Canadian Airgun Forum

The #1 Community for Airguns in Canada!
It is currently Wed Aug 21, 2019 9:10 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours


The Canadian Airgun Forums are a place for people to discuss and learn about airguns and the airgunning sport in Canada. There are lots of discussions about airguns, airgun accessories, reviews, modification and repair information, airgun events, field target and free classifieds!

 

You need to register before you can post: click the register link to proceed. Before you register, please read the forum rules. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own pictures, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free! To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.






Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 5:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:42 am
Posts: 4080
Location: Somewhere In Time
daguasta wrote:
if you think about it they probably keep it vaugue on purpose...keep people guessing .....keep em scared of breaking the law if they are good law abiding folk


Well thats just it isn't it........HTF should I know what they decided in 1980 when it not noted in their current laws? I wasn't even born yet in 1980 :roll:

_________________
"Are you guys silly? I'm still gonna send it..."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:42 am
Posts: 4080
Location: Somewhere In Time
Voltar1 wrote:
Voltar1 wrote:
jgoodz420 wrote:

Just though of something though....

What is the difference of using a light pellet over 500FPS and under 5.4J and using a heavy pellet under 500FPS and under 5.4J???

The heavy pellet exceeds neither.... :|


The determination is it must break both barriers to be PAL rated.
you gotta use real life examples instead of what-ifs to sort this out.

14.3 grains at 499fps is 7.95fpe = 10.77 Joules..... non-PAL

7.9 grains at 499fps is 4.4fpe = 5.96 Joules ...... non-PAL

Now if either of those shoots a super light pellet that exceeds the 500fps but does not exceed 5.4 Joules it is still non-PAL
if it exceeds both then it is PAL.



Standard weights were determined and thereafter presumed to be understood since about 1980

there are some math mistakes in my quote above. Fixed in an edit.

Alright, thanks Walter.....

I will call them tomorrow, and see how many headaches I cause in one phone call :) it is just not good enough for me (what they are saying, or "not" saying). They have not clearly laid this out, especially if they expect me (born in 87') to assume the weights decided back in 1980 :lol: That's ridiculous :| I would love to see them argue this in the court of law, "well judge he should have assumed we meant 7.9gr, we sent out a memo in 1980, seven years before he was born, but still..." :lol: :ANAL:

These weights should (must) be included with the current law, a very good lawyer would rip this apart if you think about what has actually been said.....and more importantly, not said

_________________
"Are you guys silly? I'm still gonna send it..."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 10:55 pm
Posts: 6841
Location: Rocky Mtn Hse Alberta
J, this is one of those things you want to leave well enuf alone.

Questioning beauracrats and gun haters will only make things worse when you get a ruling.

I hope you leave it alone for all airgunners.

Walter....

_________________
Image
Walter


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:42 am
Posts: 4080
Location: Somewhere In Time
Voltar1 wrote:
J, this is one of those things you want to leave well enuf alone.

Questioning beauracrats and gun haters will only make things worse when you get a ruling.

I hope you leave it alone for all airgunners.

Walter....


Well I understand that......I just want them to tell me to the fullest extent of their knowledge the complete "entailment" of their laws....or something like that :wink:

want to hear it "from the horses mouth" sort of thing :)

_________________
"Are you guys silly? I'm still gonna send it..."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:56 pm 
Offline
Site sponsor and moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 11:53 pm
Posts: 6429
Location: Surrey B.C.
The fps and Energy ft lbs was an ammendment to the original law back in the 80' that stated anything over 500 fps was considered a firearm. Cops were checking airguns arbitrarily with the lightest pellet they could find in order to make it illegal. That is when the amendment was made to bring some continuity into place. By saying the pellet must meet both the Fps and foot Lb energy the cops could no longer play their silly games. There is a complete history withy dates and reason behind the ammendment on one o the Canadian firearm history pages that explains it all bnetter than me. But this was the gist of it.
Really stupid opening up a can of worms with those in power over this. :roll:

My memory is going. It was with the instigation of Bill c68 when the CFC started using really light pellets and reclassifying a lot of everyday airguns.
This is when the FPS AND 4.2 Energy was brought in to try and keep everything status quo.
The CFC was out of control. Check the restricted firearms out.
A crosman 357 and webley tempest.? :shock:

Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 19:51:32 -0600
From: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca
Subject: [none]

Sender <BreitG0@parl.gc.ca>
Subject: RCMP: 34 AIRGUNS ARE NOW FIREARMS
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 12:34:14 -0500
Sender: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca
Precedence: normal
Reply-To: cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca

RCMP HAVE LISTED 34 AIRGUNS AS FIREARMS
ON FIREARMS REFERENCE TABLE (FRT)
by Garry Breitkreuz, MP

November 30, 2000 This morning, Canadian Firearms Registry provided FRT
numbers for four more airguns:
Norica M56 FRT# 76012-1
Gamo Model P-800 Restricted FRT# 103035-1
Slavia Model 631 Non-Restricted FRT# 109185-1
Shanghai Model 61 Non-Restricted FRT# 82361-1

November 23, 2000 (PM) This afternoon, the RCMP confirmed that two of
Crosman's biggest selling airguns had been added to the FRT:
Crosman Model 1008 FRT #31714-1
Crosman 795 Springmaster FRT# 38579-1

November 23, 2000 (AM) - Today the RCMP provided us with the newest list of
15 airguns the Canadian Firearm Registry has changed from non-firearms to
firearms on their Firearms Reference Tables (FRT):
Umarex Walther cp88 Prohibited Firearm - FRT# 40081-1
Gamo r77 Prohibited Firearm - FRT# 47973-3
Daisy model 131 Powerline Restricted Firearm - FRT# 79531-1
Benj Sheridan Silver Streak 177 Restricted Firearm - FRT# 63222-3
Crosman 1740 Restricted Firearm - FRT# 89275-1
Umarex Walther ppk Restricted Firearm - FRT# 40082-2
Umarex Colt 1911 Restricted Firearm - FRT#47505-3
Gamo r77-6 Restricted Firearm - FRT# 47973-1
Gamo 45 auto Restricted Firearm - FRT# 47966-2
Benj. Sheridan Blue Streak 177 Non-Restricted Firearm - FRT#
41279-2
Savage 560f FRT# 33149-1
Crosman Challenge 2000 FRT# 72353-1
Crosman mod 66 pwst FRT# 41792-1
Crosman 2260 FRT# 46765-1
Gamo p23 FRT# 4427-2

November 17, 2000 - Original list of 13 airguns the Canadian Firearm
Registry has changed from non-firearms to firearms on RCMP's Firearms
Reference Tables (FRT):
Crosman 357 mag - Prohibited Firearm - FRT# 41822-1 (now prohibited because
of barrel length)
Webley Hurricane - Restricted Firearm - FRT# 43386-1 (muzzle
velocity: 640fps)
Webley Tempest - Restricted Firearm - FRT# 43382-1 (muzzle velocity: 560
fps)
Beeman Model p1 - Restricted Firearm - FRT# 17122-2 (muzzle velocity: 580
fps)
Crosman Model 1740 - Restricted Firearm - FRT# 89275-1 (muzzle
velocity: 600fps)
Crosman 1008 - Restricted Firearm - FRT# 41826-1
Crosman 1377c - Restricted Firearm - FRT# 90615-1
Crosman Model 1760 - Non-Restricted Firearm - FRT# 89255 (muzzle
velocity: 750fps)
Crosman Model 1077 - Non-Restricted Firearm - FRT# 41814-1
Crosman 760 - Non-Restricted Firearm - FRT# 41799-1
Crosman Powermaster - Non-Restricted Firearm - FRT# 72071-1
Diana Model 20 - Non-Restricted Firearm - FRT# 38510-1
Marksman Lazerhawk - Non-Restricted Firearm - FRT# 79371-4

NOTE#1: These reclassified airguns and pellet rifles are very common and
are sold in 400 Canadian Tire Stores, 120 Wal-Mart stores, 300 Home Hardware
Stores, 300 Federated Co-op stores and most True Value Hardware stores as
well as thousands of other smaller businesses and shops across Canada.

NOTE #2: These businesses have not been informed by the RCMP or the
Department of Justice that these airguns are now firearms according to the
definition of a firearm in Bill C-68.

