View Single Post
Old July 27th, 2008, 23:15   #46
Delierious Designer of Dastardly Detonations
MadMax's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: in the dark recesses of some metal chip filled machine shop
Originally Posted by The Saint View Post


Individuals are afforded the full spectrum of legal protection for acquiring, possessing, transporting and responsibly using Replica Firearm. The language of the Firearms Act and the Criminal Code is one of inclusion and exclusion, so there is nothing unusual about the exception.

And had they not included it, they would have been faced with a situation where Canadian public agencies crushed by the sheer scale of a ban on everything that looked convincingly gun-like. They could've grandfathered all existing Replica Firearms in Canada to ease the aforementioned scenario, but they didn't. They did not grandfather and they did not ban. In fact, the Firearms Act makes completely banning Replica Firearm impossible.

Transfer has a very specific meaning under the Firearms Act and Criminal Code. Transfer for the purpose of this topic is always the point of origin. The seller, giver, (originating) barterer is the transferer. Individuals may only transfer Prohibited Devices to businesses, that's what the Act says.

However, when it comes to the recipient, the buyer, there are no laws against that portion of an exchange. The key is to understand that the Act relies on possession to control acquisition. Because Replica Firearm is not illegal in any way for individuals to possess (provided no other laws are broken, like stolen goods or smuggling), it is not illegal for individuals to acquire.

The legislation is not the problem.
You seem to have an advantage in having an expert opinion on the legislation whereas most of us don't even have the legislation in front of us. Do you mind posting links to the legislation?

The discussion would be pretty asymetrical without looking at the applicable laws.
Want nearly free GBB gas?

MadMax is offline   Reply With Quote