Clarification needed please help! Clasification for colt 1851

[jethunter]

You are right that there are three mutually exclusive classes. NR, Res and Prohib.

Antique is a special status. Not a class. Antiques are not specially class as non-firearms. YOU provide YOUR explanation, referencing the law, that leads you to believe this.

There is no such thing as "non-firearm" under the law. Either something is a firearm, or it isn't.

The criminal code defines a firearm as:



Any antique that has a barrel and can fire a shot that is capable of causing serious bodily harm, (which is generally determined by the pigs eye test, which is in the vicinity of 250 FPS depending on the projectile), meets the definition of a firearm. The rest of the analysis that I posted above flows from this.

So other than being your opinion, do you have any basis to prove the validity of any of that? Specifically are you aware of any legal antique that is also restricted or prohibited? I don't recall seeing an antique FRT that said it was classifed as prohibited or restricted.

I agree that the unlawful use of an antique attracts penalties similar to unlawful use of a non-antique status firearm. But how does your premise specifically impact the lawful antique owner?

 

[whiskeywillow]

As far as Antiques are concerned, by sections 85 through 90 of the Criminal code, an Antiques only "tie" to restricteds and being classed that-way happens at which time; by section 85, it's used while committing an offence. Section 86, violation of storage & transportation rules. Section 87, points at another person. Section 88, possession for a purpose dangerouse to public peace. Section 89, possession at or on the way to public meeting. And lastly Section 90, carrying concealed. Period.

All other times, while an individual is (rightfully/legally) acting under the applicable Storage, Display, Transportation & Handling sections; an antique remains an Antique. Including through loading, firing and yes, otherwise lawful use in locations that "that-use" isn't by-lawed or regulated against... (So) if you had a crippled, old, lame & beyond doctor-able Cow that was past the point of return (per say) ... with your Antique, on some chunk of private land, you could make use of it and go dispatch that cow not to prolong its death & suffering. And do so completely legal. Which is 100% the way things should-be, and is 100% unlike the restricted Ruger that's confined to sitting locked up in your safe back home, red-taped in the beaurocratic bullsh!t that classes them and keeps those-ones barred [incorrectly] as useless.

That's the legal difference in a real world application. It isn't that complicated to understand at all.

 

[Cameron SS]

So other than being your opinion, do you have any basis to prove the validity of any of that? Specifically are you aware of any legal antique that is also restricted or prohibited? I don't recall seeing an antique FRT that said it was classifed as prohibited or restricted.

I agree that the unlawful use of an antique attracts penalties similar to unlawful use of a non-antique status firearm. But how does your premise specifically impact the lawful antique owner?

Quoting the actual law wasn't good enough for you? I've substantiated my claim with reference to the law. If you want to continue to object, then please offer something that serves as the basis for your objection.

I couldn't care less what the FRT says. That's just someone else's opinion. But I don't have access to the FRT, otherwise I'd be happy to find examples for you.

The law that I presented impacts an antique owner in that they should know that antique firearms are subject to all of the rules for firearms, except those listed in 84.3 of the code as being not applicable to antiques, such as S91 to 95, 99 to 101, 103 to 107 and 117.03.

It is still unlawful to point an antique at someone, even in jest. It is still an offence to carry an antique concealed, unless authorized by the Firearms Act. It is still an offence carry an antique at a public meeting. It is still an offence to convert an antique to full auto or to deface any serial number. And lastly, if you are prohibited from possession firearms by court order, than you are also prohibited from possessing antiques.

Lastly, and probably most applicably, following the regulations for storage display and transportation of antiques is sufficient for NR antiques, as they are basically the same, but if your antique is a handgun, then by law, you have to follow the rules for both antiques, AND restricted or prohibited, as the case may be.

 

[bgcameron]

but if your antique is a handgun, then by law, you have to follow the rules for both antiques, AND restricted or prohibited, as the case may be.

I have 2 flintlock pistols that will not accommodate a trigger lock. I am curious to know what would qualify to make it "rendered inoperable by means of a secure locking device".

 

[Cameron SS]

I have 2 flintlock pistols that will not accommodate a trigger lock. I am curious to know what would qualify to make it "rendered inoperable by means of a secure locking device".

Me too. I suspect a cable tie that arrests the forward movement of the flint would suffice, or something that covers the powder pan.

I also doubt one police officer in 1000 would have the time or inclination to parse out the rules for antiques, and as long as he saw you complying with everything else would probably shrug and let it go.

 

[whiskeywillow]

I have 2 flintlock pistols that will not accommodate a trigger lock. I am curious to know what would qualify to make it "rendered inoperable by means of a secure locking device".

Guys. Cameron SS Included.

The wording in the antique portion of the Storage & Transportation sections only states "in a locked container that is made of an opaque material and is of such strength, construction and nature that it cannot readily be broken open or into or accidentally opened during transportation." That's a direct quote off the laws-lois-justice website straight outta the Criminal code of Canada pertaining to Antiques.

The Restricted Section (written separately) very clearly has an additional clause stating that besides in the locked opaque material container, [they] must also be rendered inoperable... a restricted. Grade 4 students can read well enough to pick out the difference in those two definitions if the differences were asked for in a "compare these quotes" quiz.

This stuff is easily looked up & available, and really is as cut & dried as wording can be so far as legal terminology goes. It's being twisted up & way over-complicated in some of these threads.

 

[Cameron SS]

Guys. Cameron SS Included.

