Replica versus disabled firearm
 

Hi,

Just spoke with a local police officer in charge of releasing permit in Quebec.

Quebec position regarding airsoft gun:

You can own a original weapon that what disabled in order to make it unable to shoot (by an armourer) without any need for permit whatsoever. So, you can have a real disabled AK without any paperwork.

Now, replica (airsoft) are considered restricted, hence you must have a permit and all that good stuff to have one.

It make a lot of sense doesn t...

Are the same thing.. an object that looks like a firearm but is not is a replica and is classified as a prohibited device if proven to be a replica in a court of law.

A deactivated firearm is not a firearm.. but is an exact duplicate of a firearm ( because it used to be one ) therefore it is a replica.

I have no Idea what provincial statutes apply in PQ for airsoft..

I can't read french well enough to read laws... but whatever statutes they have they are subordinate to federal law.

From the analyst at the SQ, for Quebec law, you can own a disabled firearm without any permit or requirement, this I can confirm by having a phone discussion with the person in charge of releasing permit in Quebec for firearm.

Now, since custom are Federal, getting the disabled firearm across the border is another ball game... You would have to prove that the disabled weapon is no in a permanent fashion, not easy considering that the weapon was modified by a non canadian armourer...

You can own a Replica Firearm without any permit or requirement, too. Can you transfer "disabled firearm" in QC without any permit or requirement?

Personally, this sounds like provincial police not understanding Federal law.

Firearms Act (Federal Law) superceded any Quebec Provincial law. Replicas are prohibited as per Federal law.

A dewat is not a replica. It's proscribed as a dewat, and it is a firearm. It just changes classification from non-restricted, restricted or prohibited based upon verification as a permanent dewat. You do not need to have a PAL in any form to possess or transfer a dewat that is in Canada. This differs from a replica.

If you import a dewat, you must possess and register the item as it would be classified in Canada, and then it gets verified by as a dewat, and the classification is changed. So, basically, you can only import a dewat if you have a PAL for the non-deactivated version of the gun. Once it's in Canada, it can be done with as you please, just don't try to commit another crime using it.

That would go along the line of what I was told by the SQ (Provincial Police),

I guess that the police feel safer when facing a Dewat then a Replica :)

I looked for these statutes in the CC can you point them out?

or is the classification under the firearms act?

There's thread on it on CGN, and the CFC has a sheet out on dewats.

A quick search of CCC and CFA revealed no use of the term "Deactivated War Trophy", same with the CFC website. There is a fact sheet on "Deactivation Guidelines", but it says nothing about the legal status of such devices.

I recall seeing a court case where a deactivated/disabled pistol was ruled to be a Replica Firearm. I'll see if I can dig it up.

Wow. Just when I thought CFC can't get more incompetent, they go and create a policy in violation of the CCC and CFA. But I suppose if this completely irrational interpretation of law on the part of the CFA plays into the hands of firearm owner, it can't be all that bad.

It just doesn t make sense in the end, you can have a disabled firearm without any constraint, but no replica... Someone somewhere should be able to include Replica in the same status as disabled weapon... I mean, they are the same, except for 6 mm bb coming out of the replica and a 100% perfect look for the disabled one (being a real one after all...), which should not make a difference to a police officer...

That would make dewats as restricted as Replicas, not Replicas as unrestricted as dewats. Replicas have an actual status in law, dewats have a CFC-derived policy that in some parts contradicts law.

Am still baffled why when I look in the Le Baron catalog, under the muzzle loading rifles, the matchlock .50 says 'permit required' but the flintlock .50 says 'No Permit Required'. Ok, so one can legally buy and own the flintlock without a permit and use it for hunting, but need a permit to buy a matchlock that uses the same ammo and propellant. Talk about confusing there too.