Fintlock rifle owner charged

nessy357

nessy357

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
87   0   1
Location
vanc.isl.
Anyone see this threas over at The Muzzleloading Forum ? under general discussion .
This was the first post .



"I just finished being charged with owning firearms that were not registered. Fingerprinted photographed ect. The guns in question were Lyman flintlocks. I explained to the RCMP that you don't register flintlocks but they phoned their firearms "expert" and charged me anyway.

Lucky I didn't have a staple gun too or I might have been dead . Anyway a person should keep a copy of the firearms act on hand".

Surprised no-one this side of the border has heard anything.

Cheers nessy.
 
When was the last time someone went on a killing spree with a Flintlock rifle ?

Oh ya i remember now it was.... Never!
Better check out this story before we go ape#### but i wouldnt doubt it.
Isnt there and amnesty on registration right now even on modern cartridge rifles that are Non Restricted ?

They can haul off the rifles but they cant charge you and as soon as there Registered they have to give them back.
Or do i have this all wrong.
 
Come on guys! Everyone on here should know this!

They should be shown the LeBaron's catalog that shows flintlocks for sale and advertising no PAL required.

I would suggest everyone with a antique or flintlock class call in and get the RCMP letter for each and every gun they own in this catagory. It is as easy as one phone call and a fax machine number!
 
We need to find out if they were flintlock pistols or rifles. Flintlock rifles do not require registration but repro flintlock pistols do. If it was a rifle, then the victim needs to file a formal complaint. I like to have a copy of the law on hand with my antiques so that if I ever do have a problem with a LEO who does not know the law, I've got a copy on hand that I can put in her hands right there on the spot.
 
It would be nice if police officers who charge a person because they have missinterprted the law, be fined a couple thousnad each time, than i bet they won't be doing it to offen after the first few times they mischarge a person, and have them responsable for all the court costs too.
 
TGC said:
It would be nice if police officers who charge a person because they have missinterprted the law, be fined a couple thousnad each time, than i bet they won't be doing it to offen after the first few times they mischarge a person, and have them responsable for all the court costs too.
Click to expand...

It will never happen,we are the ones that are always inconvenienced
and out of pocket for the costs.:mad::bangHead:
 
... Without further details and specifics it's it's premature to jump to any conclusions ! It's a LYMAN, so clearly there's no question of it having "Antique status". It MAY have been a case, of being in possession of a "Weapon Dangerous to Public Peace" situation, or even an "Offensive Weapon situation " I really don't know. And before anyone jumps up and says, it's just a Flintlock so it must be OK; they were once state of the art weapons, and are still used for Hunting. So hardly a toy . .. Again, details, and circumstance MAY put a different spin on it, apart from the usual "Dumb Cops! " interpretation. .... David K
 
As long as it isn't a pistol, under the overall size limit, or I believe, under the overall barrel limit, it's classified as a rifle and therefore not necessary to liscence, as a flintlock.

Now, if they were flintlock pistols, or he had converted them to cap and ball, that's a different ball of wax.

I'd say there might be going on, as raiding a guy with a flintlock means they're either really desperate to make a successful raid and show they're doing something, or there were other things.
 
Where was this what province?
How do I find the article stupidity like this boils my blood but before I get too worked up I got too find out the whole story.
 
I went there i could not find it and it kept saying i had to be a member.

Why cant someone just copy the info that can see it and paste it here :confused:

they do that in politics section all the time.

I agree before i jump on the band wagon id like to know what was the guy doing with the flintlock.
Was he sitting at home or shooting the neibours cat outa a tree?
 
This is the Gist of the story , from his thread

A person driving by saw a gun outside my house. You can legaly shoot right in my front yard, people do all the time hunting gophers.

They phoned the RCMP, I showed them the gun, they asked if I owned more and I showed them my other flintlock. They asked for my PAL and I told them I don't have one or need one.

They phone their firearms "expert" and charge me with having unregistered firearms. Next time I will tell them to leave the property as they are tresspassing and go get a warrent or face the consequences.



Email Post Report Post Quote Post Reply

flinthead
36 Cal.
Posts: 69

Loc: Alberta
Registered on 04/30/09

06/12/09 08:23 PM - Post#727443
In response to theDuck

I should also mention that while at the station I asked if they had a copy of the firearms act as I would show them the section that excempts flintlocks. They repied that they relied on their highly qualified firearms experts to rule on matters like mine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom