What are the current requirements for buying a pistol in BC?

[shawn]

That was our member, Cyclone.

For some reason, I thought it was a Canada wide provision of Bill C-42 that made the ATT an automatic part of our RPAL's. But I guess I was wrong.

Either that, or the other provinces need their day in court.

Your not it is. Under the current law if your RPAL is renewed the C-42 provision are added to your RPAL and will be listed on the carrier

Too bad we still don't have a Conservative majority.

LOL because they did so much for us

Shawn

 

[Odd Shot]

That was our member, Cyclone.

For some reason, I thought it was a Canada wide provision of Bill C-42 that made the ATT an automatic part of our RPAL's. But I guess I was wrong.

Either that, or the other provinces need their day in court.

Too bad we still don't have a Conservative majority.

It is, but the BC cfo won't complete a transfer of a restricted to you for target shooting unless you're a member of a shooting club to target shoot at

 

[shawn]

It is, but the BC cfo won't complete a transfer of a restricted to you for target shooting unless you're a member of a shooting club to target shoot at

If only there was a section of the firearms act specifically written to enable people to take before a judge situations where unelected bureaucrats made up BS that was not supported by law, that cost nothing.

Shawn

 

[Canuck44]

You do not need a range membership to buy or own a restricted by law

The fact that all of you just bend over and take it is why they continue to claim it is.

Shawn

OK lets here how you avoid "bending over".

When did following a simple process equate to "bending over"? You either have no idea how the laws are administered in Canada or are trolling behind a keyboard. The whole process of renewing a PAL is about as simple as it gets now.

The last two pistol purchases made during Nov/Dec went through within hours not days. I know it varies from Province to Province and with good reason. Organized crime and gang membership varies from province to province and location to location, so too transfer volumes. Most of us understand the process and for those who don't they ask here for clarification and advice.

There is a legitimate case to be made for allowing members of competitive shooting sports to avoid the necessity of club membership but I suspect most of us who do shoot competitively also are members of shooting clubs which likely explains why the exception does not exist. I doubt the CFO's would object to this exception if approached. I suspect they never have been.

Take Care

Bob

 

[KeltecFan]

When I first got back into shooting here in BC, I wasn't sure which club I wanted to join. I wanted to try them out first. So, I joined Silvercore. It is accepted as a club membership even though they do not have a range as such. They do conduct several shooting courses and use ranges for that purpose. I kept the membership up until now. I'm letting it go since it just went up to $60.00 and I have insurance from other sources. However, if I were in your situation, that is what I would do. It allows you the flexibility to check out ranges that either have day cards or places where a member can take a guest. It's really the best option. It would be great if a local person would challenge the CFO the way Cyclone did in Ontario. That took money and time. For $60.00, you're in and you can buy your guns, and shoot them without the hassle.

 

[shawn]

OK lets here how you avoid "bending over".

When did following a simple process equate to "bending over"? You either have no idea how the laws are administered in Canada or are trolling behind a keyboard. The whole process of renewing a PAL is about as simple as it gets now.

The last two pistol purchases made during Nov/Dec went through within hours not days. I know it varies from Province to Province and with good reason. Organized crime and gang membership varies from province to province and location to location, so too transfer volumes. Most of us understand the process and for those who don't they ask here for clarification and advice.

There is a legitimate case to be made for allowing members of competitive shooting sports to avoid the necessity of club membership but I suspect most of us who do shoot competitively also are members of shooting clubs which likely explains why the exception does not exist. I doubt the CFO's would object to this exception if approached. I suspect they never have been.

Take Care

Bob

Cool story bro

Sorry to burst your bubble but following the demands of unelected bureaucrats that is contrary to what the law says they can do is bending over no matter how much you want to rationalize it.

Also renewal is a different animal and the only time the they can demand range membership or proof of intended use.

Shawn

 

[Canuck44]

You apparently missed the part where the bureaucrats are charged with the administration of such acts of parliament that get passed.

No bubble to burst.

You simply don't understand what power is entrusted to them. You also fail to grasp the concept of need. If you want to purchase a handgun, you need a PAL. If you want a PAL the method of obtaining one is laid out pretty clearly. If you have a PAL there are rules laid out on how to go about purchasing a handgun. If you don't want to follow the rules laid out then you don't get to buy the handgun you want. You do have the option of going to court. Most find it easier to follow the simple rules laid out by the CFO. Pick option A or B. If you post here and own a handgun you obviously chose A. You might want to stand up bending.... over can hard on your back.

Take Care

Bob

Take Care

Bob

 

[Rod]

Your best bet is to join a club convenient to where you're going to live. . You can purchase a restricted or prohibited firearm in B.C., providing you have the correct licence endorsement, but without a club membership the CFO will classify you as a collector which will bring down on you rules and obligations you may not want. . If target shooting is your wish then save the hassle and join a range before you purchase.

 

[BlackVoid]

When I bought my first restricted in 2010, CFO approved transfer without club membership. That's when I applied for LTATT they told me I have to be a member of shooting club.
Which made sense for me at the time.

Now they (Miramichi) for some reason ask about club membership during transfer approval, it went to BC CFO and was completed in 24 hours.

My guess, somebody at RCMP FAC is tightening the screws as much as they can get away with.

 

[MapleSugar]

Your not it is. Under the current law if your RPAL is renewed the C-42 provision are added to your RPAL and will be listed on the carrier



LOL because they did so much for us

Shawn

Cool story bro

Sorry to burst your bubble but following the demands of unelected bureaucrats that is contrary to what the law says they can do is bending over no matter how much you want to rationalize it.

Also renewal is a different animal and the only time the they can demand range membership or proof of intended use.

Shawn

You seem to contradict yourself with those two statements.

First you say that the provisions of Bill C-42 are added to RPAL renewals (which would mean an automatic ATT.)

Then you claim that RPAL renewal is the only time that they can demand intended use.

Why would they bother if you already had an ATT?

I don't know how old you are, but when I bought my first pistol in 1992, I had to join a gun club first.

Then, after I had bought the pistol, I was given a permit to transport it to the RCMP station for verification.

Then they gave me a temporary permit to take it home with me and to transport it to the range until my ATT came in.

The ATT was only good for that specific range.

When I got my black badge later that year, I was upgraded to being allowed to shoot at any range in Canada upon invitation to a match.

I thought that it was BS, as well as a bunch of unnecessary paperwork and running around, but those were the steps that I had to take.

In order to purchase a handgun; you needed an FAC, range membership, a handgun to purchase, a permit to and from the RCMP station, and then an ATT was mailed to you.

FWIW, I can't recall being asked to produce range membership when I renewed my FAC and still owned a handgun.

If you have been able to purchase a handgun without showing proof of range membership, good for you.

The rest of us outside of Ontario are being told that we have to. We don't like it, but we have no other choice unless we want to challenge our CFO's in court like Cyclone did.

IIRC, Chris Wyatt (the Ontario CFO) was in contempt of court and still refusing to issue Cyclone's ATT until Bill C-42 kicked in. From what I can gather, that ATT provision was included BECAUSE of Cyclone's victory and the contemptuous response of Chris Wyatt.

So please don't act all tough and defiant when it was somebody else that won that victory in court for us. Did you even contribute to Cyclone's court costs?

It might be a good thing if every provincial CFO not complying with the Federal law was taken to court and raked over the coals until they stopped interpreting the law as they saw fit. On the other hand, it could result in the Liberals making onerous changes to the law that knock us back again to where we were, or even worse.

That is why I wish we still had a Conservative majority. We don't have any friends in the Liberal caucus like we did with the Conservatives.

You can whine that they didn't do enough, and they didn't in my opinion, but they reversed arbitrary decisions that the RCMP had made and actually clawed back a few of our stolen rights. No other party would have, or ever will.

 

[MapleSugar]

Thanks again for all the help, guys!

I think I'll join a little range nearby that will let me shoot pistols and plink with my .22LR's.

I'll check out the ranges further out in the valley too. Abbotsford, Mission, and Chilliwack seem to be the most interesting.

Too bad that they didn't turn the old Chilliwack CF range into a civilian one. IIRC, it went out to 1000m.

Cheers!

 

[shawn]

You seem to contradict yourself with those two statements.

Sorry but its not clearly you have not actually read the law. Renewal and a transfer are not the same thing. I said it is not required to own or transfer a restricted, you are confusing two different things as if they are the same

Why would they bother if you already had an ATT?

Because you don't, if its not renewed how do you get the ATT?

I don't know how old you are, but when I bought my first pistol in 1992, I had to join a gun club first.
Then, after I had bought the pistol, I was given a permit to transport it to the RCMP station for verification. Then they gave me a temporary permit to take it home with me and to transport it to the range until my ATT came in. The ATT was only good for that specific range.

And?

The law changed

When I got my black badge later that year, I was upgraded to being allowed to shoot at any range in Canada upon invitation to a match.

And?

You can still get that now

I thought that it was BS, as well as a bunch of unnecessary paperwork and running around, but those were the steps that I had to take.

No it was the law, demanding range membership for transfers is not the law and the courts have ruled on it in at least two provinces.

In order to purchase a handgun; you needed an FAC, range membership, a handgun to purchase, a permit to and from the RCMP station, and then an ATT was mailed to you.

Cool story bro, the law changed

The rest of us outside of Ontario are being told that we have to. We don't like it, but we have no other choice unless we want to challenge our CFO's in court like Cyclone did.

It not my fault you think that what ever the secretary you talked to at the CFP said is the law. The fact remains it is not. And you choose to comply with it because it was easy.

So please don't act all tough and defiant when it was somebody else that won that victory in court for us. Did you even contribute to Cyclone's court costs?

I did multiple times I also have used section 74. But you prob don't even know what that is as you clearly have not even read the act. So don't act all tough that since you bent over and took it from the CFP, that it was what the law is, to rationalize it.

It might be a good thing if every provincial CFO not complying with the Federal law was taken to court and raked over the coals until they stopped interpreting the law as they saw fit. On the other hand, it could result in the Liberals making onerous changes to the law that knock us back again to where we were, or even worse.

How has doing nothing worked out for gun owners over the last 25 years? That's right it didn't

That is why I wish we still had a Conservative majority. We don't have any friends in the Liberal caucus like we did with the Conservatives.

LOL they were not our friends, we lots more under the cons than we have so far under the libs.

You can whine that they didn't do enough, and they didn't in my opinion, but they reversed arbitrary decisions that the RCMP had made and actually clawed back a few of our stolen rights. No other party would have, or ever will.

It not my fault you cant tell the difference between what is law and not.

Shawn

 

[shawn]

You apparently missed the part where the bureaucrats are charged with the administration of such acts of parliament that get passed.

No bubble to burst.

You simply don't understand what power is entrusted to them. You also fail to grasp the concept of need. If you want to purchase a handgun, you need a PAL. If you want a PAL the method of obtaining one is laid out pretty clearly. If you have a PAL there are rules laid out on how to go about purchasing a handgun. If you don't want to follow the rules laid out then you don't get to buy the handgun you want. You do have the option of going to court. Most find it easier to follow the simple rules laid out by the CFO. Pick option A or B. If you post here and own a handgun you obviously chose A. You might want to stand up bending.... over can hard on your back.

Take Care

Bob

LOL sure

Just because bureaucrats administer an act does not mean then can legally do what ever they want or things that are contrary to the act. But don't let facts get in the way of a good rant of BS. You choosing to comply with the made up things they ask you to do does not make it the law.

Shawn

 

[KeltecFan]

Thanks again for all the help, guys!

I think I'll join a little range nearby that will let me shoot pistols and plink with my .22LR's.

I'll check out the ranges further out in the valley too. Abbotsford, Mission, and Chilliwack seem to be the most interesting.

Too bad that they didn't turn the old Chilliwack CF range into a civilian one. IIRC, it went out to 1000m.

Cheers!

Vokes range in Chilliwack is still a CF range as you mention. There is a way to get access to it though. It won't work out for you as a main range but if you join the BCRA, you can get access though their events and practice dates.
It is a beautiful range and has a maximum range of 600m.

 

[enefgee]

CFO's are essentially a law unto themselves. They rule through regulation, not law. The law was written in such a way that a bureaucrat can create or interpret regulations with very little interference - it's one of the reasons that the Firearms Act is regarded as one of the worst written pieces of legislation anywhere.

 

[MapleSugar]

Sorry but its not clearly you have not actually read the law. Renewal and a transfer are not the same thing. I said it is not required to own or transfer a restricted, you are confusing two different things as if they are the same



Because you don't, if its not renewed how do you get the ATT?



And?

The law changed



And?

You can still get that now



No it was the law, demanding range membership for transfers is not the law and the courts have ruled on it in at least two provinces.



Cool story bro, the law changed



It not my fault you think that what ever the secretary you talked to at the CFP said is the law. The fact remains it is not. And you choose to comply with it because it was easy.



I did multiple times I also have used section 74. But you prob don't even know what that is as you clearly have not even read the act. So don't act all tough that since you bent over and took it from the CFP, that it was what the law is, to rationalize it.



How has doing nothing worked out for gun owners over the last 25 years? That's right it didn't



LOL they were not our friends, we lots more under the cons than we have so far under the libs.



It not my fault you cant tell the difference between what is law and not.

Shawn

You don't add anything worthwhile to this discussion. Why are you here? You don't even live in BC.

I couldn't care less about your opinion, or your statements.

You certainly like to twist other's words and make convoluted statements.

Yes, I don't need a range membership to purchase or transfer a restricted firearm in BC. But then I'd need to be a collector, not a shooter.

I'm sure that if I tell the "secretary" at the BC CFO's office that Shawn in Moosejaw, Saskatchewan claims I don't need one, she'll stop jerking me around and approve my restricted purchase immediately. Not.

I assume that you're referring to Section 74 of the Firearms Act?

References to Provincial Court Judge

Reference to judge of refusal to issue or revocation, etc.

74 (1) Subject to subsection (2), where

(a) a chief firearms officer or the Registrar refuses to issue or revokes a licence, registration certificate, authorization to transport, authorization to export or authorization to import,

(b) a chief firearms officer decides under section 67 that a firearm possessed by an individual who holds a licence is not being used for a purpose described in section 28, or

(c) a provincial minister refuses to approve or revokes the approval of a shooting club or shooting range for the purposes of this Act,

the applicant for or holder of the licence, registration certificate, authorization or approval may refer the matter to a provincial court judge in the territorial division in which the applicant or holder resides.

Limitation period

(2) An applicant or holder may only refer a matter to a provincial court judge under subsection (1) within thirty days after receiving notice of the decision of the chief firearms officer, Registrar or provincial minister under section 29, 67 or 72 or within such further time as is allowed by a provincial court judge, whether before or after the expiration of those thirty days.

Wow, you sound like a real badass. You've either been denied a licence or permit, or had one revoked. How did that work out for you?

As far as I can tell, the laws haven't been rewritten and we don't have you to thank for being a catalyst in their revision (like we do with Cyclone.)

I also can't recall anything that we lost under the Conservatives? I do however recall that they staved off the reclassification of the Swiss Arms and CZ-858 rifles. That would never have happened under the Liberals. I am certain that we will lose much of what we have now under the Liberals. Just wait until they roll out their new gun laws in the New Year. That will just be the beginning, they are already starting with the propaganda campaign in the media. They even had Sophie Trudeau stating on TV how she doesn't want guns that can hurt people on our streets. Joseph Goebbels would be proud.

BTW, your spelling is atrocious. I do hope that your reading comprehension is significantly better.

Here is the Liberal plan from their own webpage:

We will take action to get handguns and assault weapons off our streets.

Over the last decade, Stephen Harper has steadily weakened our gun laws in ways that make Canadians more vulnerable and communities more dangerous.

We will take pragmatic action to make it harder for criminals to get, and use, handguns and assault weapons. We will:

repeal changes made by Bill C-42 that allow restricted and prohibited weapons to be freely transported without a permit, and we will put decision-making about weapons restrictions back in the hands of police, not politicians;

provide $100 million each year to the provinces and territories to support guns and gangs police task forces to take illegal guns off our streets and reduce gang violence;

modify the membership of the Canadian Firearms Advisory Committee to include knowledgeable law enforcement officers, public health advocates, representatives from women’s groups, and members of the legal community;

require enhanced background checks for anyone seeking to purchase a handgun or other restricted firearm;

require purchasers of firearms to show a license when they buy a gun, and require all sellers of firearms to confirm that the license is valid before completing the sale;

require firearms vendors to keep records of all firearms inventory and sales to assist police in investigating firearms trafficking and other gun crimes;

immediately implement the imported gun marking regulations that have been repeatedly delayed by Stephen Harper; and as part of our investment in border infrastructure, invest in technologies to enhance our border guards’ ability to detect and halt illegal guns from the United States entering into Canada.

We will not create a new national long-gun registry to replace the one that has been dismantled.

We will ensure that Canada becomes a party to the international Arms Trade Treaty.

https://www.liberal.ca/realchange/guns/

Yup, I can't recall the Conservatives directing such venom towards us. With the Liberals, it's only a matter of time until they erode away everything that we take for granted now.

#####ing at us won't change their plans. Feel free to take them to court yourself if you have the time and energy. It will probably go about as far as the petition to remove the restriction from the AR-15.

Nothing positive will happen with this government in power. Nothing.

 

[MapleSugar]

Vokes range in Chilliwack is still a CF range as you mention. There is a way to get access to it though. It won't work out for you as a main range but if you join the BCRA, you can get access though their events and practice dates.
It is a beautiful range and has a maximum range of 600m.

Thank you, KeltecFan!

I knew there was a long distance range out there. My bad, I thought it went to 1000m.

I'll definitely look into the BCRA, I just need to find a good southpaw target rifle now.

Cheers!

 

[MapleSugar]

CFO's are essentially a law unto themselves. They rule through regulation, not law. The law was written in such a way that a bureaucrat can create or interpret regulations with very little interference - it's one of the reasons that the Firearms Act is regarded as one of the worst written pieces of legislation anywhere.

I'm not surprised.

Our firearm laws are just one more reason why I wish I was living in the States.

 

[shawn]

I couldn't care less about your opinion, or your statements.

LOL your panties in twist prove otherwise

Yes, I don't need a range membership to purchase or transfer a restricted firearm in BC. But then I'd need to be a collector, not a shooter.

Nope try again, just because you say it a bunch does not make it the law

I assume that you're referring to Section 74 of the Firearms Act?

Wow, you sound like a real badass. You've either been denied a licence or permit, or had one revoked. How did that work out for you?

Nope try again, also it worked out great I didn't bend over and take

As far as I can tell, the laws haven't been rewritten and we don't have you to thank for being a catalyst in their revision (like we do with Cyclone.)

Except for all the BS you posted about how it was 20 years ago and C-42 last year. Yeah you are right nothing has change. Also Inever claimed to be a catatlyst for anything that is just more BS you made up because you are running from being wrong.

BTW, your spelling is atrocious. I do hope that your reading comprehension is significantly better.

OH NOES I SPEL KNOW GOODER ON CGN LOL

Nothing positive will happen with this government in power. Nothing.

I never said it would. But carry on LOL

Shawn

 

[MapleSugar]

LOL your panties in twist prove otherwise



Nope try again, just because you say it a bunch does not make it the law



Nope try again, also it worked out great I didn't bend over and take



Except for all the BS you posted about how it was 20 years ago and C-42 last year. Yeah you are right nothing has change. Also Inever claimed to be a catatlyst for anything that is just more BS you made up because you are running from being wrong.



OH NOES I SPEL KNOW GOODER ON CGN LOL



I never said it would. But carry on LOL

Shawn

Running from being wrong?

What statement did I make that was false?

In this entire thread, you're the only person that has failed to offer any useful advice to the questions that I've asked.

You act like a 4 year old that's stomping their feet and loudly demanding attention in the grocery store.

Why don't you tell someone who cares? You're not even my child.

Maybe you should run along and start a thread about how awesome you are, and how you invoked Section 74 of the Firearms Act and didn't bend over for the bureaucrats.

I'm sure that we'll all be enthralled to read it.

Then we can be the ones that say, "Cool story, Bro!"