Transport rules for pistol CFO is giving 2 answers

Pocisk said:
He's not technically wrong about needing to carry a reg cert. Sure it's not a criminal offense and it's not punishable by a maximum penalty of life in prison, but you're still expected to be able to produce it on demand, otherwise they wouldn't seize your firearm when you can't.
Click to expand...

Actually he is. There is literally no offense for not carrying it.

Choosing whether or not you want to avoid the the potential of going through the BS to get it back does not make it a legal requirement. Also note is says may seize not must. Or whether or not it is a good idea to carry it does not change the legally of it.

Shawn
 
gunnarheim said:
You said it yourself in this post.
Click to expand...

Nope try again, I said, and the law says no such thing

gunnarheim said:
So is it worth it to go through a seizure of your firearm by not having the certificate on you at the time. I don't think so.
Click to expand...

That is up to the individual. Because you think it is not does not make it the law as you claim

gunnarheim said:
Even after 14 days if you still do not have the certificate in hand, what do you do then? I guess you could tell them you have the notification stating that it has been processed.
Click to expand...

As others has pointed out one could petition for an extension. I really don't care its up to the individual if they want too or not.

gunnarheim said:
On another note, it is the same thing with your RPAL. You receive the notification that it has been approved but since you do not have the actual license you are not entitled to possess a firearm. You could say its in the mail. I don't think that would cut it if ever questioned.
Click to expand...

You are right it is the same as your RPAL, there is no law saying you have to carry it.

gunnarheim said:
Last week I called the Ontario CFO about a certificate that I hadn't received.yet. He told me that it had been mailed and as an aside said that I would have to wait for it before taking it to the range. So who do you believe some guy that does this all day for a living or some guy who spends most of his time pontificating on the Internet.
Click to expand...

You mean you talked to a secretary working at a call center. So who do you want to believe what the law actually says? Or some secretary working at a call center making not much more than minumum wage with legal advice? One that can tell you anything they want and the judge will just laugh at you when you whip out "but but the guy at the call center said"

You are mixing up what is legal with what it prudent. They are not the same thing.

Shawn
 
The amount of handwringing and angst that occurs over this topic is so out of proportion to the actual circumstances. Others have already demonstrated the legal consequence of not having your RC on your person is minimal.

Granted, the inconvenience factor could be pretty high, however I would like to point out that after years of owning restricted firearms, and literally thousands of trips to ranges across this country, I have never, not even once been asked by a police officer, much less anyone else, to show a registration certificate.

And I will add, I don’t know of anyone else who has either...perhaps it has happened to someone, but I have no first hand knowledge of that...
 
Last edited:
Innavedaw said:
The amount of handwringing and angst that occurs over this topic is so out of proportion to the actual circumstances. Shawn has already demonstrated the legal consequence of not having your RC on your person is minimal.

Granted, the inconvenience factor could be pretty high, however I would like to point out that after years of owning restricted firearms, and literally thousands of trips to ranges across this country, I have never, not even once been asked by a police officer, much less anyone else, to show a registration certificate.

And I will add, I don’t know of anyone else who has either...perhaps it has happened to someone, but I have no first hand knowledge of that...
Click to expand...

This.

Take Care

Bob
 
Innavedaw said:
The amount of handwringing and angst that occurs over this topic is so out of proportion to the actual circumstances. Shawn has already demonstrated the legal consequence of not having your RC on your person is minimal.

Granted, the inconvenience factor could be pretty high, however I would like to point out that after years of owning restricted firearms, and literally thousands of trips to ranges across this country, I have never, not even once been asked by a police officer, much less anyone else, to show a registration certificate.

And I will add, I don’t know of anyone else who has either...perhaps it has happened to someone, but I have no first hand knowledge of that...
Click to expand...

FTW :rockOn::rockOn:

I didn't know anyone cared much about this because it is much ado about nothing. I am the same as you. Years of owning restricteds, many hundreds of range trips and have never, ever been asked by anyone for any of the ridiculous paperwork that our government forces us to deal with under threat of serious violence. I know gun owners who don't even bother with trigger locks on any restricteds or prohibs simply because no one has ever cared in decades of gun ownership. Sure, it's technically illegal and everyone has to choose for themselves how much of a slave they want to be, but I can absolutely say no one cares about all these idiotic rules. Harm no one and do nothing reckless or dangerous and you are fine.


Mark
 
shawn said:
You mean you talked to a secretary working at a call center. So who do you want to believe what the law actually says? Or some secretary working at a call center making not much more than minumum wage with legal advice? One that can tell you anything they want and the judge will just laugh at you when you whip out "but but the guy at the call center said"

You are mixing up what is legal with what it prudent. They are not the same thing.

Shawn
Click to expand...
You are assuming that I talked to a secretary. I did not ;don't put words in my mouth. I guess I should just say Shawn on CGN told me it was OK not to carry the registration if asked for one.
 
