# Dissaembly and transporting a pistol



## Jarnhamar (15 Feb 2013)

An 'illegal' 30 round AR15 magazine ceases to be illegal if you dissemble it.


Could someone theoretically take down a restricted pistol into 3 or 4 parts and transport the pieces separately without inciting the wrath of the RCMP, sans ATT?


----------



## Loachman (15 Feb 2013)

The "frame or receiver" is what legally constitutes the pistol. Everything else is an uncontrolled part. Those you can move without an ATT. The frame or receiver, no.

Magazines have no equivalent to a "frame or receiver" within the law. All components are uncontrolled parts when separated.


----------



## KevinB (18 Feb 2013)

Pistols/Restricted and Prohibited firearms require locked case and trigger lock.


or down here a good holster


----------



## Jarnhamar (27 Feb 2013)

Loachman said:
			
		

> The "frame or receiver" is what legally constitutes the pistol. Everything else is an uncontrolled part. Those you can move without an ATT. The frame or receiver, no.
> 
> Magazines have no equivalent to a "frame or receiver" within the law. All components are uncontrolled parts when separated.


Understood thanks.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (27 Feb 2013)

This was discussed on CGN, the common belief was that a disassembled full capacity magazine not pinned to 5 or 10rds was not a prohibited device. However a court case involving an individual importing mags bodies to pin and then sell them, was charged and found guilty of having a  prohibited device. The judge ruled that the mag body was the device in question as I recall. I not saying I agree with the judge, but advising you to be careful.


----------



## Loachman (27 Feb 2013)

I know of no such case. More likely, the person struck a deal rather than undergo the cost and risk of a trial. The Crown seems to favour that route, as it avoids putting stupid laws to the test and risk losing them.


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Feb 2013)

That's interesting.

A 30 round AR15 magazine is illegal.
A 30 round AR15 magazine with a nut and bolt in it from canadian tire pinning it to 5 rounds is legal.
A 30 round AR 15 magazine in 4 pieces (body, spring, floor plate and cartridge thingie) is illegal?


----------



## Robert0288 (28 Feb 2013)

Just to add to the confusion.  An AR15 mag designed to go in a LAR-15 pistol can be pinned to 10 rounds, because it's a pistol mag and not a rifle mag despite being able to fit in both.


----------



## Loachman (28 Feb 2013)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> A 30 round AR 15 magazine in 4 pieces (body, spring, floor plate and cartridge thingie) is illegal?



Not as far as anybody knows, ie until the Supreme Court rules as such (or declines to accept a case ruled upon by a lower court).

No single part of a magazine has been declared to be a magazine in law, as opposed to a "frame or receiver" being declared to be a firearm (ignoring those few firearms which have neither, of course, but this legislation was written by incompetents).

Blocking can be achieved by a variety of means, as explained in CFC literature previously issued. Pop rivets can be put through the body below the follower, or a vertical rod can be rivetted to the floor plate, for example. To anybody with a clue, these can be removed quite easily, or a rodless floor plate could be combined with an unpinned body. I have also seen magazines for sale, in shops, with tabs punched into the back and front of the body and bent inwards to block the follower. Of course, not even the most murderous psychopath could bend those back out of the way. The CFC literature, however, is not based upon anything actually stated in the legislation, so it has no legal standing.

Someday, somebody will be charged and will decide to test this little mess in court. It would make an interesting case.

Extremely little in that idiotic legislation makes any sense at all.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (28 Feb 2013)

Robert0288 said:
			
		

> Just to add to the confusion.  An AR15 mag designed to go in a LAR-15 pistol can be pinned to 10 rounds, because it's a pistol mag and not a rifle mag despite being able to fit in both.



LAR-15 mags for the pistol are manufactured as ten round mags, for the pistol. Not pinned 30's, but only manufactured to hold ten. Being designed for the pistol, *as imprinted on the magazine by the manufacturer,* they are legal 10 round pistol mags that will fit the AR15 series of rifles.


----------



## Robert0288 (28 Feb 2013)

Thank you for clearing that up for me.

/future AR owner


----------



## Colin Parkinson (28 Feb 2013)

recceguy said:
			
		

> LAR-15 mags for the pistol are manufactured as ten round mags, for the pistol. Not pinned 30's, but only manufactured to hold ten. Being designed for the pistol, *as imprinted on the magazine by the manufacturer,* they are legal 10 round pistol mags that will fit the AR15 series of rifles.



and the reverse is I cannot have a 10rd pistol mag marked "Storm" in my CX-4 Storm as it is a prohibited device, but I can have the same mag, unnamed in 10rds in my Storm. I just love explaining this to cops, who are desperately seeking some form of logic in all of it.  

I am trying to dig up the court case I mentioned earlier


----------



## Bzzliteyr (28 Feb 2013)

I of course just did my licence testing and am sending off the paperwork today.. I'm glad it's all so black and white.


----------



## Container (28 Feb 2013)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I just love explaining this to cops, who are desperately seeking some form of logic in all of it.



With no luck I might add. Want to see a bunch of mind blown cops- start on a firearms laws debate.

We've really come up with an amazing goolash of nonsense.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (28 Feb 2013)

Colin P said:
			
		

> and the reverse is I cannot have a 10rd pistol mag marked "Storm" in my CX-4 Storm as it is a prohibited device, but I can have the same mag, unnamed in 10rds in my Storm. I just love explaining this to cops, who are desperately seeking some form of logic in all of it.
> 
> I am trying to dig up the court case I mentioned earlier



Most RPAL and PAL holders have a hard enough time figuring out the laws. They are incomprehensible to the layman

This includes most cops. Most cops are not PAL or RPAL holders and have never had the training 

Which explains why they know very little about storage, transportation or ammunition laws. They also have almost no understanding of firearms classification beyond a hunting shotgun and a handgun.


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Feb 2013)

Colin P said:
			
		

> and the reverse is I cannot have a 10rd pistol mag marked "Storm" in my CX-4 Storm as it is a prohibited device



huh?  A magazine with Storm written on it is illegal?


----------



## Container (28 Feb 2013)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Most RPAL and PAL holders have a hard enough time figuring out the laws. They are incomprehensible to the layman
> 
> This includes most cops. Most cops are not PAL or RPAL holders and have never had the training
> 
> Which explains why they know very little about storage, transportation or ammunition laws. They also have almost no understanding of firearms classification beyond a hunting shotgun and a handgun.



I know the more black on it the more evil it is.  :blotto:


----------



## J.J (28 Feb 2013)

Loachman said:
			
		

> The "frame or receiver" is what legally constitutes the pistol. Everything else is an uncontrolled part. Those you can move without an ATT. The frame or receiver, no.
> 
> Magazines have no equivalent to a "frame or receiver" within the law. All components are uncontrolled parts when separated.


Unfortunately you are incorrect

http://www.bcjustice.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8412:r-v-cancade-being-in-possession-of-a-not-fully-operational-illegal-cartridge-magazine-court-of-appeal-for-british-columbia&catid=385:criminal-08&Itemid=1648 

Case law dictates that if the parts can be assembled they are considered prohibited. You have the magazine, but not the base plate or spring, the magazine is still considered prohibited as it is assumed you can reassemble it with the missing components.

The %3-5 of criminals ruin it for the legal/lawful owner.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (1 Mar 2013)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> huh?  A magazine with Storm written on it is illegal?



A 10rd mag with Storm on it is a prohibited device, it must be pinned to 5 rds as it was "designed" for a semi-auto centre-fire rifle. The 92 pistol mag which is the same mag without the word "Storm" on it can be 10rds and can be used in the gun. 
the only semi-auto rifle exempted is the Garand rifle.


----------



## KevinB (6 Mar 2013)

WR said:
			
		

> Unfortunately you are incorrect
> 
> http://www.bcjustice.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8412:r-v-cancade-being-in-possession-of-a-not-fully-operational-illegal-cartridge-magazine-court-of-appeal-for-british-columbia&catid=385:criminal-08&Itemid=1648
> 
> ...



Case law in Alberta says differently -- see McFarland AR10 case...

SCOC has not ruled, so in other provinces your gambling.

IIRC the most important aspect is Customer/Border Patrol will not allow import of pieces of mags, which removes the chicken or the egg about component parts.


----------



## DirtyDog (6 Mar 2013)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> huh?  A magazine with Storm written on it is illegal?


There is a type of 25rnd 10-22 mag (that is .22LR) that is prohibited simply because it was once advertised as fitting in a type of .22 pistol.  .22LR long guns have no magazine capacity limits but because this magazine was advertised for also fitting a pistol it is verboten... and the mag does not differ from other 10-22 mags in any kind of interoperability.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (6 Mar 2013)

KevinB that was the case I was referring to, clearly your Google fu is stronger than mine!


----------



## J.J (6 Mar 2013)

Colin P said:
			
		

> KevinB that was the case I was referring to, clearly your Google fu is stronger than mine!



Can you please provide a link to this case?


----------



## KevinB (6 Mar 2013)

I had the transcript of the case when I lived in Ab, trying to find it again, without much luck

Brief synopsis

RCMP and CPS (Pre NWEST) seized Bruce McFarlands AR-10 as a prohibited weapon.  Eventually he proves it was a rare semi-auto only gun thus restricted by OIC, and a judge orders the gun returned, the gun got seized and the mag law came into effect, he refuses to take it with the mag, as there is a lot of BS in the trial with the CPS Firearms cell actually on tape removing peices of the gun to try to make it fire full auto, and he (McF beleives this is simply entrapment of possession of prohitied weapon WRT the mag).  Judge rules that disassembly of the mag will make it non prohibited -- since then its been Ab "rule of the land" (I may know a few folks who benefited from that ruling... :nod


----------



## Robert0288 (9 Nov 2014)

I thought this might be the best place to ask the question rather than start a new thread.  As it IS about transporting restricted firearms.

I'm hoping someone here has some experience with this.  But I'm moving from Ontario out to BC, and along with me comes a number of non-restricted and 2 restricted firearms.  The question is, what is the best method of transporting them out to BC with me.  Thanks to the federal government, I only have 3 weeks to pack everything, HHT, move and start work, so timelines are short.  My current thinking is to somehow get an SATT from the ON CFO and transport the restricted firearms on my person by plane, and have the 10-ish others follow up by ground, either by moving company.... which may not be a good idea, or ship via fedex/UPS despite the massive cost that will go with it.  Or say screw it and buy another couple of cases and ship everything by air, which would probably annoy some individuals with Air Canada.

Any insight, input or previous experience would be helpful.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (9 Nov 2014)

Have you contacted the CFO?

When I was posted from Ontario to NS back in the mid 90s I went through the CFO and had no issues. My firearms (restricted, non restricted and prohib) had to come with me as did my ammo as the movers would not take it. Things may have changed since then but your first step should be the CFO and they should be able to set you straight.


----------



## Robert0288 (9 Nov 2014)

That was the plan for early monday morning.  Probably right after I talk to brookfield and they tell me what I can and can't claim


----------



## Jorkapp (10 Nov 2014)

Movers will not take Restricted or Prohibited firearms, ammunition, reloading supplies, or gun cleaning equipment.

Non-Restricted firearms can be taken by the moving company. I had no problems with them taking my firearms last time I moved, in fact I would recommend it for Non-Restricted firearms. I had mine in hard cases with locks, and everything went just fine. Each case gets its own sticker, and is accounted for. Before you case up your guns, take a note of their serial numbers and approximate value, and give them a good coat of oil as well.

As for your restricted firearms, I'd recommend a courier. Take a look at Canpar, they have decent rates.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Nov 2014)

Guy Incognito said:
			
		

> As for your restricted firearms, I'd recommend a courier. Take a look at Canpar, they have decent rates.



Ding, ding, ding! That's the ticket right there. Have them pick them up at your residence here and deliver them to your residence there.


----------



## Mr. St-Cyr (29 Dec 2014)

> Transporting Firearms Safely
> 
> Restricted and prohibited firearms
> 
> ...



Funny how you absolutely need to attach a locking device to a restricted firearm. I would've thought rendering the firearm inoperable (IE removing a barrel or a bolt) and storing it in a locked case would be sufficient.


----------

