NEW ANTIQUE FRT CHANGES and Addendum to altered cartridges handguns

braun said:
Now I'm no Liberal supporter by any means, but I don't agree with this statement. The RCMP is an entity unto itself, historically conservative just like the local police forces and the military, but as far as they're concerned the fewer guns out there the easier it is to do their jobs - full stop. It's about reducing the overall number of guns, and antique-status firearms are low-hanging fruit.
Click to expand...

Sorry, wrong! This has nothing to do with a Police Officer doing their job, and everything to do with end game politics.

If the Conservatives allow all this crap to go unchallenged, they lose a part of their base. If the Conservatives challenge the RCMP and fix the gun laws, the left unites against them and they lose the next election. Win-win for the Liberals in charge. A bit of distraction perhaps while the PQ does its next dirty deed. Regardless, this whole thing and its timing is only politics.

So far, the RCMP are demonstrating that they can do what they like, with little or no consequence to them or the level of political management that is pulling off stunts like High River, this reclassification, and no doubt other things we'll learn about soon.
 
wildphil24 said:
Is it still impossible to derestrict a handgun by changing it's caliber?
I was thinking to use a .44spl cylinder to qualify as antique.
Click to expand...

Best to call the RCMP CFO and ask for a tech to tell you if your case and your details is valid to have them remove the restricted classification from your pre 1898 handgun and letter it as a antique. Don't rely on strangers telling you it is okay on a unaccountable internet forum. I'm going to say that they will say no but maybe they will let you, but get it in writing from them first.
 
As an "antique" firearm owner (If that's the correct term for a person with no property rights) am I the only one who sees getting a handgun lettered "antique" as registering it?
All it's going to take is for an incident of an "antique" scaring some campers or hikers in the boonies and two things will happen:

- we will be disallowed carrying "antique" revolvers into the boonies
- "antiques" will be regarded as any other revolver, only legally discharged on an "approved range"

Lettering = registration = eventual confiscation
 
Sharps '63 said:
As an "antique" firearm owner (If that's the correct term for a person with no property rights) am I the only one who sees getting a handgun lettered "antique" as registering it?
All it's going to take is for an incident of an "antique" scaring some campers or hikers in the boonies and two things will happen:

- we will be disallowed carrying "antique" revolvers into the boonies
- "antiques" will be regarded as any other revolver, only legally discharged on an "approved range"

Lettering = registration = eventual confiscation
Click to expand...

I have heard that this is already in the works from a prominent lawyer who says that these guns are showing up at crime scenes in Toronto. ..
 
That ought to drive the ridiculous price of "antiques" down considerably. Same for the M1s/m305s once they get put on the restricted or prohib list.
 
wildphil24 said:
Is it still impossible to derestrict a handgun by changing it's caliber?
I was thinking to use a .44spl cylinder to qualify as antique.
Click to expand...

Could be worth it to get a factory letter if possible. If it originally came in an antique friendly caliber, or strictly .44 you should be able to get a letter if converted back, but that just sounds downright logical!
 
wildphil24 said:
Is it still impossible to derestrict a handgun by changing it's caliber?
I was thinking to use a .44spl cylinder to qualify as antique.
Click to expand...

the way understand the " new understanding by the rcmp " is this , if the handgun was originally chambered in one of the "no cartridges" ( i'll use 45 colt for example ) , it can never have "antique status .
so if you took a gun that was made pre 1898 , but in 45 colt , it is a restricted due to 45 colt being specifically named as not being able to have antique status .
if the firearm was rebuilt / rechambered to 44 special , it is still a restricted because it was "born" as a 45 colt . ...... very similar to our removable magazine laws in a sense .
 
burnt_servo said:
the way understand the " new understanding by the rcmp " is this , if the handgun was originally chambered in one of the "no cartridges" ( i'll use 45 colt for example ) , it can never have "antique status .
so if you took a gun that was made pre 1898 , but in 45 colt , it is a restricted due to 45 colt being specifically named as not being able to have antique status .
if the firearm was rebuilt / rechambered to 44 special , it is still a restricted because it was "born" as a 45 colt . ...... very similar to our removable magazine laws in a sense .
Click to expand...

funny, the firearms act says "capable of discharging"
 
burnt_servo said:
the way understand the " new understanding by the rcmp " is this , if the handgun was originally chambered in one of the "no cartridges" ( i'll use 45 colt for example ) , it can never have "antique status .
so if you took a gun that was made pre 1898 , but in 45 colt , it is a restricted due to 45 colt being specifically named as not being able to have antique status .
if the firearm was rebuilt / rechambered to 44 special , it is still a restricted because it was "born" as a 45 colt . ...... very similar to our removable magazine laws in a sense .
Click to expand...

I think you will find their (RCMP) intention has nothing to do with what calibre it may have been originally, as lots of blackpowder Colt SAA's Gen 1 for example, had their calibre changed by the Colt factory and other Gunsmiths in the distant past and they do not care what calibre they originally started off as. You can still import a antique status Pre 1898 Colt SAA in say .44 Special that originally may have been a .45 Colt or .32-20. It has nothing to do with what it was originally "born as" so to speak.

What the RCMP are saying is that if you own or import/bring in the same pre 1898 Colt in .45 Colt or .32-20 which is a restricted status gun they no longer will de-register it from restricted to Antique status. All the ones they previously did de-register are still antique status but they will no longer allow or want the conversion of already restricted to antique status.

All this is not written in law but is just their new way of now wanting to do things regarding controlling the conversion of restricted handguns off their books and control to handguns that are no longer on the books but meet the antique status laws as written by parliament.
 
mkrnel said:
I think you will find their (RCMP) intention has nothing to do with what calibre it may have been originally, as lots of blackpowder Colt SAA's Gen 1 for example, had their calibre changed by the Colt factory and other Gunsmiths in the distant past and they do not care what calibre they originally started off as. You can still import a antique status Pre 1898 Colt SAA in say .44 Special that originally may have been a .45 Colt or .32-20. It has nothing to do with what it was originally "born as" so to speak.

What the RCMP are saying is that if you own or import/bring in the same pre 1898 Colt in .45 Colt or .32-20 which is a restricted status gun they no longer will de-register it from restricted to Antique status. All the ones they previously did de-register are still antique status but they will no longer allow or want the conversion of already restricted to antique status.

All this is not written in law but is just their new way of now wanting to do things regarding controlling the conversion of restricted handguns off their books and control to handguns that are no longer on the books but meet the antique status laws as written by parliament.
Click to expand...

If they will not de register it but it still falls into the class of antique, it is no longer restricted and you should legally be able to shoot it in the bush?

I don't know how they can choose to not follow the written law. Anybody take them to court over this nonsense? It's just as absurd as the 10/22 fiasco just doesn't affect as many people, or as seriously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom