shooting pistol on own property

Based on the above, if you have a shooting range on your property, it must be approved by the CFO if you want to use it. Secondly, if you want to possess a restricted or prohibited firearm on a range on your property, that place must be a place authorized by the CFO. The Firearms Act clearly states that you may possess a prohibited or restricted firearm at the dwelling-house of the individual as recorded in the Canadian Firearms Registry. Therefore an ATT would be required to move the restricted or prohibited firearm from the dwelling-house to a place authorized by the CFO - the range in your yard that the CFO authorized the possession of restricted firearms and has approved for operation.

Therefore to operate a range for restricted firearms on your property you must:

1) Have your range approved by the CFO,
2) Have your range authorized by the CFO as a place you may possess restricted firearms, and
3) Have an ATT to transport your restricted firearm from one authorized place to another.
 
Last edited:
So, if I understand this mess, the "gotcha!" is the ATT in an indirect way.

There is no law that actually says you must only shoot a restricted firearm at a range. That isn't the issue.

The issue is that you are not allowed to take the restricted firearm outside of the physical dwelling place to which it is registered without an ATT, even though you are on your own property. As soon as you take it out the door without a valid ATT you're screwed.

And the ATT will only be issued for going to an approved range at the discretion of the provincial CFO (they could issue an ATT for your own property, presumably). So you're screwed by the ATT which is under the control of the provincial CFO.

Does that seem correct?
 
A couple years back the Alberta CFO told us it's OK to shoot from the attached deck of your dwelling. And no, not in writing. To bad. They also said out a window in a safe manner.
 
I believe this is another case of "interpretation". The address on your ATT is the address of the property, not the residence (house). I had the same address before my house was built on that property. You can reside in your car with that address.
 
oldiron said:
A couple years back the Alberta CFO told us it's OK to shoot from the attached deck of your dwelling. And no, not in writing. To bad. They also said out a window in a safe manner.
Click to expand...

kean said:
I believe this is another case of "interpretation". The address on your ATT is the address of the property, not the residence (house). I had the same address before my house was built on that property. You can reside in your car with that address.
Click to expand...

Two words: Roof turrets
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JP
Quebec Provincial Police ruled that shooting restricted guns on your property is not legal years ago. It was permitted at one point, if you had a certain amount of land and lived at least one mile from the nearest town. One day they re-interpreted the firearms laws and no one opposed it (took them to court) and it became the law of the land in Quebec. The same thing happened nation wide to ATT's for prohibited firearms a few years ago remember!

WHAT???

Since when are any of us ruled by the police. Interpreting the law is the role of the courts. Writing the law is the role of government. The job of the police is to enforce the law, not to interpret the law.




PROVINCIAL CFO's CAN AND DO INTERPRET AND ENFORCE THE REGULATIONS ANYWAY THEY SEE FIT!


Our Provincial Prime Minister wants to keep his own Provincial Firearms Registry even if the Conservative win a Majority and abolish the one in the rest of Canada.
 
JP said:
Our Provincial Prime Minister wants to keep his own Provincial Firearms Registry even if the Conservative win a Majority and abolish the one in the rest of Canada.
Click to expand...

All the more reason why the provinces should have no control over the federally-legislated firearms process. The CFOs have already taken their liberties in interpreting the Firearms Act however they see fit, and we have suffered as a result. There's no reason a federal law should have as many interpretations as there are provinces and territories.
 
The address on your ATT is the address of the property, not the residence (house). I had the same address before my house was built on that property. You can reside in your car with that address.
Click to expand...

True, and that's what I was thinking until I really, really read this part:

17. Subject to sections 19 and 20, a prohibited firearm or restricted firearm, the holder of the registration certificate for which is an individual, may be possessed only at the dwelling-house of the individual, as recorded in the Canadian Firearms Registry, or at a place authorized by a chief firearms officer.
Click to expand...

Meaning that as soon as you leave "the dwelling-house of the individual" with a restricted or prohibited you are in violation of the law, unless you do so under the protection of an ATT. And that ATT is (usually) going to say that you have to be going to an approved range, not your back yard.
 
Shoot from the door/window of your house? As long as you're inside, you're covered? It would be a nice loophole....
 
promac said:
Not a smart move. Other provinces would follow by example or the federal government would eventually impose further restrictions as provincial borders are not protected.
Click to expand...

100% provincial jurisdiction regarding firearms wouldn't be as stupid as you think. At least there are areas in the USA that you can still enjoy the freedoms.

I think the only provinces that would follow by example would be the already mentioned Ontario, Quebec and maybe BC... maybe. While it would suck for those residents, at least everyone wouldn't be pissed on. I know the entire country deserves the same freedom... but that also goes both ways... and punishing areas that do not even know what gun crime is, is totally out to lunch.
 
My farm is zoned agricultural. Thje township bylaws say that shooting is permited on land zoned agricultural. It says saomehting about "any legal caliber..."

In other words, probably only 270 and smaller.

How do i know the 38 Spl is ok, so far as the caliber restrictyion is concerend? I could not shoot a 38 spl rifle here.

I have a rifle range, but it is not approved. Not needed for personal use?

Would love to be able to shoot hand gun legaly.
 
It says "at the dwelling" not in. Dosen't matter wich side of a door you are on before you go through, you are still "at" the door.
Click to expand...

I'm not a lawyer but what the heck, anyone can play one on the Internet! I think the response to that would be "nice try", but "at the dwelling-house" in fact is reasonably intended to mean "completely inside the house."
 
Vonschmoot said:
I call BS for two reasons.

#1 an ATT allows you to STORE your firearms at your home and TRANSPORT them to an approved range. It does not allow you to discharge firearms at your home. That is governed by federal legislation.

#2 the legislation states that you can only discharge Restricted firearms (handguns) at a range approved by the CFO. One of the requirements of the CFO is that you carry $2m in liability insurance. Good luck getting that at your private residence.

All I have to say is that if you think you can legally do it, then please let us know how you pull it off.
Click to expand...

My agent, no problem!
 
EdGCNM said:
I'm not a lawyer but what the heck, anyone can play one on the Internet! I think the response to that would be "nice try", but "at the dwelling-house" in fact is reasonably intended to mean "completely inside the house."
Click to expand...

The courts don't like guessing what parliament intended, and often rule as to what it says.
 
So if I'm understanding this correctly, what one would need in order to shoot your own handgun on your own property, assuming it is otherwise legal to do so (e.g. you can shoot rifles there legally) is either:

- to have a range on the property approved by the CFO so it falls under the standard ATT, or

- to have a separate ATT from the CFO saying it's okay to shoot on your own property without an approved range.

The second option would allow you to take the restricted firearm out of your house legally to shoot it on your own property (the address parts of the ATT would be interesting!). No reason it couldn't be done, though.

She said as long as I have a valid ATT which also means I have a valid membership at a range then I can go out in my yard (25 acres) and shoot my .22 pistol at a safe backstop. The ATT covers me stepping out my front door.
Click to expand...

So what is the wording on the PEI ATT? Does it state "an approved range" or not?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom