- Reaction score
- 7,587
- Points
- 1,360

Every five years the RCMP sends me a letter basically telling me "Keep your PAL up to date and we won't seize your gun".The mother was apparently the owner of the known firearms at the residence. Her PAL was reported to have allegedly been expired. The question now is why were the firearms not seized for unlawful possession? That's simple. Peoples PALs, drivers licenses, health cards, gym memberships expire all the time and they don't realize it until the need arises for that document. The RCMP's Continuous Eligibility Screening would not have flagged it as expired without a triggering law enforcement interaction being entered in a contributing police information system.
So, if the legally acquired firearms may not have been involved at all, they were just at the residence? A bit of speculation on my part, but that does appear to be what this is saying.Ref in an RCMP FB statement to the second weapon in question having been modified:
View attachment 98452

It's called anarcho-tyranny or "law without order" and Canada is trending toward it, very quickly.Every five years the RCMP sends me a letter basically telling me "Keep your PAL up to date and we won't seize your gun".
Every five years the RCMP sends me a letter basically telling me "Keep your PAL up to date and we won't seize your gun".
The NS Gov does the same thing for my DL. And my various vehicle registrations.
IMHO not knowing your ID expired is a copout. People need to be an adult and manage their lives. Failure to do that should limit thier privileges until things can be corrected.
PALs shouldn’t expire. Maybe acquiring new firearms should be restricted, but simply owning your property shouldn’t become illegal just because a licence expired.The NS Gov does the same thing for my DL. And my various vehicle registrations.
IMHO not knowing your ID expired is a copout. People need to be an adult and manage their lives. Failure to do that should limit thier privileges until things can be corrected.
In the case of a car, you are licensing both the car and the driver, but anyone can drive it as long as they and the car are licensed.PALs shouldn’t expire. Maybe acquiring new firearms should be restricted, but simply owning your property shouldn’t become illegal just because a licence expired.
The government doesn’t come take your car because your drivers licence expired, you just can’t drive it on public roads.
Yes but my drivers licence doesn’t expire and suddenly my car becomes illegal to possess and can result in jail time.In the case of a car, you are licensing both the car and the driver, but anyone can drive it as long as they and the car are licensed.
I can’t see a valid reason why it expires currently other than bureaucracy. If the government has a reason to believe that you shouldn’t have a PAL they should be initiating the process to remove it, not just ‘oh 5 years is up your now a criminal’.

Again you should have to have a reason. Not be fishing for a reason. They should be proactive not reactive with this.Perhaps because an individual's personal history and conjugal status has changed?
View attachment 98516
PALs shouldn’t expire. Maybe acquiring new firearms should be restricted, but simply owning your property shouldn’t become illegal just because a licence expired.
The government doesn’t come take your car because your drivers licence expired, you just can’t drive it on public roads.
It may be a left over thing that had a purpose a long while ago. But I don’t disagree with you now. The issue of course, with anything related to government processes is the unintended optics.Yes but my drivers licence doesn’t expire and suddenly my car becomes illegal to possess and can result in jail time.
To me the PAL should be like the old FAC (firearms acquisition certificate) where you can possess your firearms with a expired FAC but cannot buy new ones. Or the PAL should never expire and can’t be revoked without a valid reason.
I can’t see a valid reason why it expires currently other than bureaucracy. If the government has a reason to believe that you shouldn’t have a PAL they should be initiating the process to remove it, not just ‘oh 5 years is up your now a criminal’.
This is where you go wrong, ownership of property isn’t a privilege it is a right and should not be deprived of without a valid legal reason.If one cant be an adult and track when one's licenses are coming up for renewal I have no issue with privileges being revoked. Do the same for cars too, I don't mind. I also renew my licenses and registrations on time.
And I have no problem having to renew them.
Your mistaking the intent behind our firearms laws. It is designed to make it difficult and slowly but surely remove them from society. The designers of said laws made it very clear that was the goal.It may be a left over thing that had a purpose a long while ago. But I don’t disagree with you now. The issue of course, with anything related to government processes is the unintended optics.
If you make life easier for firearms owners, you are supporting firearms ownership.
If you support firearms ownership, and someone links your process to death you are to blame. If you inherit a system and keep it moving without change you can blame others![]()
This is where you go wrong, ownership of property isn’t a privilege it is a right and should not be deprived of without a valid legal reason.
If you do not believe in the right to own property, well comrade have I got a good political system to sell you.
The discussion stemmed from the Mom's PAL allegedly being expired. Maybe those posts should stay while the ones discussing licensing in general can be moved.Probably time to split a bunch of replies from active shooter back over to gun control thread?