It was his Brother's rifle. His pride and joy with 76 years plus of using the same 22.
But that's another story.....
hunting with atvs in Alberta
- Thread starter surban
- Start date
It was his Brother's rifle. His pride and joy with 76 years plus of using the same 22.
But that's another story.....
I sent a message to my CO at home and will relay the news. I'm not holding my breath.
This Old Norkse is just a hoot to visit with.
That's a couple of the coolest pics I have ever seen.
I do agree with you (on the french site thing too[oops]). I don't think that it is a safety issue at all, personally. Keep your finger off the trigger stupid, duh. I do believe that in the spirit of fair-chase only a handi-capped person should be able to shoot a big-game animal off of a motorized vehicle. But why the heck shouldn't I be able to shoot a couple gophers or coyotes out the truck window when I feel like it? That's all an opinion of course.
Those regulations under the Firearm's Act, refer to Transporting a Non-restricted Firearm. Is shooting from a stationary motor vehicle the same thing as transporting? I'd sure argue that it isn't. Doesn't seem like correct interpretation of the word "Transporting".
I sent a message to my CO at home and will relay the news. I'm not holding my breath.
This Old Norkse is just a hoot to visit with.
Damn Noel those are some great pictures.......would love to hear that old boy's story one day......bet he has some tales to tell
Continue on down the firearms act to:
What is their interpretation of the word "transport"?
If the vehicle is unattended,it obviously is not in motion is it?Yet they still consider the firearm to be "transported while it is in the stationary vehicle.So at what point after the vehicle stops,is the firearm no longer being transported?
I would not want to be standing in front of a judge while he decides what his interpretation of the word "transport" based on the way the firearms act is written.
Last edited:
Raises some interesting questions that whole transport aspect of it. If I have a letter on board a postal delivery truck, even when it stops at the light, its certainly in transport. That's why its in the delivery truck.
But if a farmer stops his pickup and loads his 22 to take a shot at a gopher, is the loaded rifle in transport at that point?
It seems to me they (at least) wanted to prevent firearms being shipped or stored in the vehicle loaded. That's reasonably clear. But why even use the word transport, what meaning does it add to the law, unless it in some way narrows the reason why its in a motor vehicle.
Why didn't they just say no loaded firearms in motor vehicles. For some reason they added the word transport. So by adding the word transport, what meaning did that word intend to add?
But if a farmer stops his pickup and loads his 22 to take a shot at a gopher, is the loaded rifle in transport at that point?
It seems to me they (at least) wanted to prevent firearms being shipped or stored in the vehicle loaded. That's reasonably clear. But why even use the word transport, what meaning does it add to the law, unless it in some way narrows the reason why its in a motor vehicle.
Why didn't they just say no loaded firearms in motor vehicles. For some reason they added the word transport. So by adding the word transport, what meaning did that word intend to add?
- Location
- North Vancouver
I think it might be more along the lines of - If it's not in "use" or "storage" then it's in "transport". So then, a firearm in a unattended vehicle is in "transport" only because it's not in "use" or "storage". It can't be in storage because only your home is the storage place. It can't be in use because you are not there to use it. The problem is, that's not the section that matters when it comes to shooting from a vehicle. The firearm is not in "transport" when you are shooting it. It is in "use".
Last edited:
I just love the fact that there is probably 50 or 60 years between the photo's but that rifle still looks good.
Yes
No, never has to my knowledge.
Out of respect for Him I am reluctant to give any details about him specifically. When hunting season simmers down or after Christmas I might treat you guys to a couple albums of pictures for some great hunting heritage.
Some of you boys better share some of yours tho!
And not the goofy grasshoppers on a meatpole crap either.
I spent the last year researching this fellow and his Dad and other locals. I doubt you will be dissappointed.I just love the fact that there is probably 50 or 60 years between the photo's but that rifle still looks good.
No, it would be more like 76 years.
He and his brother would trick shoot with it, wore the barrel out and paid $20 to have it relined a way back when in Calgary. We shot targets for a couple hours this summer and though neither of us did very well, we sure had a fun time, laughing like a couple kids. He's a dear friend.
Last edited:
It doesn't matter what you or I think,or how we interpret the wording of the law,what matters is a judges interpretation of the law.Are you confident enough in your interpretation of the law to believe that a judge will see it the same way?
Last edited:
