CCC. Section 86(1) seems relevant....
Click to expand...

What if the conditions are met.
Vary carefully and with all reasonable precautions taken?
 
Sorry to digress, but my question is so closely related to this thread's topic. Can a person legally clean their restricted firearms in their detached garages? Lets say the garage is 50 feet from the residence, on the same privately owned property.
 
Halger280HVMag said:
What if the conditions are met.
Vary carefully and with all reasonable precautions taken?
Click to expand...

Then I think we are back to square one where it would need to be either:
A) Approved range by the CFO
B) A business as Redleg pointed out

If you think you are just going to build this and have at er on your own, you will be looking at many court dates and many $$$.
The question posed would be "would a regular average Joe discharge firearms in his home for target practice, and would this be considered a lawful and reasonable use of those firearms". Careless use is a very broad term...and you are better off building it with the CFO/RCMP guidance then waiting to see what will happen after the fact.
 
Last edited:
Have you had a chance to look at this thread in Legalese?
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/foru...-Question-about-using-restricted-arms-at-home

Hitzy said:
Then I think we are back to square one where it would need to be either:
A) Approved range by the CFO
B) A business as Redleg pointed out

If you think you are just going to build this and have at er on your own, you will be looking at many court dates and many $$$.
The question posed would be "would a regular average Joe discharge firearms in his home for target practice, and would this be considered a lawful and reasonable use of those firearms". Careless use is a very broad term...and you are better off building it with the CFO/RCMP guidance then waiting to see what will happen after the fact.
Click to expand...
 
Anything in particular in there I should be reading?
If you want a real answer send Tony Bernardo or Ed Burlew an email.... Much more knowledge on the subject then you or me playing legal battleship on CGN
 
I found the thread mostly interesting.

No legal battleships here.
Simply opinions expressed on a forum.

Hitzy said:
Anything in particular in there I should be reading?
If you want a real answer send Tony Bernardo or Ed Burlew an email.... Much more knowledge on the subject then you or me playing legal battleship on CGN
Click to expand...
 
Halger280HVMag said:
I found the thread mostly interesting.

No legal battleships here.
Simply opinions expressed on a forum.
Click to expand...

There was some good stuff in reference to the FA and CCC there.....when i retire, I'll try and build one legally. Going to set up a rifle range this summer at the old mans farm, he has a backhoe and a couple hundred acres alongside a mountain......should make for some fun lol
 
Halger280HVMag said:
86. (1) Every person commits an offence who, without lawful excuse, uses, carries, handles, ships, transports or stores a firearm, a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device or any ammunition or prohibited ammunition in a careless manner or without reasonable precautions for the safety of other persons.
Click to expand...

Hmm. Yeah, that pretty much makes it possible to charge someone for just about anything they choose to, doesn't it? Not having an approved range would almost certainly qualify as "careless" or "without reasonable precautions for the safety of other persons," regardless of there being no legal requirement otherwise. Good find, Hitzy!
 
EdGCNM said:
Hmm. Yeah, that pretty much makes it possible to charge someone for just about anything they choose to, doesn't it? Not having an approved range would almost certainly qualify as "careless" or "without reasonable precautions for the safety of other persons," regardless of there being no legal requirement otherwise. Good find, Hitzy!
Click to expand...

Really? So you think that it is illegal to hunt? No ranges there

Sorry but there is no law against this

Shawn
 
The issue is for restricted firearms, they can only be fired/loaded or made ready to fire at approved locations, as in approved ranges. I did have the discussion with a CFO and the answer was as long as it follows the template (range design, safe areas beyond the range), meets all the zoning requirements, including permits as required, and is approved by the CFO. In my case the cost for berms, safe areas beyond the berm, and or ballistic drapes far outweighed the benefit. The stupid part is I can still shoot on my property without issue for non-restricted. Of course, I would be completely liable for any stray shot.
 
twoicebergs said:
The issue is for restricted firearms, they can only be fired/loaded or made ready to fire at approved locations, as in approved ranges.
Click to expand...

100% pure BS, you are either ill informed or purposely spreading mis-information.

Go ahead and post up anything from any legislation that says this.

That is the issue, people are parroting BS they heard form someone some where as fact with no clue as to what the law actually says.

Shawn
 
So far we no one able to actually post anything that says this is illegal. Guess what it means if there is no law saying you cant do something? Its legal

Shawn
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom