Antique pistol use

Tact870 could you tell us how they refer to the antique firearm in your letter? The reason I ask is because the following is stated clearly in the regulations "Firearms include rifles, shotguns, air or pellet guns, bows and crossbows. You may use semi-automatic or repeating firearms for hunting in Ontario, but not handguns or fully automatic firearms. Air and pellet pistols with a muzzle velocity less than 152 metres (500 feet) per second may be used for hunting in Ontario"

Perhaps you could cover your personal info and scan a copy for us to see and print.
 
I think Brother Rockeye is walking an extremely fine line with some of his statements.

point #3 re cc93 possessing at any location --- it is illegal to take a firearm to a meeting or gathering (apparently does not refer to gunshows and firearms clubs). I have absolutely no doubt that if you did take one visibly to a large meeting you would be facing thousands of dollars in legal fees proving you are innocent (remember that a antique is a firearm if used in a crime). Hold up a bank with an antique and it is a firearm --- display it at a political gathering maybe is maybe no but probably is

point #11 cc 106 & 107 giving false information to a police officer is not illegal. I find that one highly suspect regardless of what the information is about

point # 12 cc 117.03 a police officer cannot demand license etc --- he most certainly can confiscate the antique until its authenticity is verified and other legal requirements are confirmed with the local prosecutor. Think in terms of days to weeks before its return

cheers mooncoon
 
Think in terms of days to weeks before its return
Click to expand...

I'd guess months to years and chances are the rest of your firearms collection would be with your antique during that time. I assume a prosecutor would move slow and be very careful in thier research on this topic. They'd have no problem rebutting complaints that legal property was being illegally held when the story starts with "......... he showed up wearing a revolver........."

These are not the type of regulation you want to experiment with. Could cost you everything even if you are right.
 
In surprised some of you guys dont want to mount a Antique webley revolver onto the hood of your jeep and drive around like on rat patrol :p
No point in makeing them change the laws by pushing things with Antiques.
The more i read here lately the more my head shakes.
 
I'm with Dingus on this one, seems to be lots of guys running around like Pancho Villa, all it will take is for the media to glom onto the "deadly loophole", and the law will change. Remember, the law can be changed at any time! I'm pretty sure that if all the liberal types knew that people could buy (eeek!) handguns.... without even having the little plastic card that "proves" they're safe, it would be the top news story of the week. Don't push it! Enjoy your antique revolvers, but keep a low profile!
 
BUSHMAN79 said:
Don't push it! Enjoy your antique revolvers, but keep a low profile!
Click to expand...

I agree with that 100% but I think it's also important to understand what we can and cannot do with them as far as the law is concerned. There's no point in hiding in your basement fondling your antiques. Thats what restricteds are for..... ;)
 
For those of you who would like to see how the email reads have a look at this. I didn't bother attaching the other 2 pages of definitions but we all know the CC definitions of firearms....

mnrhandgunletter.jpg
 
I inquired about Antique Handguns" about a week ago...

Foolishly I used my 7 year old son as an example....All I probably did was add "Motivations for Legislature"...
The idiosyncratic component for me was, he's 7 and "technically" could buy a Revolver, chambered in 45ACP (albeit in a frame that may explode with modern Ammo but, that's not illegal...). I'm very close to 40 and, Need Rpal to aquire a .22 pistol and, then, could only fire it at a range with proper documentation to transport it there. By asking about it[Antique Pistol] alone, provides "motivation for legislature" but, as we know, the current Laws wouldn't be relaxed, the Antique Collectors would suffer.

1 person (of 27+ million in Canada), 1 AK styled rifle (of a ?? in Canada) and, now R.V. Henderson has to fight over a .22 that just resembles the "bad gun".
 
tactical870 said:
For those of you who would like to see how the email reads have a look at this. I didn't bother attaching the other 2 pages of definitions but we all know the CC definitions of firearms....

mnrhandgunletter.jpg
Click to expand...

To me this letter reads that Ontario does not control the right to hunt with a handgun, the Feds control it.
Also, it uses the word "if" the Feds allow a handgun to be used to hunt, then its ok with Ontario....as the Feds don't allow hunting with a handgun then Ontario doesn't either.

The letter sounds to me like Ontario is passing the buck, has no decision made on whether you can hunt with a handgun....but rather state to follow the federal regs.
If the feds allow it your good to go....but I don't see where the feds or Ontario allow it.

or...if the Feds allow you to hunt, then you'd have to mind the Ontario regs regarding which calibers you can hunt with. Its a moot point.

...or maybe I am misunderstanding the whole thing:confused:
 
Hunting and fishing regs are the jurisdiction of the provinces. If it is fine with the local MNR then it is fine with me. Like others of mentioned, we should just quietly enjoy our hobby and use a lot of discretion.
 