GARRY'S PREVIOUS NEWS RELEASE ON THIS ISSUE:
http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/breitkre ... trol26.htm

------------------------------

_________________
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 4:19 pm
Posts: 8946
Location: Coalmont BC
The idotic part of the law is that any .22 cal. pellet over 500 fps is going to be over the FPE rule.... In other words, all the addition of the energy part of the rule does is make it so that the police can't check a .177 with light pellets.... Unless a manufacturer states what pellet the testing was done with (and if that's OK).... or there really IS a rule about using "standard weight" (ie 14.3 gr.) pellets in .22 cal.... the police could virtually load up a .22 cal with 9.9 gr. Raptors, and if the gun shoots 501 fps it needs to be registered.... That's only 5.5 FPE (7.5 joules).... :shock:

This is just an example of how easy it would be to get a "ruling" that we wouldn't like to see.... :roll:

Bob

_________________
Dominion Marksman Silver Shield - 5890 x 6000 in 1976, and downhill ever since!
Airsonal;
Too many! Springers, Pumpers, CO2, but I love my PCPs and developing them!
Proud Member of the 2000+fps Club!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 9:21 pm
Posts: 2102
Location: Greater Napanee, ON, Canada
I am fairly sure the standard weight idea came about in order to rate guns for sale or import as PAL or Non-PAL.

Once you buy a gun as a non-pal gun, do what you will with it, shoot it, enjoy it and keep quiet about what you have done. I am sure you, other air gunners and the CFC would be much happier this way. I have to go along with Walter on not stirring this up at the cfc.

People that go on public forums and declare openly and with pride that they have modified a non-pal gun to above what is legal just boggle my mind. I just sit there and think, 'If you would just shut up about it, it would be a non-issue.' Please think before you post information about the guns you own on a public forum.

Read quote in signature line.

_________________
Tim
CAFTA Governor


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:58 pm 
Offline
Site sponsor and moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 11:53 pm
Posts: 6429
Location: Surrey B.C.
Here ya go
Included in Bill C-15 along with a pile of other amendments
Scroll down to I for the FireArm amendments

http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/Collection-R ... /c15-e.htm

Airgun amendments. Speaks specifically to the light pellet issue.

http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/Collection-R ... 15-e.htm#b. Airgunstxt

If this doesn't spell it out clear enough for jgoodz420. I don't know what will :P :wink:

_________________
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.


Last edited by scruffie on Fri Dec 10, 2010 8:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 8:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 2:29 pm
Posts: 6143
Location: Okanagan,BC
Quote:
b. Airguns

Clause 4(2) modifies section 84(3) of the Criminal Code which sets out regulated items that are excluded from requirements of the Firearms Act, and certain listed Criminal Code provisions in Part III.(50) Pursuant to current section 84(3)(d), a weapon is deemed not to be a firearm (for the above listed purposes) if it is not designed or adapted to discharge:

(i) a shot, bullet or other projectile at a muzzle velocity exceeding 152.4 m per second; or

(ii) a shot, bullet or other projectile that is designed or adapted to attain a velocity exceeding 152.4 m per second.

This exemption generally applies to many airguns and other similar types of weapons that are found in Canada. There has been concern lately with respect to lightweight pellets which can be discharged by certain airguns at a speed exceeding the maximum set out in the exemption. Some people were concerned that these airguns would no longer be exempt from the licensing and registration provisions. The goal of the amendment is to clarify the exemption by adding a muzzle energy standard to the existing muzzle velocity standard.

Under new section 84(3)(d)(i), a weapon not designed or adapted to discharge a shot, bullet or other projectile at a muzzle velocity exceeding 152.4 m per second or at a muzzle energy exceeding 5.7 Joules is deemed not to be a firearm (for the listed purposes). The intention was to exempt a weapon if it satisfies one of the two standards. Thus, even if the weapon discharges lightweight pellets at a speed exceeding the maximum set out in the exemption, it may still be exempted if it does not exceed the new muzzle energy standard. There has been some debate regarding whether the new provision does what it intended. Some argue that both standards will have to be satisfied for the weapon to be exempt. Because of the use of a double negative, the section seems to contradict itself when it is turned into a positive. As written, it appears that the weapon only needs to satisfy one of the two standards to be exempted. The new muzzle energy standard is also added to section 84(3)(d)(ii).



8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 8:08 pm 
Offline
Site sponsor and moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 11:53 pm
Posts: 6429
Location: Surrey B.C.
wllm995 wrote:
Quote:
b. Airguns

Clause 4(2) modifies section 84(3) of the Criminal Code which sets out regulated items that are excluded from requirements of the Firearms Act, and certain listed Criminal Code provisions in Part III.(50) Pursuant to current section 84(3)(d), a weapon is deemed not to be a firearm (for the above listed purposes) if it is not designed or adapted to discharge:

(i) a shot, bullet or other projectile at a muzzle velocity exceeding 152.4 m per second; or

(ii) a shot, bullet or other projectile that is designed or adapted to attain a velocity exceeding 152.4 m per second.

This exemption generally applies to many airguns and other similar types of weapons that are found in Canada. There has been concern lately with respect to lightweight pellets which can be discharged by certain airguns at a speed exceeding the maximum set out in the exemption. Some people were concerned that these airguns would no longer be exempt from the licensing and registration provisions. The goal of the amendment is to clarify the exemption by adding a muzzle energy standard to the existing muzzle velocity standard.

Under new section 84(3)(d)(i), a weapon not designed or adapted to discharge a shot, bullet or other projectile at a muzzle velocity exceeding 152.4 m per second or at a muzzle energy exceeding 5.7 Joules is deemed not to be a firearm (for the listed purposes). The intention was to exempt a weapon if it satisfies one of the two standards. Thus, even if the weapon discharges lightweight pellets at a speed exceeding the maximum set out in the exemption, it may still be exempted if it does not exceed the new muzzle energy standard. There has been some debate regarding whether the new provision does what it intended. Some argue that both standards will have to be satisfied for the weapon to be exempt. Because of the use of a double negative, the section seems to contradict itself when it is turned into a positive. As written, it appears that the weapon only needs to satisfy one of the two standards to be exempted. The new muzzle energy standard is also added to section 84(3)(d)(ii).



8)

Thanks Doug. 8)
Some people wouldn't have believed it if I only pasted it this way :roll: Thus the Bill C-15 and firearm amendment links. :ANAL:

_________________
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 9:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 4:19 pm
Posts: 8946
Location: Coalmont BC
Thanks for posting that.... it confirms what I said.... the FPE rule basically only affects .177 cal airguns.... There aren't any .22 cal pellets light enough to exceed 500 fps and remain under 4.2 FPE.... The lightest .20 cal pellet I could find was the Laser at 9.2 gr.... At 501 fps that works out to 5.1 FPE which is also over the limit....

While the intent of the new law was to allow airguns that were considered non-PAL to remain so even with lightweight pellets.... It would appear that it falls short IMO.... The energy level they chose only does that for .177 cal airguns.... :roll:

The only saving grace is the statement on the Air Gun Fact Sheet on the RCMP website that states:

Quote:
Usually, the manufacturer’s specifications are used to determine what muzzle velocity and muzzle energy an air gun was designed to have. This information may be available in the user’s manual or on the manufacturer’s web site. If the information is not available, individuals can call 1 800 731-4000 and ask to speak to a firearms technician to find out if the air gun is classified as a firearm for purposes of the Firearms Act.

Now if we could just convince all the manufacturers to rate the velocity of their airguns with heavy pellets.... or at least like Walter suggested, with bore size lead balls.... That would give:

.177 cal - 8.3 gr. - 4.6 FPE @ 499 fps
.20 cal - 12.0 gr. - 6.6 FPE
.22 cal - 15.3 gr. - 8.5 FPE
.25 cal - 23.4 gr. - 12.9 FPE
.30 cal - 43.8 gr. - 24.2 FPE
9 mm - 67.6 gr. - 37.4 FPE

Bob

_________________
Dominion Marksman Silver Shield - 5890 x 6000 in 1976, and downhill ever since!
Airsonal;
Too many! Springers, Pumpers, CO2, but I love my PCPs and developing them!
Proud Member of the 2000+fps Club!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 9:26 pm 
Offline
Site sponsor and moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 11:53 pm
Posts: 6429
Location: Surrey B.C.
Did you read the Commentary (F) FireArms at the bottom of the links I posted Bob. Have to scroll right to the bottom. Gives a little more incite into why and what they were trying to accomplish.

_________________
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 10:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 4:19 pm
Posts: 8946
Location: Coalmont BC
I did read that.... I agree that the gun has to exceed BOTH the velocity and energy levels to require registration.... My point is that the energy level is so low that it is only a factor for .177 guns.... Anything bigger, and the only REAL limit is the 500 fps rule.... My concern is that unless there is something else written down that REQUIRES the use of a "standard weight" pellet to measure the velocity of a gun in question.... the police can use the lightest pellet they wish.... and in .20 cal and larger if the gun exceeds 500 fps then it requires registration....

The problem here is not for unmodified guns that have been classified as non-PAL.... The problem is for a .20 cal or larger gun that has had even a minor modification done and then tested by the owner using "standard weight" pellets and intentionally kept under 500 fps.... but when tested by the police using a lightweight pellet it is over 500 fps.... and consequently ALSO over 4.2 FPE because the test pellet weighs over 7.6 grains (the heaviest pellet that is under 4.2 FPE at 499 fps)....

I'll give you a specific example.... A shooter buys a 1377 which is non-PAL.... He converts it to .22 cal and modifies it carefully so that it shoots consistently at 495 fps with 14.3 gr. pellets.... He even makes sure that he tests a bunch of different brands and selects the one that is the fastest in his gun for his tests.... As far as he is concerned, he has been diligent in making sure that the gun does not need to be registered.... For whatever reason he gets checked by the police.... Maybe something as simple as he is shooting on Crown land and gets reported simply because someone "saw a guy with a gun" (I know somebody that happened to).... Maybe the cop had a bad day and decides to take the gun in for testing (my buddy didn't have that happen, he convinced the officer it was under 500 fps).... When the gun is tested, the police use 11.9 gr. RWS Hobby pellets.... and the velocity is 520 fps.... The owner can't claim that the gun should be tested with the pellets the manufacturer used because they are .177 and his gun is a .22.... Can anybody show me in writing where there is any argument that can be presented that the gun does not require registration?....

Please understand, guys.... I'm playing devils advocate here.... I don't think our shooter has done anything wrong, in fact he has been very careful to abide by the law AS WE UNDERSTAND IT.... All I'm asking is.... DO WE HAVE IT RIGHT?.... :shock:

Bob

_________________
Dominion Marksman Silver Shield - 5890 x 6000 in 1976, and downhill ever since!
Airsonal;
Too many! Springers, Pumpers, CO2, but I love my PCPs and developing them!
Proud Member of the 2000+fps Club!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 11:03 pm
Posts: 5330
Location: home of the Marshville Festival, Ontario, Canada
Voltar1 wrote:
That is very interesting Supr, never heard that one before especially on a gun that has never been PAL rated or offered as PAL rated. (may be mistaken on that one too) I can't recall if the D-24C was ever offered as a PAL rated gun or not - however - the reason for that declaration is to allow it's importation as a non-PAL gun.

What velocity will your 24C shoot 7.9 grain Crosmans at? Not sure on the Crosmans, but with a JSB Express (also 7.9 gr) it will hit around 545 FPS.

Standard weights were determined and thereafter presumed to be understood since about 1980 Huh? Who made this determination, and where was it published? I don't recall ever seeing anything "official" (gov't sanctioned) about "standard" pellet weights for airguns.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 9:21 pm
Posts: 2102
Location: Greater Napanee, ON, Canada
Has anyone here, who was not doing something inappropriate with an air gun, ever had the police, without being requested to, test it to see if an air gun has to be registered? Just wondering. I certainly do not know anyone this has happened to. Are we fretting and unnecessarily bringing attention to this "law" that seems very easy to follow due to its ambiguity. As Bob said, as long as you keep the projectile under 500fps and I would add, keep you mouth shut, you're good to go.

_________________
Tim
CAFTA Governor


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
News News Site map Site map SitemapIndex SitemapIndex RSS Feed RSS Feed Channel list Channel list

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group

phpBB SEO