So if I theoretically don;t have guns registered..

[elkhunter11]

But dont give him the bolt or key to unlock it

I ****ed off one young Fish&Wildlife officer a few years ago when he asked to see if my gun was loaded,then reached out his hands expecting me to hand him the gun.I opened the action to show him the empty chamber and missing magazine,but I told him that I would not hand him the gun without first seeing his identification,and proof that he had a PAL.He seemed annoyed at first,but when his partner,who I have known for many years,chuckled and told him that I had a point,he quickly backed off and relaxed.

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

I ****ed off one young Fish&Wildlife officer a few years ago when he asked to see if my gun was loaded,then reached out his hands expecting me to hand him the gun.I opened the action to show him the empty chamber and missing magazine,but I told him that I would not hand him the gun without first seeing his identification,and proof that he had a PAL.He seemed annoyed at first,but when his partner,who I have known for many years,chuckled and told him that I had a point,he quickly backed off and relaxed.

Peace officers are not required to have a PAL while on duty nor would any law be broken if you handed your rifle to a non-PAL holder in any situation. You could ask to see his badge or identification but that's all you have the right to ask for. Good story though.

[deerhuntercentral]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

I got asked for my registration certificates by a commercial vehicle inspection guy a few weeks ago in BC. He never asked for my PAL though....weird.

That really surprises me, a commercial vehicle guy really shouldn't be asking for anything of that nature, has nothing to do with them.

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

I ****ed off one young Fish&Wildlife officer a few years ago when he asked to see if my gun was loaded,then reached out his hands expecting me to hand him the gun.I opened the action to show him the empty chamber and missing magazine,but I told him that I would not hand him the gun without first seeing his identification,and proof that he had a PAL.He seemed annoyed at first,but when his partner,who I have known for many years,chuckled and told him that I had a point,he quickly backed off and relaxed.

When they first gave the F&W handguns I was stopped and they asked to check my rifle, I opened my door and was trying to hand it to the guy butt end and he put his hand on his pistol like he was ready to pull it and shoot me.

Originally Posted by deerhuntercentral

That really surprises me, a commercial vehicle guy really shouldn't be asking for anything of that nature, has nothing to do with them.

That's what I thought too but as he is a Peace Officer, I was compelled to comply.

[deerhuntercentral]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

That's what I thought too but as he is a Peace Officer, I was compelled to comply.

I suppose but I would get really annoyed by it. It seems a little "Gestapo-ish". I wonder if refusing him and making him bring the RCMP to check it would be considered obstruction? I would assume the guy has absolutely no knowledge of the gun laws himself other than people needing to register because he "heard something like that".

[Donkey Oatey]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

That's what I thought too but as he is a Peace Officer, I was compelled to comply.

Not sure how it works in BC but in Alberta the commercial enforcement guys are peace officers for the Highway Safety Act but are not considered Police Officers under the criminal code so can not enforce federal laws. Much the same as the Sheriff's in Alberta. Only have Provincial powers not Federal.

I think it would be worth the few minutes to make a complaint to BC about the guys overstepping their duties asking about registered firearms. They are there to enforce weights and measures.

Originally Posted by deerhuntercentral

I suppose but I would get really annoyed by it. It seems a little "Gestapo-ish". I wonder if refusing him and making him bring the RCMP to check it would be considered obstruction? I would assume the guy has absolutely no knowledge of the gun laws himself other than people needing to register because he "heard something like that".

He was polite and I figured the quick easy way out for me was to show him the certificates. Had he started asking to see more, I may have resisted a bit. I was in a hurry and the quick way out seemed to be to show him the paperwork. As it turned out, I was right.

Originally Posted by Donkey Oatey

Not sure how it works in BC but in Alberta the commercial enforcement guys are peace officers for the Highway Safety Act but are not considered Police Officers under the criminal code so can not enforce federal laws. Much the same as the Sheriff's in Alberta. Only have Provincial powers not Federal.

I think it would be worth the few minutes to make a complaint to BC about the guys overstepping their duties asking about registered firearms. They are they to enforce weights and measures.

Actually any Peace Officer has the right to ask to see your paperwork. Fish and Wildlife officers are provincial as well.

[Donkey Oatey]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

Actually any Peace Officer has the right to ask to see your paperwork. Fish and Wildlife officers are provincial as well.

Actually no that is incorrect. Not all Peace Officers are considered Police Officers under the Criminal Code. There is a difference. A F&W Officer by virtue of he appointment is considered a Police Officer under the Criminal Code. A Sheriff is a Peace Officer under the Provincial Statutes that he his appointed under but is not considered a Police Officer under the Criminal Code and therefore can not enforce Federal Legislation.

It can be confusing but its there in the legislation.

I think the term you are looking for is ex-officio.

The point is, he was a Peace Officer and he was within his right to ask to see the paperwork. Had there been issues with the paperwork, I'm sure he'd have called in the RCMP. Our provincial Park Rangers work in much the same capicity enforcing F&W law and even asking to see gun paperwork. Under the law I was required to have the certificates. He asked to see them and I produced them and then drove happily upon my way. I don't see the cause for getting upset.

I guess I could have refused to show them and demanded that an RCMP be summoned. That would have likely taken an hour and then I'm sure I'd have been subject to a more thorough examination resulting in another lost hour of so. In the end I'd have still been required to show my registration certficates and would have lost two hours. When you get older, you learn to pick your fights carefully. There was nothing to win here...only to lose. Sure the registration fiasco peaves me off but it's still law and a Peace Officer was asking to see if I was complying.

[luv2hunt]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

My understanding was that SRD Officers or Conservation Officers rarely/never will, but that Police are likely to ask.

got checked last weekend by warden and was asked to produce registration cards,i asked what the heck,said they are to be checked as of now.so you better be carrying them. first time i have ever been asked but i think this gun bill ruffled alot of brass feathers .this was in zone 514

[elkhunter11]

Peace officers are not required to have a PAL while on duty nor would any law be broken if you handed your rifle to a non-PAL holder in any situation.

Regardless of what laws would or would not have been broken,it surprised the officer,and he immediately stopped reaching for the gun.

You could ask to see his badge or identification but that's all you have the right to ask for.

Apparently like many other officials including many RCMP officers,he was unsure about the firearms laws and backed off his demand,when I made my request.He was young and inexperienced at the job,so he was caught off guard,and wasn't sure how to deal with the situation.

I wasn't worried about a confrontation of any sort,since as I already posted,I had known his partner for many years.His partner was retiring soon,so he was showing his young replacement around.We had some entertainment at the young officers expense,and although he may have been a little ****ed off initially, there were no hard feelings afterward.I now get along very well with the replacement,just as I did with the previous officer.

Good story though.

But obviously not as good as yours.

[209x50]

Originally Posted by predatorzedge

hmm, good to know there Elk Hunter, gonna have to dig mine up I guess an carry it.

If anyone hunts the 502, 501, an 514, they are gonna ask for the firearm to inspect an check to verify its registered. Happened last year or year before cant remeber exactly but hey happens when yur half way to 54 hehe But dont give him the bolt or key to unlock it

I scan mine and print a copy to carry rather than risk losing or damaging the original.

[elkhunter11]

I scan mine and print a copy to carry rather than risk losing or damaging the original.

I carry a laminated copy in every gun case,with another copy at home in case one gets lost.

If you call the CFC and ask if a copy is legal proof of registration they will tell it's not. I'm not sure what the officers in the field would say.

[elkhunter11]

If you call the CFC and ask if a copy is legal proof of registration they will tell it's not. I'm not sure what the officers in the field would say.

Obviously you talked to a different person at the CFC than I did.The one that I talked to informed me that a copy was acceptable,she also told me that it was acceptable to laminate the original,or the copy.Then again it is quite normal for the people at the CFC to contradict each other.As for the RCMP officers that looked at my papers at the check stops,they had no problems at all with my laminated copies.They may not have even realized that the certificates were actually copies.

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Obviously you talked to a different person at the CFC than I did.The one that I talked to informed me that a copy was acceptable,she also told me that it was acceptable to laminate the original,or the copy.Then again it is quite normal for the people at the CFC to contradict each other.As for the RCMP officers that looked at my papers at the check stops,they had no problems at all with my laminated copies.They may not have even realized that the certificates were actually copies.

Just telling you what I've been told and likely a dozen other people that I know.

Laminating is fine but the standard line out of the CFC these days is that copies are not acceptable as proof of registration. You've been asked for your registration certificate numerous times? You are the only one I've ever heard of that's been asked numerous times...

[elkhunter11]

You've been asked for your registration certificate numerous times? You are the only one I've ever heard of that's been asked numerous times...

I have been asked at check stops exactly twice,both times on my way home to Fort Mcmurray.

I do know for a fact that a copy of an ATT is completely acceptable to the CFO of Alberta,and to police. I just recently sold a handgun and when I called the CFO top obtain an ATT to take the gun to the post office to ship it,the CFO emailed me the ATT,and told me to print it and take a copy with me.If a copy of an ATT is acceptable,why not a copy of a registration certificate?

As to whether the CFO is more in authority than a worker at the CFC,you decide.

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

IIf a copy of an ATT is acceptable,why not a copy of a registration certificate?

QUOTE]

Umm, let me think about that for a minute. Off the top of my head I'd say because they are two completely different things.

[elkhunter11]

Umm, let me think about that for a minute. Off the top of my head I'd say because they are two completely different things.

Not all that different,both are official documents dealing with the federal gun control regulations.In fact getting stopped,and not having an ATT could get you in much more trouble than not having a registration certificate.That would make the ATT even more important than a registration certificate in our province of Alberta.The CFO is the firearms authority in our province,so if the CFO accepts copies of official firearms documents,does it really matter what someone at the CFC thinks of copies,especially given the fact that different workers at the CFC are giving out different information to different callers?

Just telling you what I've been told and likely a dozen other people that I know.

You obviously know 209x50 quite well,is he one of those people?If so,why did he post that he caries a copy of the certificate?Obviously he was told as I was that copies were acceptable.

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Not all that different,both are official documents dealing with the federal gun control regulations.In fact getting stopped,and not having an ATT could get you in much more trouble than not having a registration certificate.That would make the ATT even more important than a registration certificate in our province of Alberta.The CFO is the firearms authority in our province,so if the CFO accepts copies of official firearms documents,does it really matter what someone at the CFC thinks of copies,especially given the fact that different workers at the CFC are giving out different information to different callers?



You obviously know 209x50 quite well,is he one of those people?If so,why did he post that he caries a copy of the certificate?Obviously he was told as I was that copies were acceptable.

As much as you want black to be white elkhunter...it ain't. All I was doing was passing along some recent information that I received from the CFC....take it for what it's worth and do whatever you personally like...I could care less. My neighbour's cat doesn't need a licence but I don't automatically assume my dog doesn't either even though they are both living, breathing mamals. Perhaps a photocopy of an ATT is fine, I've never asked but I have asked several times about copying registration certificates and in the early days of the registry they seemed fine with it but that position seems to have changed. I'm just relaying that info to those that may be interested. Perhaps add some pertinent info about registration certificates rather than trying to convince everyone that an ATT and a registration certificate are the same. They aren't!

I'm not feeding the troll any more...have a good day.

[elkhunter11]

You obviously know 209x50 quite well,is he one of those people?If so,why did he post that he caries a copy of the certificate?Obviously he was told as I was that copies were acceptable.

Just wondering why you quoted that from my post,yet declined to answer my question?

Coincidentally after you posted previously that only the seller could initiate a transfer of registration it was 209x50 that corrected you,in that the buyer can initiate the transfer,but the CFC still needed to hear from the seller to complete the transfer.Is he wrong,or is there something about the transfer of firearms that you misunderstood,or were provided the wrong information on from the CFC.If that happened once,perhaps it can happen twice.

And in neither case,did you attempt to correct 209x50 as you attempted to correct myself.I wonder why that is?

As tempting as it is to point out the folly in yet another of your pointless posts, I'll stick with my gut on this one...

[elkhunter11]

As tempting as it is to point out the folly in yet another of your pointless posts, I'll stick with my gut on this one...

As if I don't already know the answer,just like any forum members who know the real identity of both yourself and 209x50.Either you would have to admit your mistake,or admit that your partner made a mistake,I guess that neither is acceptable to you.In that case,it's best to avoid the questions.

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

As if I don't already know the answer,just like any forum members who know the real identity of both yourself and 209x50.Either you would have to admit your mistake,or admit that your partner made a mistake,I guess that neither is acceptable to you.In that case,it's best to avoid the questions.

Actually I find it's best to stick to facts and avoid the trolls. When you get desperate, you sure try and bring in personal lives don't you. I'm okay learning something on this board every day. I can't speak for 209 but I'm sure he is too. I'd ask what your point was but once again my gut wins out.....


Sorry, I know you need the last word. Post away...it's yours!

[elkhunter11]

Actually I find it's best to stick to facts and avoid the trolls. When you get desperate, you sure try and bring in personal lives don't you.

I'd ask what your point was but once again my gut wins out.....

My point is obvious,that you don't have the guts to confront certain people as would myself.It's okay for a personal friend to point out your mistake,or to post something that you feel is incorrect,but you feel a need to attack anyone else that does the same thing.

[bakerman]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

You need to have it with you,so that you can present it to an officer if he asks to see it.

Thanks for the info I've been gone a few days, so sorry I didn't respond sooner. I guess I better start packing the paper work.