I just called the Ontario CFO, they emailed me the transfer approval for the pistol. Did not bother to ask about taking the pistol to the range with only the transfer notification, as I'll err on the side of cation.

The registration certificate came in the mail today for the revolver so of to the range with that toy.

Thanks for everyones help.
 
Doors of Perception said:
I just called the Ontario CFO, they emailed me the transfer approval for the pistol. Did not bother to ask about taking the pistol to the range with only the transfer notification, as I'll err on the side of cation.

The registration certificate came in the mail today for the revolver so of to the range with that toy.

Thanks for everyones help.
Click to expand...

You can use your transfer notification as a target. :)
 
mmattockx said:
FTW :rockOn::rockOn:

I didn't know anyone cared much about this because it is much ado about nothing. I am the same as you. Years of owning restricteds, many hundreds of range trips and have never, ever been asked by anyone for any of the ridiculous paperwork that our government forces us to deal with under threat of serious violence. I know gun owners who don't even bother with trigger locks on any restricteds or prohibs simply because no one has ever cared in decades of gun ownership. Sure, it's technically illegal and everyone has to choose for themselves how much of a slave they want to be, but I can absolutely say no one cares about all these idiotic rules. Harm no one and do nothing reckless or dangerous and you are fine.


Mark
Click to expand...

I agree. In the last twenty years no officer or warden has asked me for drivers license, insurance, hunting/fishing license or PAL - BUT i make darn sure to have all in my wallet at all times - a lot less hassle that way.
 
gunnarheim said:
You are assuming that I talked to a secretary. I did not ;don't put words in my mouth. I guess I should just say Shawn on CGN told me it was OK not to carry the registration if asked for one.
Click to expand...

LOL sure

Who you did or did not talk to is irrelevant and does not change what the says and is. If you choose to do something different all the power to you, but that does not make what you choose to the law. I also notice you have completely failed to even provide a counter to anything I have posted

Shawn
 
From the Criminal Code 84 Part III ,88 Possesion Offences , 91 (1) (b)

(1) Subject to subsection (4), every person commits an offence who possesses a prohibited firearm, a restricted firearm or a non-restricted firearm without being the holder of

(a) a licence under which the person may possess it; and


(b) in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, a registration certificate for it.

Marginal note:Unauthorized possession of prohibited weapon or restricted weapon

(2) Subject to subsection (4), every person commits an offence who possesses a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device, other than a replica firearm, or any prohibited ammunition, without being the holder of a licence under which the person may possess it.


Marginal note:punishment

(3) Every person who commits an offence under subsection (1) or (2)

(a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years; or


(b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction
 
They are both right, you had paper for the first one, you don't have paper for the second one so you can't go to the range, with the 2 nd one. Not that hard if you think about it.
 
gunnarheim said:
From the Criminal Code 84 Part III ,88 Possesion Offences , 91 (1) (b)

(1) Subject to subsection (4), every person commits an offence who possesses a prohibited firearm, a restricted firearm or a non-restricted firearm without being the holder of

(a) a licence under which the person may possess it; and


(b) in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, a registration certificate for it.

Marginal note:Unauthorized possession of prohibited weapon or restricted weapon

(2) Subject to subsection (4), every person commits an offence who possesses a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device, other than a replica firearm, or any prohibited ammunition, without being the holder of a licence under which the person may possess it.


Marginal note:punishment

(3) Every person who commits an offence under subsection (1) or (2)

(a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years; or


(b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction
Click to expand...


Is a "Transfer Notification (Buyer)" a temporary registration certificate because it says I can take possession of said firearm. If it is not, then the cfo is putting people in violation of Criminal Code 84 Part III ,88 Possesion Offences , 91 (1) (b)

One cfo phone agent said it was and another said it was not. For the purposes of taking possession, I could have driven to pick it up from the sellers residence.
 
Last edited:
Doors of Perception said:
Is a "Transfer Notification (Buyer)" a temporary registration certificate because it says I can take possession of said firearm. If it is not, then the cfo is putting people in violation of Criminal Code 84 Part III ,88 Possesion Offences , 91 (1) (b)

One cfo phone agent said it was and another said it was not. For the purposes of taking possession, I could have driven to pick it up from the sellers residence.
Click to expand...

It is what it says a notification that the transfer was processed. It does not say that it is a temporary registration certificate The notification is not the actual registration certificate. Otherwise why would the CFO mail the certificate. One other thing I found out is that: as an example. You did not receive the registration certificate. You then request the CFO to issue another one for the same firearm. The first one arrives in the mail later. Now the second requested certificate arrives. This apparently makes the original registration certificate null and void anyway It's the same thing with car ownership. You have the ownership, but you have no plate on the car. Are you allowed to drive on the road? I think you made the right decision in waiting the certificate before going to the range. Like other people mentioned on this tread the chances of getting stopped are very low. But what happens if you do and get charged? It's not worth the aggravation, time and money to defend yourself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom