Passenger finds RCMP gun BC ferry

[jollyjacktar]

Yes, seeing a numpty or complacent knob handing a pistol stupidly makes me nervous as well.  I kind of suspected the requirement was to give the FNG's the experience of which end is the front and which is the back etc.  But seeing as they are "supposed" to have many weeks of professional training in the safe usage of FA, it still seems pointless and an expensive pain in the ass.  Getting a course here in Metro Hfx is difficult as spaces are limited and there are many legitimate sportsmen who need to have the courses hereabouts.  As you say, tick in the box.  :

 

[ballz]

Yes they do. Just recently a man had a rifle stolen from under his  matress from a break and enter. I gave the guy a break and made sure he secured the rest of his firearms properly. Explained why etc.

The file bounced back, the uppers and a lawyer wanted the storage charge laid. So they did.

Absolute discharge.

So yes it does happen. From my own first hand experience.

That is a completely different situation from leaving a loaded handgun in a public place. That's not even close to a relevant case.

Having a PAL has caused me ten minutes of paperwork every few years. It isnt a big deal.

Try getting posted (prohibited) where you can't take your F&E. The moving company isn't allowed to store your restricted firearm, nor are they allowed to move it from point A to point B. I can get it stored at a shop somewhere in St. John's, but I won't be back to St. John's after my posting is over, so then I'll have to deal with all the garbage of trying to ship a restricted firearm.

The RCMP's solution? Give my $1700 rifle away to someone else and let them "hold on to it." Yeah right, thanks...

This is all ignoring the part where I couldn't take my rifle home for weeks after I bought it without declaring myself as a target shooter, getting an $80 range membership, attending an orientation, etc etc.

10 minutes my ass.

 

[fraserdw]

:evilrifle: :goodpost:

 

[Robert0288]

so then I'll have to deal with all the garbage of trying to ship a restricted firearm.

This is all ignoring the part where I couldn't take my rifle home for weeks after I bought it without declaring myself as a target shooter, getting an $80 range membership, attending an orientation, etc etc.

10 minutes my ***.

You can ship restricted firearms via Canada post so long as you use the most 'secure method' possible (AKA requires a signature)  Although that hasn't stopped Canada post from leaving those packages sitting on my lawn chair in front of the house multiple times either.  Also what is this nonsense about requiring a range membership?

 

[fraserdw]

  Also what is this nonsense about requiring a range membership?

I was also told that in 1999 by the Oromocto RCMP.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

You can ship restricted firearms via Canada post so long as you use the most 'secure method' possible (AKA requires a signature)  Although that hasn't stopped Canada post from leaving those packages sitting on my lawn chair in front of the house multiple times either.  Also what is this nonsense about requiring a range membership?

When you buy a Restricted, there are two reasons. Target shooting or Collector. Collector status is a long drawn out affair and you can't get an ATT to go to the range. You're a Collector, not a shooter.

If you are a target shooter, the only place that you can legally use a Restricted is at a CFO designated range. CFOs have being using this clause to demand your club membership in order to purchase (transfer to you) a Restricted. It makes no difference if you can shoot as a guest. If you don't belong to a club, you won't get the restricted registration and the transfer won't be approved. There is nothing saying that you have to remain a member in order to possess. So if your membership runs out, you don't have to renew in order to retain ownership of the restricted. However, some CFOs are now taking requests for LTATT only from clubs. If your not a member, you can't apply for a LTATT yourself, only a single use short term ATT. It's not 100% in use across the board yet, but it's coming.

Just more hoops.

It started in Quebec, IIRC, but CFOs across the country are starting to standardize their Provincial rules with one another. CFOs also have a large amount if leeway in how they interpret the existing requirements. LTATT used to be good for three provinces, gun shops and border crossings out west. Now they are going like Ontario and Quebec. To and from CFO approved ranges, in that province, only.

 

[Robert0288]

I have purchased restricted firearms without a valid range membership within the past year without issue.  Also I know the Ontario CFO doesn't process LTATTs without the application directly from the club, what really bothers me is all the power the CFO has in the implementation seemingly random regulations, and the fact that some clubs (looking at you RA centre in Ottawa) Want you to be a member for something like 6 months before they will apply for an LTATT for you.

