Freedom Ordnance FX-9 10inch Upper Receiver IN-STOCK

Bfranklin said:
Can you provide a link to where this is stated?
Click to expand...

You want a link to the Firearms Act?

1. You can only possess a restricted firearm in your home. You need an ATT for it to leave your residence, even your back deck.

2. The only permitted purpose to target shoot a restricted firearm is at a s29 approved range. Unless your back deck is covered by your ATT and your back yard is a s29 approved range- no bueno.

Source:
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/f-11.6/
 
1) your back deck is part of the dwelling house. This is established in case law.

2) discharge of restricted firearms is not governed by the criminal code.

3) acquisition is not the same as use
 
Bfranklin said:
Why can't you just post them.
Click to expand...

Here is section 92(1)(b)
92 (1) Subject to subsection (4), every person commits an offence who possesses a prohibited firearm, a restricted firearm or a non-restricted firearm knowing that the person is not the holder of

(b) in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, a registration certificate for it.
Click to expand...

So knowingly putting yourself in the possession of a restricted firearm that is not registered and does not have a registration certificate, is a problem.

Moving on to possessing a restricted firearm at a place other than your dwelling house that is not covered by your ATT, that’s this criminal offence.

IMG_2409.jpg

So, assuming you’re willing to argue in court that your deck is part of your dwelling (curtilage), you still have to get past loading and discharging your restricted firearm at a non s29 approved range.

The Firearms Act sets out the lawful purposes you may acquire -and continue to possess- a restricted firearm at sections 28 and 71(b). Should the CFO learn you are target shooting a restricted firearm at a place that is not a s29 approved range, they SHALL revoke the registration certificate for the firearm.

IMG_2410.jpgIMG_2411.jpg
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2409.jpg
    IMG_2409.jpg
    97 KB · Views: 157
  • IMG_2410.jpg
    IMG_2410.jpg
    90.3 KB · Views: 153
  • IMG_2411.jpg
    IMG_2411.jpg
    63.2 KB · Views: 155
Paul_1982 said:
Here is section 92(1)(b)


So knowingly putting yourself in the possession of a restricted firearm that is not registered and does not have a registration certificate, is a problem.

Moving on to possessing a restricted firearm at a place other than your dwelling house that is not covered by your ATT, that’s this criminal offence.

View attachment 770257
Click to expand...


I agree with your explanation of the above.


So, assuming you’re willing to argue in court that your deck is part of your dwelling (curtilage), you still have to get past loading and discharging your restricted firearm at a non s29 approved range.

The Firearms Act sets out the lawful purposes you may acquire -and continue to possess- a restricted firearm at sections 28 and 71(b). Should the CFO learn you are target shooting a restricted firearm at a place that is not a s29 approved range, they SHALL revoke the registration certificate for the firearm.

View attachment 770260View attachment 770261
Click to expand...

That's not what it says, so I am not sure why you understand it that way. I do not agree with you at all, and I am very curious if there have ever been any charges brought against anyone for what you claim to be illegal.
 
Bfranklin said:
I agree with your explanation of the above.




That's not what it says, so I am not sure why you understand it that way. I do not agree with you at all, and I am very curious if there have ever been any charges brought against anyone for what you claim to be illegal.
Click to expand...

There are no charges. They just revoke your certs.
 
Bfranklin said:
Curious if that has ever happened.
Click to expand...

Doubtful.

The number of people in Canada who a) own restricted firearms and B) live rural enough to safely discharge a firearm from an attached deck and c) is willing to take that risk, is very small. On top of that, being caught would be even less of a chance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom