Order In Council Firearms problem / solution

[Ed Landstrom]

Originally Posted by rob love

Don't bet on it. The OIC is the guideline. It results in a lot of other similar firearms or devices being prohibited for being similar. They changed a lot of firearms from non-restricted over to prohibited that were not on the list simply because they were similar, including a few that, a month previous, were listed as NOT being related to the parent firearm that they are now using to prohibit them. And just because the turkish M72 tube isn't listed doesn't mean that they can't add that FRT when the time comes with their opinion as to it's status.

I have an airsoft M-72. Kind of heavy duty in that it's made of metal rather than fiberglass. Hopefully they don't consider it a replica. Those are banned too.

It doesn't even have to be similar to anything, It only has to have a bore greater than 20mm or be capable of discharging a projectile at a muzzle energy greater than 10 000 Joules. The list is only a sampling of things that are included in the prohibition. If it meets the above criteria, it's outlawed whether they remembered to put it on the list or not.

Collectors are still speculating (and the feds haven't chosen to issue any clarification) whether the ban includes flare guns, antiques, muzzle loading match-fired cannons, line-throwers, industrial devices such as kiln guns, and other gun-like devices that have been traditionally exempt.

[Bruce Parker (RIP)]

Originally Posted by Ed Landstrom

Collectors are still speculating (and the feds haven't chosen to issue any clarification) whether the ban includes flare guns, antiques, muzzle loading match-fired cannons, line-throwers, industrial devices such as kiln guns, and other gun-like devices that have been traditionally exempt.

What you say is correct. Regarding the flare guns and industrial devices I recall some early soothing words that they would be exempt. However if it's not in writing and the definition includes them I wouldn't take my chances in court as they say.

How an unlicensed shooter with illegal smuggled guns somehow justifies a ban on WW1 relics and empty fiberglass M72 tubes is beyond me. That those items were already on the list well before the shooting tells me a great deal as well.

[Ed Storey]

It is bad enough that the Canadian Government and Press consistently paint legal firearms owners as a potential safety risk and that the government has done everything in its power to strip legal owners of their firearms; but now it appears the medical profession has jumped into the fray. I guess if you cannot legislate the legal confiscation of personal property then you can always try a new approach and go after those Canadians over 60 who own firearms by scaring unwitting relatives into believing that the older, firearms owning, members of their family are a potential risk to themselves or other people due to potential mental health issues.

https://ottawacitizen.com/health/men...ms-and-suicide