There is a small, select cadre of CGN members who seem to revel in the practice of re-interpreting game laws and firearms laws in an effort to teach us that every single solitary thing we do is illegal.
You would be very wrong if you're referring to me. There is no reveling or 're-interpreting' here and no nefarious motive on my part. I am simply pointing out the black letter of the law, and that, being in the stand prior to legal light is likely technically in breach of the law as written (poorly or otherwise).
Sadly, they are probably correct, in that the ambiguous wording of so much of this stuff allows for many interpretations. If you meet a CO who is dead-set on "getting" you...or, more likely, if you really are an a$$hole who should be gotten...he can almost certainly find a way to bend the meaning of the law to make that possible.
This is the further point. You are at the mercy of the CO's mood and interpretation of the law, at least until you are in front of a judge trying to explain. At which point you are then at the mercy of his/her mood and interpretation.
I ran into many CO's over the course of my hunting activities in Ontario, many of them before or after legal shooting light, and I can guarantee you that each and every one of them interpreted the law the same way that JYC above is interpreting it, i.e. if the gun is in the case you are good to go.
Which is great, laudable, sensible and reasonable, until you run into the guy who sees it differently. (And I have seen various flavours of CO.)
CV32, correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't your take on this law really mean that if I go out to a treestand or a blind with nothing but a camera, I am technically breaking the law? I am "lying in wait" according to the ridiculously broad definition of hunting that you posted. How about taking a walk at dawn, not during hunting season? I do this frequently; if I stop at a spot where I think I might see deer or other wildlife, I am now "lying in wait". Taking it a step further, if CO's follow your reasoning, they can probably ticket every birdwatcher they come across as well, and a lot of rural people taking their dogs for a walk. Where does it end?
There is case law to address this point. If it isn't hunting season, you don't have a hunting license, you aren't in a tree stand or a ground blind, you don't have any hunting equipment or firearm, bow, etc., and you're walking a dog on a leash, there is a very good chance that both the CO and judge will accept that you aren't hunting. However, if all of the opposite circumstances apply, how should we reasonably expect the CO or judge to assess you?
Facts don't care much about any of our feelings on the matter. If ignorance of the facts better suits a person's sensibilities, then so be it. But it doesn't change those facts one iota, and don't kill the messenger. Are you offended when someone points out the nonsensical technicalities of the
Firearms Act?
Since I spend a good deal of my time advocating for hunters, trappers and anglers in this country (and I am all of those things myself), and better wild life conservation and game management, don't misinterpret my pointing out the frailties of the law as a motive for trying to make your life more difficult. Nothing could be further from the truth.
