Weapon vs Firearm

[Unregistered user]

The term "Weapon" is used in the Alberta hunting regs. See p14 etc.

[thumper]

Originally Posted by 260 Rem

Perhaps our time would be better spent pouring shame on gun owners that refer to magazines as clips? Of all people, they should know better but .... I own firearms, not weapons.

In certain situations, almost anything I own could be a 'weapon', but under normal use, I own hammers, shovels, cutlery, firearms, golf clubs etc.

[260 Rem]

Originally Posted by thumper

In certain situations, almost anything I own could be a 'weapon', but under normal use, I own hammers, shovels, cutlery, firearms, golf clubs etc.

My baseball bat could be a weapon, but none of my firearms are.

[urban rednek]

Originally Posted by brendan's dad

[/B]

This is wrong. Canadian Criminal Code, Section 2 definition reads....

“Weapon” means any thing used, designed to be used or intended for use

(a) in causing death or injury to any person, or
(b) for the purpose of threatening or intimidating any person
and, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, includes a firearm.


As per the Criminal Code a firearm is a "Weapon" regardless of use, design, or intention.

This definition was written to drive an agenda; say something enough times and people will come to believe it. It works.

Are you able to find out when this Criminal Code definition was revised to this wording? It would be interesting to find out who was in charge when this occurred.

[Okotokian]

My wife calls my hunting firearms nothing but "exercise aids while hiking", similar to wrist weights. She's not far wrong. LOL

[Pathfinder76]

What a waste of bandwidth.

[1100winger]

Originally Posted by markg

I have been watching a lot of videos on firearms and gun reviews on youtube lately. Seems like our cousins to the south seem to be obsessed with refering to there firearms as "weapons" I find this strange.

Is this a pop vs soda kinda of thing or do you think there is something a bit deeper to this?

I think we as Canadians think of firearms as tools or recreation equipment. I think the americans think of there firearms literally as weapons that are intended for killing other people. I am not saying that they are wrong in there approach, a person who is assaulted has a right to defend themselves. I just dont think we in Canada approach our firearms use the same as they do. I look forward to the discussion and I am genuinely interested in your opinions. I dont profess to have all the answers on this; just a particular way of looking at something I have observed.

The news report and police notice outlines the difference perfectly - A person was shot with a weapon; we use firearms to fill our freezers, punch targets etc. I was stopped once by the RCMP coming home from the range, he asked if I had weapons on board - I replied "No, but I have several firearms" Intent is everything.

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by chuck

What a waste of bandwidth.

Yup...snowflakes offended on wording,words, jeepers....handgun, pistol, Devils right hand...who really cares eh!!!

[Sundog57]

Terminology is critically important both in law and in conversation.
The Criminal Code definition presupposes intent and reflects the attitude of both our legislators and law enforcement and that in turn feeds general hysteria
With the exception of those enforcement personnel who hunt or shoot recreationally, all of the firearms to which law enforcement officers are exposed to, whether in training or on duty are "weapons" in accordance with the CC definition.
I once had the conversation with one of our mounted friends in which I responded to a statement by pointing out that what I had in my possession was a shotgun (and a v nice double at that) and what he had on his hip was a weapon.
Then (this was just post Robert Dziekanski) I noticed that he had a DE Weapon on his other hip (and yes indeed that is a weapon) and decided to stop talking...
When you refer in conversation to a firearm as a weapon, you are acceding to the the definition applied by the criminal code.
As for journalists, as with most, if not all technical subjects, most of them don't bother, or perhaps if we are being generous, don't have the time, to do the research that would allow them to distinguish subtleties in nomenclature and will parrot whatever someone else said. (never attribute to malice what might otherwise be written down to laziness or stupidity)

[markg]

Originally Posted by 58thecat

Yup...snowflakes offended on wording,words, jeepers....handgun, pistol, Devils right hand...who really cares eh!!!

Just curious if you are calling me a snowflake or if you are referring to those in the media that get all bent out of shape about firearms.

[2000victory]

When was last time anyone was stopped by police for whatever reason. They do not ask if you have any firearms in the vehicle...they ask if you have any weapons.
Police , politicians and the unknowing public all now without haste call them all weapons.
To me the use of the word weapon by anyone is an inference or suspicion of criminal activity
Weapon rather than firearm by politicians indicates that there is a type of mistrust of the public by the powers that be and it indicates the direction the politicians are headed in writing future laws. If the word weapon is written into law rather than firearm that to me is a suggestion or suspicion of guilt. Will this then mean a suspicion of guilt prior to innocent until proven guilty by political and law enforcement persons.
The latest firearm acquisition by the RCMP is a carbine...yet the civilian version of the exact same or a very similar firearm is restricted and conveniently called a weapon...why is that ?
I think it is an automatic assumption that a firearm in the hands of a citizen who they feel is not sufficiently trained in their eyes as to the safe use and handling of a firearm as compared the the same firearm used by a better trained person , ie: law enforcement , so therefore we posses weapons and law enforcement posses carbines.
How many times have legal cases been dropped or dismissed because of a definition, interpetation or wording of a law. Proper correct and precise terminology and vocabulary are of utmost importance in the eyes of the law.
I think if the use of the word weapon gets allowed into law and is used freely by the authorities we could find ourselves on a slippery slope as to our freedom of use of firearms deemed weapons in the future.
Perhaps this is just my personal paranoia . maybe not.

Was recently out coyote hunting and stopped by law enforcement and was asked by LEO if I had any " weapons" in the vehicle...
No sir ! but I have a non restricted semi-auto firearm in a hard case in the back seat and the ammunition and magazine are on the floor in front of passenger seat.
Needless to say I was ordered out of the vehicle while the officer kept his hand on his unsecured sidearm and to keep my hands where he could see them.
Firearm magazine and ammunition were seized and taken to the cruiser. 20 minutes later the officer exited from his cruiser and returned my belongings.
Then proceeded to tell me I am to have the bolt removed and a trigger lock on the "WEAPON" even during transport.
Really !!! On a semi auto firearm.
I chose to shut up and leave...Thank You Sir !!!

[Dick284]

I dunno, I haven't been stopped by a cop or a fish cop in so long I must be blessed.
The last time I was, it was a friendly chat and documents were checked, the fish cop asked in passing if my shotgun, yes shotgun! Was unloaded, I said of course, and would he like to see it, he shrugged it off saying, he'd like to see the old box of CIL Canucks I had on the console instead, he was unhappy that they weren't older production shells(French language on the box).

I just asked the Pit Boss just now, what the cops have asked for when he's encountered them, he said the last bon fire bush party they attended that the constable asked if there were any firearms with anyone. I asked twice, he said that she used the word firearms.

But I've sure heard the wannabe GI Joe, hyper sniper types at the range, refer to their souped up tube guns as weapons, on more than one occasion.

Makes you go hmm, don't it.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by 2000victory

When was last time anyone was stopped by police for whatever reason. They do not ask if you have any firearms in the vehicle...they ask if you have any weapons.
Police , politicians and the unknowing public all now without haste call them all weapons.
To me the use of the word weapon by anyone is an inference or suspicion of criminal activity
Weapon rather than firearm by politicians indicates that there is a type of mistrust of the public by the powers that be and it indicates the direction the politicians are headed in writing future laws. If the word weapon is written into law rather than firearm that to me is a suggestion or suspicion of guilt. Will this then mean a suspicion of guilt prior to innocent until proven guilty by political and law enforcement persons.
The latest firearm acquisition by the RCMP is a carbine...yet the civilian version of the exact same or a very similar firearm is restricted and conveniently called a weapon...why is that ?
I think it is an automatic assumption that a firearm in the hands of a citizen who they feel is not sufficiently trained in their eyes as to the safe use and handling of a firearm as compared the the same firearm used by a better trained person , ie: law enforcement , so therefore we posses weapons and law enforcement posses carbines.
How many times have legal cases been dropped or dismissed because of a definition, interpetation or wording of a law. Proper correct and precise terminology and vocabulary are of utmost importance in the eyes of the law.
I think if the use of the word weapon gets allowed into law and is used freely by the authorities we could find ourselves on a slippery slope as to our freedom of use of firearms deemed weapons in the future.
Perhaps this is just my personal paranoia . maybe not.

Was recently out coyote hunting and stopped by law enforcement and was asked by LEO if I had any " weapons" in the vehicle...
No sir ! but I have a non restricted semi-auto firearm in a hard case in the back seat and the ammunition and magazine are on the floor in front of passenger seat.
Needless to say I was ordered out of the vehicle while the officer kept his hand on his unsecured sidearm and to keep my hands where he could see them.
Firearm magazine and ammunition were seized and taken to the cruiser. 20 minutes later the officer exited from his cruiser and returned my belongings.
Then proceeded to tell me I am to have the bolt removed and a trigger lock on the "WEAPON" even during transport.
Really !!! On a semi auto firearm.
I chose to shut up and leave...Thank You Sir !!!

This is why I keep a copy of the safe storage, handling and transport regs in my glove box.
Last time I was asked to make a weapon safe was on a firing line at a service rifle match.
Cat

[GunnerySgtJackson]

At the end of the practical test of my RPAL course, the instructor, who was a retired RCMP Officer, asked me if I was military or retired military? When I asked him how he knew (RCAF, Aircrew, so my hair was pretty long and not a give away) He told me I referred to each training aid as "the weapon" as I described my actions to him. Great instructor! Really nice guy. He always used the term "Firearms", in all his instruction.
Last time coyote hunting, stopped by a LEO. He asked me to pull the bolt back on my "rifle", then told me I did not need a trigger lock on it.

[2000victory]

I always carry all pertinent paperwork with me for the semi auto, the legal 10 round magazine , carry and transport info as well as RM map with all farmers land color coded to each farmer and their contact info , but was not allowed to re-enter my vehicle. Standing in the middle of a gravel road in a t-shirt at -5C while he checked out the firearm and magazine on his computer and my registration info , as he informed me that he saw no restrictions or restricted on my PAL when he returned my firearm ammunition and magazine.
And proceeded to drive right into a roadside checkstop two miles down the road...go figure.!

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by markg

Just curious if you are calling me a snowflake or if you are referring to those in the media that get all bent out of shape about firearms.

Nope not calling you a snowflake unless you fall into the category of getting all bent out of shape about firearms, weapons, guns, legal hunting, ethical pursuit of game, have the occasional HR moment at work because you overheard a conversation....

Good thing about snowflakes is that they melt, turn into icesicles and then go away for 8 months or so....bad thing is they show up again....

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by GunnerySgtJackson

At the end of the practical test of my RPAL course, the instructor, who was a retired RCMP Officer, asked me if I was military or retired military? When I asked him how he knew (RCAF, Aircrew, so my hair was pretty long and not a give away) He told me I referred to each training aid as "the weapon" as I described my actions to him. Great instructor! Really nice guy. He always used the term "Firearms", in all his instruction.
Last time coyote hunting, stopped by a LEO. He asked me to pull the bolt back on my "rifle", then told me I did not need a trigger lock on it.

Ya, he was right, hard to shoot the yote after you call it in with the trigger lock on...

I bet now your success rate is up.

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by urban rednek

This definition was written to drive an agenda; say something enough times and people will come to believe it. It works.

Are you able to find out when this Criminal Code definition was revised to this wording? It would be interesting to find out who was in charge when this occurred.

I recall seeing similar terminology in the Criminal Code as early as 1968 and for sure long before the Allan Rock Liberals.

[covey ridge]

[QUOTE=2000victory;3694394]

When was last time anyone was stopped by police for whatever reason. They do not ask if you have any firearms in the vehicle...they ask if you have any weapons.

Not always!

Police , politicians and the unknowing public all now without haste call them all weapons.

Not always!

To me the use of the word weapon by anyone is an inference or suspicion of criminal activity

Probably just to you and for sure not absolute!

If the word weapon is written into law rather than firearm that to me is a suggestion or suspicion of guilt. Will this then mean a suspicion of guilt prior to innocent until proven guilty by political and law enforcement persons.

No such thing is suggested. There is nothing wrong with suspicion. Suspicion of guilt is not the same as presumed guilty.

The latest firearm acquisition by the RCMP is a carbine...yet the civilian version of the exact same or a very similar firearm is restricted and conveniently called a weapon...why is that ?
I think it is an automatic assumption that a firearm in the hands of a citizen who they feel is not sufficiently trained in their eyes as to the safe use and handling of a firearm as compared the the same firearm used by a better trained person , ie: law enforcement , so therefore we posses weapons and law enforcement posses carbines.

Firearms, carbines, restricted firearms, weapons according to the criminal code are all weapons. The patrol carbine is very much a weapon and a similar weapon may also be restricted for non police use. Police are trained but not always better trained, but their training is sufficient to authorize on duty use.

How many times have legal cases been dropped or dismissed because of a definition, interpetation or wording of a law. Proper correct and precise terminology and vocabulary are of utmost importance in the eyes of the law.
I think if the use of the word weapon gets allowed into law and is used freely by the authorities we could find ourselves on a slippery slope as to our freedom of use of firearms deemed weapons in the future.
Perhaps this is just my personal paranoia . maybe not.

Probably not paranoia but maybe misunderstanding of law. The word weapon is already been used in law for a long time. If the wording of the charge uses the word weapon, it must be proven that a weapon according to the definition of weapon was used. If firearm is part of the wording of the charge that must be proved.

Yes some charges are dismissed because of wordings. Do you have an example of one that was dismissed based on the difference between the words weapon and the word firearm?

BTW my PAL has the words "FIREARMS LICENCE" and has been issued by the Chief Firearms officer of Alberta under the authority of the Firearms Act, Statutes of Canada.

[bobalong]

Originally Posted by 260 Rem

My baseball bat could be a weapon, but none of my firearms are.

Weapons can also be used in defense. If someone breaks into your home and shoots at you or your family and misses, you have access to a loaded rifle and shoot back hitting him, what is it called then?

[wolf308]

Originally Posted by chuck

What a waste of bandwidth.

Ya. No kidding. With you on this one.

[markg]

Originally Posted by 58thecat

Nope not calling you a snowflake unless you fall into the category of getting all bent out of shape about firearms, weapons, guns, legal hunting, ethical pursuit of game, have the occasional HR moment at work because you overheard a conversation....

Good thing about snowflakes is that they melt, turn into icesicles and then go away for 8 months or so....bad thing is they show up again....

Glad to hear that because I am about as anti snowflake as it gets. I grew up in the era of sticks and stones break your bones ect ect

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by bobalong

Weapons can also be used in defense. If someone breaks into your home and shoots at you or your family and misses, you have access to a loaded rifle and shoot back hitting him, what is it called then?

That is then called a gun fight! The thief had a weapon, missed...you had a rifle...didn't miss.

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by bobalong

Weapons can also be used in defense. If someone breaks into your home and shoots at you or your family and misses, you have access to a loaded rifle and shoot back hitting him, what is it called then?

Don't you mean you had access to a safely stored firearm and then loaded it?

It does not matter if it is a gun or a rifle or it is called a weapon, if someone gets shot there will at least be an investigation and maybe a trial. It will not matter to the judge what you call it.

If it could be proven that the rifle was loaded before you accessed it, you could be charged with one of the storage offenses in the act or under the Criminal Code you could be charged with a possession of a weapon for a purpose dangerous to............

Better to be alive to be tried than dead. Better to explain why you shot him than you being dead where he does not have to say anything without his lawyer being present.

[Unregistered user]

Storage rules don't apply when you are at home and in full care and control of your weapons,guns/firearms/bangstick thingies. you have the right to use reasonable force to defend yourself/family. If someone shoots at you, shooting back is reasonable.

[Twobucks]

I don't own any weapons but I do have a bunch of guns and I do think language matters.

In Canada our law essentially differentiates between "guns" and "weapons" in the way it classifies non-restricted and restricted. In the US, guns are guns are guns.

As for the media criticism in this thread, I more often see gun owners referring to their hunting rifles as "weapons" and "platforms" than I see media doing that. I think the more common failing for media is repeating police press releases reporting "firearms" seized without a critical look at what the guns are. I'd suggest there's a difference between a dirtbag with an old bolt action Cooey .22 and a modern .308 carbine. That's a problem of ignorance as opposed to an agenda.

[260 Rem]

Originally Posted by bobalong

Weapons can also be used in defense. If someone breaks into your home and shoots at you or your family and misses, you have access to a loaded rifle and shoot back hitting him, what is it called then?

My firearms remain in the safe...my baseball bat would be my weapon of choice for defending the break-in.

[Ehgun]

Originally Posted by DiabeticKripple

It’s only a weapon when used against another human.

That's how I see it.