SUPREME COURT OF CANADA RULES. Is this is new news and how this affects us?

[Madrigal]

Has anyone brought up, or considered, the implications for buying parts overseas? If they are now classed as a firearm, then technically we will be trying to bring in firearm parts. Not sure if that will go over well at the border. Not an expert or anything, just my interpretation.

[kalnaren]

Originally Posted by Madrigal

Has anyone brought up, or considered, the implications for buying parts overseas? If they are now classed as a firearm, then technically we will be trying to bring in firearm parts. Not sure if that will go over well at the border. Not an expert or anything, just my interpretation.

AS parts are like.. gears, springs, metal tubes, lube.. hardly anything illegal.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Madrigal

Has anyone brought up, or considered, the implications for buying parts overseas? If they are now classed as a firearm, then technically we will be trying to bring in firearm parts. Not sure if that will go over well at the border. Not an expert or anything, just my interpretation.

no more so than the past 2-3 years.

[Danke]

[Ricochet]

Originally Posted by Cameron SS

stuf phall owt uf muwth

They aren't insults! They are meant in the nicest possible way....

The law and legislation is already in place. It has been provided to you, and its purpose, in this thread in depth, along with all relevant links in this thread. We have been dealing with airsoft and firearms laws in Canada since the beginning of time, and have worked directly on their alteration and interpretation to make our sport legal. That also sets precedence. I'm sorry your interpretation isn't sitting well with you, but this court ruling still would've changed nothing as we'd already be in trouble by you train of thought anyways. I see what you're saying, but what you are saying is that buying a kitchen knife, and then walking from the store to your car, with the knife in a bag, makes it a concealed weapon, because some dude somewhere threatened someone with a box-cutter.

[Memphishills]

EVERYBODY, EVERYBODY!

Stop what you're doing and read this statement, maybe 5-6 times if that's what it takes to sink in:

The ruling did not make our air guns / airsoft guns firearms. THEY ALREADY WERE. THEY'VE BEEN FIREARMS SINCE 2012.

They were exempt from the rules then, and they are still exempt from the rules now, because NOTHING CHANGED. Nothing was reclassified, or classified for the first time. We have been using "firearms" since 2012. Period. No debate. This is fact. Look it up.

All this ruling reaffirmed, is that if you commit a serious crime with a air gun, you will most definitely be charged as a full fledged firearm. This has been the case since 2012. This ruling was just confirming that.

FACTS. END OF STORY.

[ThunderCactus]

/thread

[Dracheous]

Originally Posted by rc_p120

So you guys are saying this will not effect enforcement of the law or perception by police officers in any way? Really?

It won't change a single thing. The reaction to airsoft in public is already in a constant state of misunderstanding with law enforcers. The reality is that these events are still so uncommon that no special training is applied to police forces in dealing with this sort of law.

There are many that often harp on officers "not knowing the law". But the reality is in Canada dealing with Gun crime is extremely limited by the very low number of events. And the events that do take place are very often too clear cut to be worried about that comma, spacing, misspelled word, or translation of sorts. Strictly speaking of course what I mean is that LEO in Canada generally encounter firearm events that are severe. Someone has opened fired, murdered someone or is straight up trafficking them. These sorts of events are easy for officers to deal with ((legally speaking)) as it's a straight up "Cuff em, book em, toss em to the lawyers!" Of course there is tonnes of specialized training to deal with this as we are talking physical threats here.

When you get into the nitty gritties of every day life, the laws become both unclear and underused by law enforcements. For example a Farmer can keep a loaded firearm unlocked in his home for the protection of live stock; he can carry this on his person when about his property through out the year. But expect a beat cop to know the exact section and definitions of such permissions in the Firearms Act? Even with google it would take me a little while to track that down for you reader right now. But the reality is the appearance of such a situation is... Random guy walking around with a loaded gun! "ON THE GROUND NOW SCUMBAG!!!" However that said, officers that spend time in Rural areas tend to become familiar with the particulars of the area and how such people live, think, act etc.

Problem is, that when it comes to Airsoft, you're never really talking rural officers. Anyone silly enough to walk down the street with an M60 and NOT put their hands the fuck up when encountering an officers needs a strict injection of lead STAT!



The end of the day, this will cause no more or no less confusion in how officers understand intricate laws at the street level. You move like an idiot, talk like an idiot, brandish what looks like a gun; you're going to be treated like an idiot with a gun. How you handle the situation can either diffuse everything ((you know, being smart about how you transport, where you play, what you say etc)), or escalate the situation... ie. perforation of the body or brand new jewellery.

[Dracheous]

Originally Posted by Cameron SS

Care to provide a reference for that?

http://ottawa.ca/en/residents/laws-l...aw-no-2002-344

"firearm" means any class or type of gun or other firearm including a shotgun, rifle, air-gun, spring-gun, long-bow or cross-bow;

The definition itself is never recanted or stipulation for the approval of any device that is a type of "gun" which is air/compressed gas operated "tools" to be discharged with in city limits.

This actually makes me want to take the Hilti DX 460 out back and try to chrony the discharged nail. The device is rated with a max 325J of force load and uses strips of gun powder loads to fire. Has ALL the markings of "gun" and I have zero doubt it will exceed the 214fps to make this a firearm. I do have a holster that is covered to prevent it from falling ((also tethered)) when working at heights so could possibly get nailed (heh) for having a "concealed" firearm. And it is often always loaded when on site; even left in an unlocked case unattended in the tool crib where anyone that wanted/needed it could collect it. Well fuck.

Good thing I stocked up on those ACME Umbrellas!

Also, Kalnaren was no less direct and rough on the language than you have been to all in the conversation. I'd be a lil less on the offensive that direction; things tend to fall back on ya when you loose the logic game and start the finger game.

[ThunderCactus]

They don't always make laws to limit carry or what you can own, most of the laws being made are to add charges to criminal offenses.

When that guy took the bus with his rifle to shoot up York university, lawmakers afterwards made it illegal to carry a firearm on public transportation.
Do you think the firearm community was worried it would lead to a ban on firearms?
It only affected a select few firearm owners, but the point of the law was to add one more criminal charge to anyone using public transport to go commit a firearm related crime.
They lumped in airsoft guns with firearms so they can add more charges to a person pointing an airsoft gun at a police officer.

The ban of airsoft makes no sense what so ever, and even lawmakers must see that. I'm sure anyone would rather be held up by an airsoft gun, in which they're in no actual life threatening situation, instead of a real firearm, or even a knife.
The person committing the crime still gets charged with armed robbery as if it were a real gun, but nobody was in any life threatening danger. It's win/win for everyone.

[Cameron SS]

Originally Posted by Dracheous

It won't change a single thing. The reaction to airsoft in public is already in a constant state of misunderstanding with law enforcers. The reality is that these events are still so uncommon that no special training is applied to police forces in dealing with this sort of law.

There are many that often harp on officers "not knowing the law". But the reality is in Canada dealing with Gun crime is extremely limited by the very low number of events. And the events that do take place are very often too clear cut to be worried about that comma, spacing, misspelled word, or translation of sorts. Strictly speaking of course what I mean is that LEO in Canada generally encounter firearm events that are severe. Someone has opened fired, murdered someone or is straight up trafficking them. These sorts of events are easy for officers to deal with ((legally speaking)) as it's a straight up "Cuff em, book em, toss em to the lawyers!" Of course there is tonnes of specialized training to deal with this as we are talking physical threats here.

When you get into the nitty gritties of every day life, the laws become both unclear and underused by law enforcements. For example a Farmer can keep a loaded firearm unlocked in his home for the protection of live stock; he can carry this on his person when about his property through out the year. But expect a beat cop to know the exact section and definitions of such permissions in the Firearms Act? Even with google it would take me a little while to track that down for you reader right now. But the reality is the appearance of such a situation is... Random guy walking around with a loaded gun! "ON THE GROUND NOW SCUMBAG!!!" However that said, officers that spend time in Rural areas tend to become familiar with the particulars of the area and how such people live, think, act etc.

Problem is, that when it comes to Airsoft, you're never really talking rural officers. Anyone silly enough to walk down the street with an M60 and NOT put their hands the fuck up when encountering an officers needs a strict injection of lead STAT!



The end of the day, this will cause no more or no less confusion in how officers understand intricate laws at the street level. You move like an idiot, talk like an idiot, brandish what looks like a gun; you're going to be treated like an idiot with a gun. How you handle the situation can either diffuse everything ((you know, being smart about how you transport, where you play, what you say etc)), or escalate the situation... ie. perforation of the body or brand new jewellery.

Asides from thinking that someone who is a bit slow to put their hands up when encountering the police after having done nothing illegal needs to a lead injection, I agree with this 100%.

[Cameron SS]

Originally Posted by Ricochet

They aren't insults! They are meant in the nicest possible way....

The law and legislation is already in place. It has been provided to you, and its purpose, in this thread in depth, along with all relevant links in this thread. We have been dealing with airsoft and firearms laws in Canada since the beginning of time, and have worked directly on their alteration and interpretation to make our sport legal. That also sets precedence. I'm sorry your interpretation isn't sitting well with you, but this court ruling still would've changed nothing as we'd already be in trouble by you train of thought anyways. I see what you're saying, but what you are saying is that buying a kitchen knife, and then walking from the store to your car, with the knife in a bag, makes it a concealed weapon, because some dude somewhere threatened someone with a box-cutter.

Actually, that's not what I'm saying. But first, apologies if I have perceived insults where none were made.

At a very basic level, the difference between a weapon, and a firearm, is that any object is a weapon if it is intended by the person who possesses it to be used in a harmful way. Any object can be a weapon, but only if its is used, or intended to be used as such. Without any intent, a kitchen knife can never be a weapon, and therefore can never be a concealed weapon.

Firearms, are markedly different. Despite the absurdity of the statement, "Firearms, by their design, are inherently weapons". Therefore, as soon as you intend to conceal a firearm from view, you run the risk of being in possession of a concealed 'weapon'. Again, this is also an absurd statement, because the transportation regulations specifically mention the requirement, where possible, to conceal things from view.

Lastly, the ONCA decided Dunn in 2013. As the supreme court merely affirmed this decision, yes, nothing really has changed since 2013, except that the appeals process has now been exhausted.

If the RCMP has simply refused to address or enforce an issue up until this point, nothing is stopping them from starting to enforce it now. In fact, now that the appeals process is complete, is the best time to begin doing so.

Firearms owners have been languishing under nonsensical laws for more than 40 years, and many of the attacks on legitimate activities were predicted well in advance, in the midst of nay-saying and accusations of fear mongering.

I truly hope that you're right. Time will tell.

[Cameron SS]

Originally Posted by ThunderCactus

They don't always make laws to limit carry or what you can own, most of the laws being made are to add charges to criminal offenses.

When that guy took the bus with his rifle to shoot up York university, lawmakers afterwards made it illegal to carry a firearm on public transportation.
Do you think the firearm community was worried it would lead to a ban on firearms?
It only affected a select few firearm owners, but the point of the law was to add one more criminal charge to anyone using public transport to go commit a firearm related crime.
They lumped in airsoft guns with firearms so they can add more charges to a person pointing an airsoft gun at a police officer.

The ban of airsoft makes no sense what so ever, and even lawmakers must see that. I'm sure anyone would rather be held up by an airsoft gun, in which they're in no actual life threatening situation, instead of a real firearm, or even a knife.
The person committing the crime still gets charged with armed robbery as if it were a real gun, but nobody was in any life threatening danger. It's win/win for everyone.

Well, first off, thousands of Canadians were affected by the ban on public transportation, despite not being on their way to a crime. The law was not a ban on public transportation for criminals with firearms, it was a ban on public transportation with firearms. It was not limited to only the situation that was brought up at trial, but it was applied across the country and negatively affected lots of people who had done absolutely nothing wrong.

No one here has ever denied that a person using an airsoft to rob a bank should have the book thrown at them. That is not the issue.

The Dunn case was a case of the nonviolent use of a firearm. While under observation for something completely unrelated, he took out a pellet gun, and put it back in his pocket. The people watching him thought he pointed it at some one else, who never complained, and then the observers reported it to Ottawa Police. The charge of pointing was tossed in court due to lack of evidence. That should have been the end of it all right there but it wasn't.

He was charged for three other non violent offences, and was convicted despite any intent to harm anyone. Now, as a result of the ruling, there is no intent of any kind required to be convicted of such an offence. This is a terribly unfair state of affairs, especially for people who think as long as I don't intend to hurt anyone else, I am safe from the law.

[Memphishills]

I guess my thread closer didn't stick. :P

[rc_p120]

Originally Posted by ThunderCactus

Police officers aren't robots. You think they're going to slap you with a shit ton of firearm charges just because you didn't put a trigger lock on a toy gun in a case on your way to a game?

YES. Charge you and you can have your day in court, even if you win, you're still out tens of thousands of dollars. Locked hard cases, ammo not stored near the guns, trigger locks...

That is how it works with firearms, and the SCC has pretty clearly stated that airguns are now firearms. This is fairly recent declaration, but as CameronSS said, I'm sure policies and guidelines will be put in place over time and the potential is there for them to be treated exactly as firearms are now. I HOPE I AM WRONG. But it's not a good sign is it? It's frankly idiotic.


I see alot of comments about how airsoft has been through this before, and airsoft survived this and that and we will be okay, etc... Well, if they are now considered 'firearms' you have to listen to the firearms guys and their knowledge on how the law is applied and the history of dealing with RCMP and the govt on these issues. The wording of this declaration gives me that whole 'we're not in Kansas anymore' type of feeling. Crossing into the legal territory of being a firearm is something that you may mockingly describe as the 'sky falling', but it increases the risks by huge degrees for taking part in the sport, even if you have NO bad intentions! The gun community has been living with this for decades.