Restricted firearms

[CV32]

You wouldn't be hunting with it. That would be personal protection or if you aren't adverse to bullet holes in pelts then for finishing off a trapped animal.

Yah, because a trapper never pops a grouse when he happens to see one while checking his trapline. Grouse can be deadly.

 

[hawk-i]

Yah, because a trapper never pops a grouse when he happens to see one while checking his trapline. Grouse can be deadly.

LOL, they can be deadly, if you're speeding on a motorcycle!

 

[theDuck]

Yah, because a trapper never pops a grouse when he happens to see one while checking his trapline. Grouse can be deadly.

I don't doubt that takes place but that was not the intent of the ATC. For the record I am in favour of hunting with restricted rifles. With handguns also. I remember in the 60's the old man and my uncles hunting with pistols for rabbits and pheasants in Essex County. The old man got 7 pheasants one day in a stubble corn field because they wouldn't fly. The shotgun would have done too much damage at close range on the ground.

 

[CV32]

I don't doubt that takes place but that was not the intent of the ATC. For the record I am in favour of hunting with restricted rifles.

The point is, that unless the ATC makes some restriction on the firearm's use that says it cannot be used for the purpose, someone lucky enough to be granted an ATC ought to be able to use it for hunting if they wish.

 

[TheTooner]

That is incorrect. The FCWC and associated regulations can/will/do allow for hunting with firearms. It is not illegal to hunt with a handgun. We cannot do it because the CFO says so, not because of MNR guidelines. Here is the email I received.

Sorry, I have read several Ontarians express it as a hunting regulation of your province. Thanks.

Sask hunting regulations likewise don't forbid using restricted guns, because it is irrelevant as long as federal firearms regulations or CFO policies forbid taking restricted guns to any areas where hunting is permitted.

 

[sheephunter]

What? Why? What possible demographic are they serving? I doubt the general public has any idea that you can bear an antique firearm legally, so who got "proactive" and ruined something for no reason?
I'd love to see who's behind that legislature...

SRD was behind it.....it came from within the government's own ranks.

 

[FHTP]

Technically you can shoot a restricted anywhere that is legal to shoot a non restricted, it's getting an ATT to take it there that is the problem. A CFO will only issue you with an ATT to an approved range, because the CFO's have decided that the only purpose for a restricted gun is target shooting or collecting.
Kristian

If one would own 160 acres, surrounded by crown land, and also that would be the one's primary residence, so the restricted firearms would be legally stored on that property, would that one be able legally discharge those restricted rifles and pistols the one owns? And if that one having properly hunting licensed, open season, would that one be legally harvest a game with the one's restricted firearms? In Ontario?

 

[coreyd]

If one would own 160 acres, surrounded by crown land, and also that would be the one's primary residence, so the restricted firearms would be legally stored on that property, would that one be able legally discharge those restricted rifles and pistols the one owns? And if that one having properly hunting licensed, open season, would that one be legally harvest a game with the one's restricted firearms? In Ontario?

Come on man... this whole thing of "can I discharge on my own property" thing has been beaten to death. Sure you *can* do it, but the law says that the firearm is in your dwelling house, not your property and there is a huge difference and a very clear legal definition of a dwelling house.

 

[caustic]

Alberta recently and purposefully shut the door on that opportunity.

more info please.