Re: Packing an antique to circumvent ATC or CCW laws
I've come here and made this thread so as to not derail the other thread talking about ATC, and I thought this was the appropriate place. The original thread can be found here; http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=565140
This thread is to educate those that think antiques can be carried in cities to circumvent ATC and CCW laws, and is started in reply of this;
and this;
Now the first quote only outlines where antiques aren't deemed a firearm, not where they are. Such as;
In transport. An antique firearm must be transported unloaded and in a locked opaque container.
ATC or CCW for self defence against humans. Face it, it would be hard to argue intent if you're packing openly or concealed a loaded antique at the corner store or anywhere in city limits, even if section 93 deems possession of antique anywhere to be legal, as you can just as easily leave it in your vehicle if your intent is to head out somewhere to plink some cans. Intent is where it would change the antique status from non firearm to weapon. The intent of the OP in the original thread would be for ATC or CCW for preservation of life against "being the victim of robbery" which would directly be intent for preservation of life against humans.
Being as how you have to transport in a locked container and unloaded that would mean that to pack an antique in city limits you would have to remove it from the container and load it every time you get out of the vehicle, and unload it before entry. You wouldn't want to load it in the vehicle as that would immediately put you in possession of a loaded firearm inside of a vehicle which AFAIK is illegal, and loading it outside of the vehicle would draw the wrong kind of attention. This again would lead back to intent, as the intent in doing this is to protect life from attacks in the city, which the OP from the original thread outlines is to protect life and property from humans.
A good thread to read further on the matter of concealment of antiques is found here; Concealed weapon or not: The bush and animal protection.
So as you can see an antique is not a good option for ATC or CCW within city limits. You can also bet that you're going to get a ERT tactical takedown and your activities headlined in the Toronto Star if seen carrying your antique, legal or not. IMO carrying an antique to circumvent ATC and CCW laws would be easily deemed illegal and open a person to a world of hurt and charges, overall a bad idea.
Other antique nutz please feel free to chime in to the discussion. Perhaps I'm wrong, perhaps I missed some valid good points, but I still don't see it as a good idea and would suggest that the OP to the original thread should join the fight for ATC and CCW of modern restricted firearms.
I've come here and made this thread so as to not derail the other thread talking about ATC, and I thought this was the appropriate place. The original thread can be found here; http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=565140
This thread is to educate those that think antiques can be carried in cities to circumvent ATC and CCW laws, and is started in reply of this;
If you are bent on packing, what about carying a handgun that meets the definition “antique firearm” in subsection 84(1) of the Criminal Code? - Just be descrete and avoid having to use it so as not to ruin this rare exception of "antiques" for everyone else. Def'n:
6. A handgun manufactured before 1898 that is capable of discharging only rim-fire cartridges, other than 22 Calibre Short, 22 Calibre Long or 22 Calibre Long Rifle cartridges.
7. A handgun manufactured before 1898 that is capable of discharging centre-fire cartridges, other than a handgun designed or adapted to discharge 32 Short Colt, 32 Long Colt, 32 Smith and Wesson, 32 Smith and Wesson Long, 32-20 Winchester, 38 Smith and Wesson, 38 Short Colt, 38 Long Colt, 38-40 Winchester, 44-40 Winchester, or 45 Colt cartridges.
*copied and saved the below from another post a while back, neglected to save author's name.
Under the current legislation, "any antique firearm" is not a "firearm" for the following purposes:
1. Firearms Act: None of the provisions of the Firearms Act, including those requiring registration, licences, ATTs and/or ATCs, apply to any "antique firearm."
2. CC s. 91 and 92: Possession of any "antique firearm" without a licence or registration certificate is legal.
3. CC s. 93: Possession of any "antique firearm" at any location is legal.
4. CC s. 94: Being in a motor vehicle with any "antique firearm" is legal.
5. CC s. 95: Being in possession of a loaded "antique firearm" (which is also a "restricted firearm" or a "prohibited firearm"), or one with readily accessible ammunition is legal even if the person is not the holder of any licence, registration certificate, ATT, or ATC.
6. CC s. 99: Transferring or offering to transfer any "antique firearm" is legal.
7. CC s. 100: Dealing in any type of any "antique firearm" is legal.
8. CC s. 101: Transferring any "antique firearm" is legal if the transfer apparently violates the Firearms Act.
9. CC s. 103 and 104: Importing or exporting any "antique firearm" is legal.
10. CC s. 105: Not reporting the loss or finding of any "antique firearm" is legal.
11. CC s. 106 and 107: Not reporting the destruction of any "antique firearm" is legal, and knowingly making a false report of that type to a firearms official or the police is legal.
12. CC s. 117.03: A peace officer who finds a person in possession of any "antique firearm" is not authorized to demand that the person present a licence, registration certificate, ATT, and/or ATC.
and this;
Yes, that thought has crossed my mind, and truly, I have owned some .455's and .41 LC's and I consider it good, however, I always wondered if that is going to be considered carrying a concealed weapon. I mean possibly you could skirt the firearms charges, because it is not deemed a firearm, however, you would be carrying a weapon, and as seen in other threads, ANYTHING can be a weapon depending on what the police interpret it as.
Now the first quote only outlines where antiques aren't deemed a firearm, not where they are. Such as;
In transport. An antique firearm must be transported unloaded and in a locked opaque container.
ATC or CCW for self defence against humans. Face it, it would be hard to argue intent if you're packing openly or concealed a loaded antique at the corner store or anywhere in city limits, even if section 93 deems possession of antique anywhere to be legal, as you can just as easily leave it in your vehicle if your intent is to head out somewhere to plink some cans. Intent is where it would change the antique status from non firearm to weapon. The intent of the OP in the original thread would be for ATC or CCW for preservation of life against "being the victim of robbery" which would directly be intent for preservation of life against humans.
Being as how you have to transport in a locked container and unloaded that would mean that to pack an antique in city limits you would have to remove it from the container and load it every time you get out of the vehicle, and unload it before entry. You wouldn't want to load it in the vehicle as that would immediately put you in possession of a loaded firearm inside of a vehicle which AFAIK is illegal, and loading it outside of the vehicle would draw the wrong kind of attention. This again would lead back to intent, as the intent in doing this is to protect life from attacks in the city, which the OP from the original thread outlines is to protect life and property from humans.
A good thread to read further on the matter of concealment of antiques is found here; Concealed weapon or not: The bush and animal protection.
So as you can see an antique is not a good option for ATC or CCW within city limits. You can also bet that you're going to get a ERT tactical takedown and your activities headlined in the Toronto Star if seen carrying your antique, legal or not. IMO carrying an antique to circumvent ATC and CCW laws would be easily deemed illegal and open a person to a world of hurt and charges, overall a bad idea.
Other antique nutz please feel free to chime in to the discussion. Perhaps I'm wrong, perhaps I missed some valid good points, but I still don't see it as a good idea and would suggest that the OP to the original thread should join the fight for ATC and CCW of modern restricted firearms.































, but if 






















