flintlock pistol are they restricted
- Thread starter JBD
- Start date
Yep, they don't care how you set the powder off. If it's newer than 1898 by the manufacturing date then it's modern and qualifies as a firearm under the law.
It may look old but unless it really is old then it won't be able to fly under the radar.... not that they had radar in 1898 mind you....
It may look old but unless it really is old then it won't be able to fly under the radar.... not that they had radar in 1898 mind you....
Yep, they don't care how you set the powder off. If it's newer than 1898 by the manufacturing date then it's modern and qualifies as a firearm under the law.
It may look old but unless it really is old then it won't be able to fly under the radar.... not that they had radar in 1898 mind you....
Now if I purchased an original Harpers Ferry flintlock pistol, how many "new" parts can I put on it before it is no longer considered an Antique?
ie, replacing the lock?
or Replacing the barrel os it is safe to shoot?
Or placing the locked and barrel into a new stock so the antique stock does not get any more damaged?
Which part of the flint pistol is the antique part - lock, stock, or barrel?
Or possibly the breech plug?
My next question is "can I import an antique barrel and then build a percussion or flintlock pistol around it with new parts and still have it considered an antique?"
Last edited:
AFAIK, for a muzzleloader, the breeched barrel is considered to be the firearm.
IF that is the case, an antique barrel unit with all new parts would still be an antique, and an antique with a new barrel assembly would lose antique status.
If it matters, it would likely be a good idea to get a written ruling.
IF that is the case, an antique barrel unit with all new parts would still be an antique, and an antique with a new barrel assembly would lose antique status.
If it matters, it would likely be a good idea to get a written ruling.
I wrote to the previous (now retired) registrar of firearms on the question and the answer that I got was that the breach plug and possibly the barrel was the frame or receiver of a muzzle loader. His answer was similar to what Tiriaq just said. More importantly with all antiques, it is the frame or receiver which is the registrable part and everything else is spare parts and can be replaced or repaired. There are some grey areas such as if you sleeve the barrel of an antique muzzle loader does it retains its status.
the big problem with the definition of the frame or receiver of a muzzle loader is that it is not defined in law and is probably governed by RCMP policy which can change at their whim or from senior administrator to the next. I think for the moment you are safest to work on the basis that it is the age of the barrel and breach plug both. The exception would be the various iron framed guns by makers like Allen and Wheel lock which do have a true frame. Unfortunately those frames usually do not have any maker's names on them or way of identifying their date of manufacture.
cheers mooncoon
the big problem with the definition of the frame or receiver of a muzzle loader is that it is not defined in law and is probably governed by RCMP policy which can change at their whim or from senior administrator to the next. I think for the moment you are safest to work on the basis that it is the age of the barrel and breach plug both. The exception would be the various iron framed guns by makers like Allen and Wheel lock which do have a true frame. Unfortunately those frames usually do not have any maker's names on them or way of identifying their date of manufacture.
cheers mooncoon
Just to further add excitement, the Feds have ruled that Flintlock muzzle loading rifles do not have to be registered as they are not considered firearms but flintlock pistols are registered and firearms. You have to love the reasoning there...
Bob
Bob
The original post concerned a "repro" pistol, I believe. Tiriac quite rightly indicated that this is a restricted or prohibited weapon depending on the length of the barrel and, as such, requires a license and registration.
Tiriac also indicated that a genuine antique pistol - as opposed to a "repro" - is an antique and therefore does not require a license and registration. He could well be correct in this; I'm just not sure.
"Repro" flintlock rifles, of course, are "prescribed antiques" and therefore are free of the paperwork.
Of course, "repro" percussion rifles are unrestricted weapons and do require the paperwork.
Another fine mess that we've created for ourselves.
Tiriac also indicated that a genuine antique pistol - as opposed to a "repro" - is an antique and therefore does not require a license and registration. He could well be correct in this; I'm just not sure.
"Repro" flintlock rifles, of course, are "prescribed antiques" and therefore are free of the paperwork.
Of course, "repro" percussion rifles are unrestricted weapons and do require the paperwork.
Another fine mess that we've created for ourselves.
cc84 1(a) and cc 84 3 will clear your confusion and show Tiriac to be correct
cheers mooncoon
That is correct - No PAL needed for long-gun flintlocks.
