irishfield Posted June 24, 2011 Report Posted June 24, 2011 (edited) So you had your AK-47 taken away? Gee, that's too bad. How unreasonable. Considering it was a legally obtainable firearm when it was purchased and also had the firing pin removed.. yes. It was part of a gun collection no different then you collecting tea cups. It isn't any more powerful... actually less powerful, than most high powered hunting rifles. Loss of a $200 gun was valueless, in comparison to the lawyer fees and loss of business thanks to the publicity for an improper/illegal search and seizure of a collection. We lost over a million gross a year in business over this b s. Edited June 24, 2011 by irishfield
fishing n autograph Posted June 24, 2011 Author Report Posted June 24, 2011 if it's rendered inoperable then it's not a fire arm.... no different than having a starters pistol
NAW Posted June 24, 2011 Report Posted June 24, 2011 Interesting thread. I've slept out in the open, just me in my duck hunting camo, a bag of decoys, my sleeping bag, and my shot gun. Not to worried about getting trouble. At home, every gun I own, pellet, BB, and the real ones, are all locked up, all the time. However, at the cottage, the pellet gun is displayed on a gun rack above the fire place. 620fps too. Try to tell my 80 year old grandparents to take it down. Aint gunna happen.
Fishnwire Posted June 24, 2011 Report Posted June 24, 2011 if it's rendered inoperable then it's not a fire arm.... no different than having a starters pistol No different than having a starter's pistol? Really? If someone points a starter's pistol at me...I'm not going to get too worried because most starter's pistols look like starter's pistols. On the other hand, if someone points an AK at me...I have no way of knowing whether or not it's operable so I'll assume it is. So would you. I sincerely hope (and am confident that) everyone who wants to responsibly enjoy hunting and target shooting in this country will always be free to do so. However, when I hear people get bent out of shape over loosing and item such as an AK-47...you'll understand if I (and most people) are not overly sympathetic.
fishing n autograph Posted June 24, 2011 Author Report Posted June 24, 2011 Well if you read what I said, possession of it is no different, I never said pointing at someone, that's completely different
DRIFTER_016 Posted June 24, 2011 Report Posted June 24, 2011 Well if you read what I said, possession of it is no different, I never said pointing at someone, that's completely different Exactly!!! And don't be surprised that if you point a starters pistol at someone you end up getting shot in self defense either. A starters pistol can still be a deadly weapon especially if it is discharged close to someone. They may shoot blanks but the escaping gas when they are fired still packs a punch. Also I have seen starters pistols that could be mistaken for a 38.
fishing n autograph Posted June 24, 2011 Author Report Posted June 24, 2011 Keep and mind, if you bore out the barrel suddenly you have a firearm Pointing a firearm and possessing one are two different thing
smally21 Posted June 24, 2011 Report Posted June 24, 2011 was the ak47 registered properly? did the owner have a restricted weapons permit? when the ak and the ar15 got restricted (late 90s???) you could still keep them. just had to register them. its almost hard to imagine that in the 1990s you could buy those guns just like any other rifle. in the majority of the worlds countries you can buy an AK in the market between the goat heads and the camel saddles. no big deal. if you recall they became restricted shortly after the marc lepine shooting in montreal. the funny thing is they restricted the AK and the AR15 but left the mini-14 alone, the actual firearm that was used. go figure. anyway, arguing gun rules without whiskey and cigarettes is quite tiring.
fishing n autograph Posted June 24, 2011 Author Report Posted June 24, 2011 And go figure the ar-15 is prohibited but the ar-10 isn't....
TennesseeGuy Posted June 24, 2011 Report Posted June 24, 2011 I had the pleasure of firing an AR15 on the range last week. It's impressive. There was a run on AR15s after our November 2008 election. Prices climbed as demand increased. The M1 Garand has become a popular item recently. Good ones are hard to come by. The U.S. attempted to buy back quite a few from South Korea, but the deal was halted by "our" side. Those suckers will reach out, with accuracy. I was assigned an M1 Garand in 1954 and told I'd have to cough up $70 if I lost it.
porkpie Posted June 24, 2011 Report Posted June 24, 2011 An AK47 is a prohibited firearm in Canada, if you owned one at the time the legislation was passed, you could keep it and buy others. Otherwise, your outta luck. An AR15 is NOT a prohibited weapon in Canada, it is merely restricted, and relegated to range use only! Anyone can pass their restricted test, get a restricted PAL and purchase an AR15. Not so much with the AK!
Sinker Posted June 24, 2011 Report Posted June 24, 2011 I thought we were talking about air rifles?? Does anyone actually know the rules?? I do...... S.
blarg Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 (edited) So you had your AK-47 taken away? Gee, that's too bad. How unreasonable. If you knew anything about firearms you would know that there are many legally available arms that are in the same class as an ak-47 you would also know that some are illegal or restricted simply because they look a certain way despite firing the same ammunition as many non restricted firearms. If you knew those things and no doubt many other things that you don't you wouldn't make such ignorant and flippant remarks. Maybe you should consider your obvious lack of knowledge before you make comments on the subject. Perhaps the most problematic part of any firearms discussion are people with opinions and little to no real knowledge. Questions, how many people have been shot with an Ak-47 in Canada? How many people have been shot with a mini-14? Which one of those is prohibited and which one is unrestricted? This is so tiresome. Edited June 25, 2011 by blarg
Sinker Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 If you knew anything about firearms you would know that there are many legally available arms that are in the same class as an ak-47 you would also know that some are illegal or restricted simply because they look a certain way despite firing the same ammunition as many non restricted firearms. If you knew those things and no doubt many other things that you don't you wouldn't make such ignorant and flippant remarks. Maybe you should consider your obvious lack of knowledge before you make comments on the subject. Perhaps the most problematic part of any firearms discussion are people with opinions and little to no real knowledge. Questions, how many people have been shot with an Ak-47 in Canada? How many people have been shot with a mini-14? Which one of those is prohibited and which one is unrestricted? This is so tiresome. Thank-you!! It amazes me how many people will open thier mouths and make a total ass of themselves. The worste part is, the OP is a cop, and still doesn'tknow the freakin rules!!! S.
Fishnwire Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 (edited) If you knew anything about firearms you would know that there are many legally available arms that are in the same class as an ak-47 you would also know that some are illegal or restricted simply because they look a certain way despite firing the same ammunition as many non restricted firearms. Then it seems to me that the problem is that a bunch of weapons as dangerous (or more dangerous) as AKs should also be made illegal...not that we should make AKs legal, as you seem to be suggesting. I clearly don't know as much about firearms as you do. The thing is...I don't have to know very much to know that an AK-47 is something that should be prohibited. It is an AK-47, right? Like most Canadians...AK-47 is all I need to hear to make up my mind. Edited June 25, 2011 by fishNwire
Fishnwire Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 Thank-you!! It amazes me how many people will open thier mouths and make a total ass of themselves. The worste part is, the OP is a cop, and still doesn'tknow the freakin rules!!! S. So I'm a "total ass" because I'd prefer my neighbor not own an AK-47 and have no sympathy for someone whining about losing one? It seems to me if you can't comprehend how and why the average Canadian feels exactly the way I do...you're the total ass, and a "gun-nut" in the true sense of the word. Nobody needs to own a Kalashnikov or similar assault rifle. Good luck convincing any clear thinking individual otherwise. That's the way it is in this country and it's not going to change anytime soon. You don't have to like it, but since the majority want it that way, you'll have to live with it. If you think more than a small fraction of the country would support your right to own an AK-47...you're out of touch.
Jer Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 What is it, in your mind, that makes an AK-47 more dangerous than most other hunting rifles out there. You do realize we're not talking "fully automatic machine guns" here, right? Is it just the name? Watching too many Hollywood movies? Any gun is just as dangerous as any other if handled improperly. So you're OK with your neighbour owning all sorts of other "legal" guns, but you hear "AK-47" and you run for the hills?
Roy Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 It's a hype thing, Jer. You can kill someone with an improperly handled candlestick. Don't get me started.
Jer Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 It just bugs me is all...and I don't even own a gun. Just tryin to kill some time waitin for my buddy to show up to go fishin...If he doesn't show up soon, I may have to go find one of them "assault" candlesticks.
porkpie Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 I thought we were talking about air rifles?? Does anyone actually know the rules?? I do...... I'm not who your referring to Sinker, but I certainly do know the rules, and what I posted above is entirely correct. If the gentlemans father had 12-5 prohibited class on his license, then he was certainly entitled to possess an AK-47. Provided he owned one at the time the legislation was passed, and continuously possessed at least one prohibited rifle. With respect to AR15 rifles in Canada, I happen to be the owner of one, and am well aware of the rules surrounding ownership and use. If you are suggesting anything else..... I would advise you break out the big book of rules and have a read. You are correct however in that there is a very similar and allegedly better operating system than an ak that is available and non-restricted in Canada in the CZ. Most non shooters, and regretably even most hunters have very little factual knowledge of Canadian firearms laws. You can generally only expect that guys who shoot a lot of handgun or black rifle will be up on the rules, if only to cover their @ss! S.
porkpie Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 Meant to say " I don't know who your referring to Sinker" D@mn I phone.... can't edit properly either...
Fishnwire Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 (edited) It's a hype thing, Jer. You can kill someone with an improperly handled candlestick. Don't get me started. If I came at you with intent to harm you...would I have a better chance of doing so with a candlestick or an AK-47? If you had to have a fight to the death with someone, would you think it would be fair for you to have a candlestick and your opponent an AK-47? Of course not, because you know a candlestick is no where near as deadly as an AK-47. If the difference between a candlestick and an AK-47 is nothing more than "hype"...why not give up the AK and go buy a candlestick and be happy with it? Oh that's right...a candlestick is nowhere near an effective a weapon as an AK...and people who want AKs want effective weapons...not a decorative place to stick a candle. Like I said...you guys think what you want and blame "Hollywood movies" as much as you like...the fact is (and thank God) that the majority of Canadians are not going to get on board with you getting to own an AK-47. Those who have suggested other less infamous weapons are equally dangerous yet legal are certainly right and only point out the need to prohibit those items as well. You want to own an AK-47? Then go to the Rwanda and join up with a gang of warlords...here in the civilized world we don't go in for that. Edited June 25, 2011 by fishNwire
porkpie Posted June 25, 2011 Report Posted June 25, 2011 Annnnnddddd there he is folks.... Another gun grabber! Sorry your party lost the election.... Think I'll clean my CZ in your honor today! You would be surprised at just how many thousands and thousands of us DO go in for that! Don't speak for me or my countrymen. Now go have a latte at starucks, and enjoy your Saturday!
fishing n autograph Posted June 25, 2011 Author Report Posted June 25, 2011 (edited) Thank-you!! It amazes me how many people will open thier mouths and make a total ass of themselves. The worste part is, the OP is a cop, and still doesn'tknow the freakin rules!!! S. Thanks but there are 700+ different sections of the criminal code, 400 sections of the highway traffic act not including the regulatiosn and a miriad of other statues that are enforced...do you really think i have absolutely everything memorized? no, thats why i carry a criminal code, an hta, and several other books in my duty bag while I work...not even lawyers or judges know every law....and if you actually think that other coppers or lawyers do, you need to give your head a shake. I've admitted to my mistake, i'm only human, i'm not a freakin computer and the OP was about the storage of a pellet gun, not whether or not i knew what a nonrestricted, restricted or prohibited firearm. Edited June 25, 2011 by FishnNAutographs
Recommended Posts