The wording in the antique portion of the Storage & Transportation sections only states "in a locked container that is made of an opaque material and is of such strength, construction and nature that it cannot readily be broken open or into or accidentally opened during transportation." That's a direct quote off the laws-lois-justice website straight outta the Criminal code of Canada pertaining to Antiques.

The Restricted Section (written separately) very clearly has an additional clause stating that besides in the locked opaque material container, [they] must also be rendered inoperable... a restricted. Grade 4 students can read well enough to pick out the difference in those two definitions if the differences were asked for in a "compare these quotes" quiz.

This stuff is easily looked up & available, and really is as cut & dried as wording can be so far as legal terminology goes. It's being twisted up & way over-complicated in some of these threads.

Thanks for your better than grade 4 read of the law.

Now tell the class where in law it states that 'antique' and 'restricted' are mutually exclusive legal categories such that the transportation regulations that you mentioned for restricted and antique shall not both be applied to a single firearm that meets the definitions of both of those categories.

I've been looking for years and still can't find it. Please help me out.

 

[jethunter]

Quoting the actual law wasn't good enough for you? I've substantiated my claim with reference to the law. If you want to continue to object, then please offer something that serves as the basis for your objection.

I couldn't care less what the FRT says. That's just someone else's opinion. But I don't have access to the FRT, otherwise I'd be happy to find examples for you.

The law that I presented impacts an antique owner in that they should know that antique firearms are subject to all of the rules for firearms, except those listed in 84.3 of the code as being not applicable to antiques, such as S91 to 95, 99 to 101, 103 to 107 and 117.03.

It is still unlawful to point an antique at someone, even in jest. It is still an offence to carry an antique concealed, unless authorized by the Firearms Act. It is still an offence carry an antique at a public meeting. It is still an offence to convert an antique to full auto or to deface any serial number. And lastly, if you are prohibited from possession firearms by court order, than you are also prohibited from possessing antiques.

Lastly, and probably most applicably, following the regulations for storage display and transportation of antiques is sufficient for NR antiques, as they are basically the same, but if your antique is a handgun, then by law, you have to follow the rules for both antiques, AND restricted or prohibited, as the case may be.

None of that is proof of dual legal status and simply finding examples that two different guns are subject to the same law is not proof they share classification or status. There are also a great many major dissimilarities that you have ignored or forgotten. They should be on the table as well.

The regulations are clear that all civilian owned restricted firearms must be registered, that transport requires a permit, and that the owner must hold a valid RPAL. But none of that applies to an antique handgun, and it is therefore obvious antiques are not restricted class firearms. Sorry but I have no further interest unless you have more than opinion to offer.

 

[whiskeywillow]

Thanks for your better than grade 4 read of the law.

Now tell the class where in law it states that 'antique' and 'restricted' are mutually exclusive legal categories such that the transportation regulations that you mentioned for restricted and antique shall not both be applied to a single firearm that meets the definitions of both of those categories.

I've been looking for years and still can't find it. Please help me out.

Gunnutz needs emojis... specifically the one where the guy is banging his head against the wall..

Cameron. They don't both meet the definitions of each/or either category. Read post #22.. the first paragraph SPECIFICALLY points out at what time(s) an Antique reverts to Restricted legalities & regulation. All other times during lawful, legal use and ownership, the Antique is just a d@mn Antique. Plain & simple. It is literally written right there, quoted off the Criminal code; where Antiques and Restricteds are designated seperately.

Like jethunter though, I too am through here. If yourself or anyone else hasn't got their heads wrapped around this discussion by now, then I'm at a loss for any better way to assist in your understanding or where to look. The facts have been noted through numerous earlier posts for those who have comprehension enough to recognize them.

 

[tokguy]

Ever run across restricted owners who are 'Butthurt' about antiques? Makes one scratch their head, no?

 

[mattcrossan]

I can’t help but laugh at all of the different opinions and advice to my question. Thank you guys for taking the time to reply. This just goes to show how rediculous and murky our gun regulations are in Canada.

 

[Cameron SS]

Gunnutz needs emojis... specifically the one where the guy is banging his head against the wall..

Cameron. They don't both meet the definitions of each/or either category. Read post #22.. the first paragraph SPECIFICALLY points out at what time(s) an Antique reverts to Restricted legalities & regulation. All other times during lawful, legal use and ownership, the Antique is just a d@mn Antique. Plain & simple. It is literally written right there, quoted off the Criminal code; where Antiques and Restricteds are designated seperately.

Like jethunter though, I too am through here. If yourself or anyone else hasn't got their heads wrapped around this discussion by now, then I'm at a loss for any better way to assist in your understanding or where to look. The facts have been noted through numerous earlier posts for those who have comprehension enough to recognize them.

Actually nothing on post 22 quotes the law, and nothing in that post or the law says that "antiques are exempt from the section 84 definition of restriced or prohibited".

We all agree that antiques are exempt from some of the things required of other restrictedor prohibited handguns, ie license registration authorization, etc per 91-95, but nothing exempts antiques from being captured under the definition of restricted firearm itself. Meaning unless expressly exempt, ie by 84.3, antiques are subject to all of the other rules that might apply to an antique handgun that is either restricted or prohibited.

Ive shown examples here of the law that creates mutually exclusive classes of NR RES and Prohib. So far no one has quoted a section of law that creates antique as a category that is incompatible with Res or Prohib.

Bang your head as you see fit. The law isnt that complicated. Stupid, but not complicated.