I have had my RPAL for nearly 10 years now and this has always been the case. Why the gun lobby is latching on to this right now is beyond me, there are actual changes happening now that need addressing, not something that has been in effect for over 10 years already.
PSA - Firearms transfer notice no longer temp Reg Cert.
- Thread starter Wolverine .303
- Start date
The staff working the phones at the CFP used to tell people that transfer notice is sufficient enough to transport the firearm to the range. Nay sayers on CGN used to sit around waiting for their certs like chumps. Anytime someone asked about this in a thread it got really interesting
For what it's worth, I've scanned my certificates and kept credit-card sized laminated copies in my range kit/gun cases over the years. These copies have never been questioned by customs officers in regular travel home from the US. I was even swatted at the podcast charity shoot in Brockville in 2016, ordered from my vehicle at gunpoint, cuffed, and held for about 45 minutes. My copies of registration certificates were satisfactory to the officers.
You can believe whatever you want is incorrect. Rod Giltaca made a video about this years ago, with emphasis on leaning towards the side of caution and ensuring you have your PAL, Reg Cert and even your conditions paper with you when transporting restricted firearms in order to ensure if you are stopped, all documents you could possibly be asked for, are with you. Why would you rely on a "might confiscate you restricted firearm" when having the reg certs with you would prevent that?
The below section of the Firearms Act states two or more specified places, and as the law is always open to "interpretation" the Crown and a Judge might not see it your way. I am not willing to risk the future of my family and a criminal code conviction on a "might."
Firearms Act Section 129:
Transporting and using prohibited firearms or restricted firearms
19 (1) An individual who holds a licence authorizing the individual to possess prohibited firearms or restricted firearms may be authorized to transport a particular prohibited firearm or restricted firearm between two or more specified places for any good and sufficient reason, including, without restricting the generality of the foregoing,
(a) for use in target practice, or a target shooting competition, under specified conditions or under the auspices of a shooting club or shooting range that is approved under section 29;
(a.1) to provide instructions in the use of firearms as part of a restricted firearms safety course that is approved by the federal Minister; or
(b) if the individual
(i) changes residence,
(ii) wishes to transport the firearm to a peace officer, firearms officer or chief firearms officer for registration or disposal in accordance with this Act or Part III of the Criminal Code,
(iii) wishes to transport the firearm for repair, storage, sale, exportation or appraisal, or
(iv) wishes to transport the firearm to a gun show.
You can decide what you want to risk or quote what Rod Giltaca has said until the sun comes up (when did he get his law degree?) but nothing you have quoted from the Firearms Act says you MUST have your registration certificates with you or that you can only transport from a named club to another location such as your home. I am simply pointing out what "might" happen. You "might" spontaneously combust, too, but do you carry a fire extinguisher with you everywhere you go on the remote chance it will happen?
if you have a valid PAL and you have valid reg certs (not necessarily in your possession) and you are travelling by a reasonably direct route from point A to point B with your properly transported firearms what part of the Firearms Act have you contravened?
Inquiring minds want to know.
I hope no one was under the impression that a transfer notification let you bring your firearm to the range.
Previously, the CFP would tell you that your transfer notification would let you transport your firearm home from point of purchase. I'm interpreting this as a notice that that is no longer the case.
Previously, the CFP would tell you that your transfer notification would let you transport your firearm home from point of purchase. I'm interpreting this as a notice that that is no longer the case.
No, I think everyone is clear that having a registration number assigned to you and your new firearm is necessary to bring it to the range legally. Some folks feel that has to be in the form of a registration certificate. Some folks feel that having the number on a transfer notice is fine. No one has posted a law that says either is definitively right or wrong.
Last edited:
Yes they have multiple times in this thread.
Post up where the law even says registration number or any variant of that. Its black and white the law says reg cert. While, as others of said, it is not required by law to carry it. It is required by law to be able to produce the actual reg cert.
The law is clear on this. The "TAN" has never had any standing in law and was simple used by the government to make it easier for them. Now they want to make it harder.
Shawn
If you get stopped on your way to or from the range and can't produce a registration certificate then the cop can assume your new gun is stolen or not registered.
You could take that chance but not having that piece of paper is illegal, is it not?
You could take that chance but not having that piece of paper is illegal, is it not?
Correct not having it is illegal.
Transporting a gun without having it physically with your gun in not illegal.
All they can do is confiscate it and you have 14 days to produce the reg cert. If after 14 you are unable to produce, then things get spicy
Shawn
A police officer can assume anything they want but that doesn't make them right. If you produce a registration certificate either at the time they stop you or at a later time their assumption becomes moot. They can also assume you are driving drunk but if a breathalyser proves you are not that assumption is moot as well. Not having the registration certificate with you is NOT illegal.
The officer can demand you produce the certificate and if you do not, the officer can choose to seize the firearm until you do produce the certificate. He may also choose to look up the certificate himself and not seize the firearm.
Not having the piece of paper with you is not illegal.
For all those arguing that you need to be in possession of your registration certificate, even though the law does not state that, Ian Runkle has provided some clarity here: https://youtu.be/Wgubk5fPthg
He says you DO NOT need to be in possession of it. Only the "holder of" a registration certificate BUT he recommends having it on you for ease of providing proof you are the holder.
In the end the cops can do whatever they please. They have you at gun point and you're a law abiding citizen so you'll do as you're told (I'm sure) whether you have the certificate on you or not but how much risk mitigation you want to have at your disposal is up to you. In the end you do not need to be in actual possession of the registration certificate no matter how many keyboard warriors tell you you must.
He says you DO NOT need to be in possession of it. Only the "holder of" a registration certificate BUT he recommends having it on you for ease of providing proof you are the holder.
In the end the cops can do whatever they please. They have you at gun point and you're a law abiding citizen so you'll do as you're told (I'm sure) whether you have the certificate on you or not but how much risk mitigation you want to have at your disposal is up to you. In the end you do not need to be in actual possession of the registration certificate no matter how many keyboard warriors tell you you must.
I will just leave this here:
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-27.html#h-117608
Shawn
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-27.html#h-117608
Shawn
steamy teabag
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Inside the Turd Reich
More bs. They could of easily sent out a clarification notice stating the transfer # can be used until the piece of paper shows up via snail mail.
You can keep posting a highlighted section with the words "registration certificate" all you want and it doesn't change what the law says.
The section you just posted isn't a criminal offence. It is an administrative part stating that if you don't produce it they MAY seize your firearms unless its possession by the person in the circumstances in which it is found is authorized by any provision of this Part, or the person is under the direct and immediate supervision of another person who may lawfully possess it.
But if you are the holder of a registration certificate you ARE authorized to possess that firearm by a provision in that Part. You are ignoring what the law actually says so you can try and win an internet argument.
Possession of firearm knowing its possession is unauthorized
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
(a) a licence under which the person may possess it; and
(b) in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, a registration certificate for it.
Marginal note
If you'll notice I highlighted the actual relevant parts. The word possession is used here but it is not used in reference to a registration certificate. Why do you think that is? Was it a mistake on behalf of parliament or was it intention? It states you must be the HOLDER OF a registration certificate in order to not be charged with unauthorized possession. The deliberately chose different words so that you would not be charged and convicted if you legally were the holder of a registration certificate but were not in possession of it at that time. The provisions go even further that if an officer is in doubt they MAY seize your firearms and you can present the registration certificate up to 14 days later and get your firearms back.
I know a lot of firearms owners are terrified of the police touching your firearms but it doesn't mean you are breaking the law for not being in possession of your registration certificate while in possession of your restricted firearms. No matter how many times you say it, it isn't true.
Not being in possession of the registration certificate is NOT an offence but it may lead to the potential of your firearms being seized until you can provide the registration certificate. It's a good idea to have it on you but it is not a criminal code offence to not have it in your possession on the way to a range as long as one has been issued to you.
Last edited:
You can try and muddy the waters all you like with irrelevant things about using under supervision all you want. Do not change the fact you are wrong:
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-29.html?txthl=onus#s-117.11
Sorry dude firearms offenses are reverse onus
Is it likely that they will charge you? No. Is it worth the of losing your guns over being to impatient to wait for a piece of paper? Also No
Shawn
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-29.html?txthl=onus#s-117.11
Sorry dude firearms offenses are reverse onus
Is it likely that they will charge you? No. Is it worth the of losing your guns over being to impatient to wait for a piece of paper? Also No
Shawn