 

[Container]

That is a completely different situation from leaving a loaded handgun in a public place. That's not even close to a relevant case.

Why the hell would a civilian have a loaded handgun on the ferry? Thats ridiculous. Im telling you, no matter your feelings on the subject, a first time offender before the courts in this case with a clean history and is a productive member of society would recieve the same consideration as a police officer. It doesnt matter what you think the courts bias is towards the police is. Its an insane suggestion to any police officer that we recieve any special consideration. Heck the court system knows everything from any misconduct we've been found guilty of right down to how many speeding tickets we have. And lawyers use this to attack our credibility- everyone else is exempt from that type of disclosure. Not the police. We have special expectations to produce even more things to attack us on.

In Alberta they convicted a police officer on charges after three trials. There was collective shock accross the police community- no everyday person has the crown go after them after two failed attempts.

The bias doesnt exist in the form you suggest. The courts in Canada do everything they can to keep people out of jail- especially on first contact. Unless of course you defend your home- then they would jail you for not calling 911 before running away.

There is no mandatory minimum for this offence. I dont believe we have effective gun laws in Canada. They are burdensome and cumbersome. But this thread is low on legal fact.

I should admit that while I have had no problems transferring rifles between owners and provinces I've heard some horror stories. So I dont for a second doubt your experience. That to me suggests that some standards need to be set in stone rather than leave it to the anti-gun public servant who occupies the office for a few years who never owned a gun....

 

[Loachman]

There is a huge perception of a double-standard between the way that law-enforcement pers and regular citizens are treated. There have been enough cases over many years to give rise to and support that perception. The "evidence" is, however, anecdotal. I do not know of a single attempt to study this and prove or disprove it.

There are different procedures in place for CF members who leave weapons insecure/unattended or have negligent discharges as well - summary trials and fines, usually. I do not recall a single one being charged criminally or losing a private collection as a result.

I would prefer one standard for all, in the interests of fairness - and a reasonable standard.

The problem is due to the current firearms legislation, which is one of the worst laws ever enacted.

I would not advocate for increased penalties for military and law-enforcement personnel, but for more reasonable treatment of regular citizens.

 

[Container]

I would not advocate for increased penalties for military and law-enforcement personnel, but for more reasonable treatment of regular citizens.

What a reasonable position. I dont share it however  ;D Im of the opinion if you enforce the law for a living, or handle weapons for a living- you should obey the law even MORESO and the expectation that you treat your weapon with respect be included in any sentencing provisions.

I dont like when I read about mounties unloading a magazine into the wall during an argument with their spouse and they keep their job. I like it even less when management responds to the disbelief with "dont worry- she wont be responding to any calls anymore". FIRE HER- and jail her damn it.

That said- I've had 6 months probation given to an offender with an arms length criminal record who tried to bury a hatchet in my skull during my response to a domestic dispute. No jail at all either.

What happens is Joe Everyone who goes to court and is found guilty one time of some assault or otherwise doesnt go to jail- there is no story there. Who really is shocked by another story of canadas courts sending mixed signals? But when a cop is convicted of assault. Their very first criminal offence ever, with a strong track record of community service, and is sentenced to no jail time- there is this mistaken belief that it was because he was a cop.

The truth is, in my ground level observations only, you have to try very hard to wind up in jail in this country. Outside of murder i've watched first time offenders skate through the court on pretty much every other type of offence at one point or another.

Im amazed at what MADD has managed to influence. Violent sexual assault leading to the death of a toddler- conviction for "fail to provide necessities" and two years less a day. Chronic impaired driver fifth conviction on a snowmobile no one injured- 2 years less a day......

 

[Jarnhamar]

you have to try very hard to wind up in jail in this country.

Challenge accepted.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I have purchased restricted firearms without a valid range membership within the past year without issue.  Also I know the Ontario CFO doesn't process LTATTs without the application directly from the club, what really bothers me is all the power the CFO has in the implementation seemingly random regulations, and the fact that some clubs (looking at you RA centre in Ottawa) Want you to be a member for something like 6 months before they will apply for an LTATT for you.

It's not a matter of what you did in the past year. I'm simply responding to your question, with the policy that's becoming entrenched out there. I also don't care if it's right or wrong. You asked a question, I answered it. I've found it best not to have a personal opinion here. :