Hryken said:
To me this letter reads that Ontario does not control the right to hunt with a handgun, the Feds control it.
Also, it uses the word "if" the Feds allow a handgun to be used to hunt, then its ok with Ontario....as the Feds don't allow hunting with a handgun then Ontario doesn't either.

The letter sounds to me like Ontario is passing the buck, has no decision made on whether you can hunt with a handgun....but rather state to follow the federal regs.
If the feds allow it your good to go....but I don't see where the feds or Ontario allow it.

or...if the Feds allow you to hunt, then you'd have to mind the Ontario regs regarding which calibers you can hunt with. Its a moot point.

...or maybe I am misunderstanding the whole thing:confused:
Click to expand...

Yes. The feds control where we can and can't use classes of firearms. They do not currently allow (although legal if authorized) hunting with a restricted weapon. They do not regulate where we can and cannot discharge an antique firearm as they are not recognized as firearms. This is similar to the situation with bows and crossbows.
 
tactical870 said:
Yes. The feds control where we can and can't use classes of firearms. They do not currently allow (although legal if authorized) hunting with a restricted weapon. They do not regulate where we can and cannot discharge an antique firearm as they are not recognized as firearms. This is similar to the situation with bows and crossbows.
Click to expand...


Gotcha...I guess I was more just picking apart the letter and not really thinking about what the law states and how grey it is.
Understood.

I agree with others as well, in the end its best to just keep a low profile.
 
Hi guys. just a thought. Watch out for the expression " within the confines of types and calibres that can be used" (pg.21 of regulatons for Ontario under firearms says "no handguns" may not be of concern) but page 22 were it lists what can be used, may. the expression "confines of types" may miss lead, but could get your butt bit. Tread careful. I was talking to the RCMP last week and they feel, it would only take one incident to have serious repocussions.
Some of the biggest collectors are retired police and they don't want to see this freedom taken away any more than the rest of us.
 
If you want to hunt with an 'antique' get one of the single shot big bore rifles they are 1/4 the price of a handgun and offer 10 times the functionality/killing power. The ultimate 'antique' hunter would be a pre 1897 mauser/steyr/etc action scoped and in 35 cal.
 
david doyle said:
If you want to hunt with an 'antique' get one of the single shot big bore rifles they are 1/4 the price of a handgun and offer 10 times the functionality/killing power. The ultimate 'antique' hunter would be a pre 1897 mauser/steyr/etc action scoped and in 35 cal.
Click to expand...

Well said David, as always.
Merry Christmas.
 
info request

I appreciate all the information posted to date regarding the provisions for antique status firearms. or simply put: old pieces of non firearm metal devices.

One question I have is:

an antique status revolver... Taken with me into the bush during our annual moose camp hunt.... worn in a holster... legal? or is that considered concealed? Do I have too carry it in an opaque container everywhere I go? does that make it legal? even though for all purposes it is not considered a firearm unless used in a crime?

Even though I understand the regs partially and not for a lack of trying, antique status revolvers still have transportation/carry limitations? even though it is just really old metal.

In a holster worn on the hip=bad? goto jail, ruin our hobby and future possession of firearms?

I am not trying to start a thread on concealed carry loop hole nonsense but simply the more I read about the provisions regarding antique status the more I shake my head.

It seems the law is on our side, mostly, but we are still not trying to exercise our rights as we fear the liberal retaliation. SO, liberals still win?

Anyways, I appreciate your professional response to this question and deeply regret if this has been posted ad nauseum throughout the site.
 
sdwatt said:
I appreciate all the information posted to date regarding the provisions for antique status firearms. or simply put: old pieces of non firearm metal devices.

One question I have is:

an antique status revolver... Taken with me into the bush during our annual moose camp hunt.... worn in a holster... legal? or is that considered concealed? Do I have too carry it in an opaque container everywhere I go? does that make it legal? even though for all purposes it is not considered a firearm unless used in a crime?

Even though I understand the regs partially and not for a lack of trying, antique status revolvers still have transportation/carry limitations? even though it is just really old metal.

In a holster worn on the hip=bad? goto jail, ruin our hobby and future possession of firearms?
Click to expand...

Yes, technically you are good to go with an externally visable holster. That said I would still advise extreme caution. There may be LEO's who are "sensitive" to what you are doing. The whole experience may turn unpleasant as often an officer's default position is if in doubt to arrest/charge/confiscate and let the courts sort it all out. If your cool with that risk go for it.

Only real sage advice I can give, if at all possible avoid the justice system, it's not there to serve you. I once had a crown prosecutor tell me, if he was given enough time and resources he could probable find fault/conviction in just about any case that gets presented to him. So even if you end up being rightous your in for a heck of a ride.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom