Will a handgun ban affect antiques handguns?

A

appleorangefish

Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Since antiques are still be classified as either long guns or hand guns.
While antique status only exempts them from some of the transportation/storage/registration requirements of typical NR/R/Prohib guns
 
They're coming for EVERYTHING. You won't have nothing left in the end, get antiques now while you can, they ain't considered firearms for now, but we know how easily the gov can rewrite the definitions and the book, so.... nothing is safe.
 
antiques may still be exempt from prohibitions, the real concern is how will the RCMP re-interpret the criteria which makes a gun antique ?

cheers mooncoon
 
After the OIC, I wrote polite letters to Trudeau and Blair asking if the OIC applied to deemed and prescribed antiques. I did not receive the courtesy of a reply. Not even a meaningless thankyouforyourletter.
 
Who knows really. I doubt antique handguns are on their radar at the moment, but in time they could be. That said folks are not snatching them up because the cost is high to break into this part of the hobby.

My small antique handgun collection could just about buy a nice new truck (my wife reminds me often). If I were looking to get one I would move sooner than later.

The reasons are obvious - there not getting cheaper and they are still not in any registry. The other reasons are big positives - shoot anywhere you can discharge a non restricted firearm, no ATT's, as an investment it keeps increasing in value, and an awesome piece of history to show and discuss with other firearm enthusiast.

In the end we will live in a country that has all legal gun ownership stripped from us. One of my pieces was hidden by a French family during NAZI occupation. Interesting history there eh?

Cheers
Moe
 
Last edited:
mooncoon said:
antiques may still be exempt from prohibitions, the real concern is how will the RCMP re-interpret the criteria which makes a gun antique ?
Click to expand...

See the part I'm torn about is:
Criminal Code 84 (1) In this Part,
antique firearm means
(a) any firearm manufactured before 1898 that was not designed to discharge rim-fire or centre-fire ammunition and that has not been redesigned to discharge such ammunition, or
(b) any firearm that is prescribed to be an antique firearm; (arme à feu historique)

handgun means a firearm that is designed, altered or intended to be aimed and fired by the action of one hand, whether or not it has been redesigned or subsequently altered to be aimed and fired by the action of both hands; (arme de poing)
Click to expand...

So an antique pistol/revolver is technically defined as both an antique and a handgun in the same section of the law.


While The antique "status"/exemption/loophole (whatever you want to call it) derives from later section of Criminal Code:
Certain weapons deemed not to be firearms
84 (3) For the purposes of sections 91 to 95, 99 to 101, 103 to 107 and 117.03 of this Act and the provisions of the Firearms Act, the following weapons are deemed not to be firearms:
(a) any antique firearm;
Click to expand...
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/FullText.html

Which means if a handgun ban is based off the definitions in 84(1), then antique pistols and revolvers will be caught in the definition of handgun under 84(1) and banned as well.

Not hoping to derail this thread into politics, I just want to make an informed decision over the next few years about whether it's worth saving up for some antiques I'm interested in, or if it's better off spending that on other things like NR's
 
No one can give you a clear answer on this yet. Blair and the libs want to confiscate everything, don't kid yourself on their agenda. Rock reminded us again years ago. But how far they'll take it this time is anyone's guess. Without a majority it may have slowed down a bit, but it could be campaigned upon come next election. The future doesn't look good for firearm/ antique owners in Canada. Just look at the U.K., Australia or New Zealand for a glimpse of what's in store for us.
 
Ralph said:
If they do not know you have it, how can they take it away?
Click to expand...

there is not much point in having an antique if you cannot take it to the range and shoot it. Even for those who might decide it is legal to shoot them in the bush, is it worth looking over your shoulder all the time ?

cheers mooncoon
 
mooncoon said:
there is not much point in having an antique if you cannot take it to the range and shoot it. Even for those who might decide it is legal to shoot them in the bush, is it worth looking over your shoulder all the time ?

cheers mooncoon
Click to expand...

Agreed, if you can't use it without major legal risk there is not much point in having it short of some "Red Dawn" sort of fantasy where you save the world with it.
 
Well... I live in the country. Cougar density is quite high... I don't go out in the trees w/o one personally.
As far as the Gov't... my location also tips my opinion on things as well.
 
So an antique pistol/revolver is technically defined as both an antique and a handgun in the same section of the law.


The 'Handgun' legal definition states it must also be a 'firearm', and antiques by definition under the FAA are deemed to not be firearms. Therefore, they should be excluded. I think the legislation would have to be re-written in order for them to go after antiques under existing law.

I had asked Michael Loberg's opinion on this subject (the lawyer working with the CCFR legal challenge). His opinion was that antiques would likely be ok, but I agree with others on this page that eventually, the Liberals will come for them.
 
Antiques we probably be the last things they come for since there is no real political gain for such a ban. You get more anti-gun mileage talking about a gang banger with a Glock then an antique Remington.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom