I like and share your videos but they also upset me. The feeling that we as good gun owners are treated like criminals is frustrating. Even if we offered the CFO a cup of coffee they could take all your property and we can't do anything about it, makes me think we are helpless and nothing more than cattle for the government.
It's increasingly looking like the Nova Scotia shooter was some sort of RCMP informant or agent. At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if the RCMP were aware but were looking the other way. All the following news stories were posted on mainstream media websites. www.google.ca/amp/s/www.macleans.ca/news/canada/the-nova-scotia-shooter-case-has-hallmarks-of-an-undercover-operation/amp/ www.google.ca/amp/s/www.macleans.ca/news/canada/the-nova-scotia-killer-had-ties-to-criminals-and-withdrew-a-huge-sum-of-cash-before-the-shooting/amp/ www.google.ca/amp/s/www.macleans.ca/opinion/the-nova-scotia-shooting-encapsulates-all-thats-wrong-with-the-rcmp/amp/ www.halifaxexaminer.ca/featured/an-epic-failure-the-first-duty-of-police-is-to-preserve-life-through-the-nova-scotia-massacre-the-rcmp-saved-no-one/ globalnews.ca/news/7222849/nova-scotia-gunman-allegedly-smuggled-guns-and-drugs-from-u-s-court-docs/
@Machine Green I know someone who has never had a PAL/RPAL, who owns guns, and who has been getting other people to buy their ammunition for them for years because they know they can't buy it themselves without a license. I reported all this to Crime Stoppers, the RCMP, the CFO, and Child Welfare Services (because the person in question left a loaded gun on the ground in their back yard while their kids were outside playing there). As far as I know, none of the authorities lifted a finger to do anything about it.
"Laws prohibiting the carrying of handguns will have the effect of disarming the person who ought to be armed, and arming the rowdies." -Sir John A. Macdonald
Under what authority did the RCMP enter private residences and seize firearms during the High River flood? Nothing in the Firearms Act permitted it, emergency legislation doesn't expand their powers in that regard, and there was no overriding public safety issue because the town was evacuated and supposedly secured.
As it's been asked a couple of times: "Business" in this context means a firearms business, not just any business. They don't get easier inspections just because you have a nail salon or something.
But that's not specifically stipulated in the regulations.... it merely states " the operation of a business". not necessarily a firearms-related business.... They will always seek to abuse the Letter of the law, rather than the Spirit of the law, when it suits THEIR purposes. The "Interpretation" of the letter of the law is in their favour... not yours. That's why laws and regulations and contracts are written thusly: to allow for " wiggle-room " in situations where it benefits the person with the power at times of their choosing.
@@scottcrawford3745 0:55 - it's mentioned right off the top, at section "102(1) Subject to section 104...", which is likely where the type of business is defined as relating specifically to firearms. Elsewhere in these comments Mr Runkle mentions that while he neglected to explicitly state it in the video, it was implied from the above and it is the case that the business in question must be one that the firearms act applies to, ie only involving guns.
@@ironymatt Implied... but not stated, defined, or stipulated in any way... and that wiggle-room is enough to get you charged.... Mr. Runkle has other videos with convictions on much thinner implications than that. like the 2 Sudbury lads with the buck knives. Just KNOWING that it's possible to do something makes you guilty of a crime if you have that item in your possession... Even if the judge BELIEVES otherwise when you say you don't know. If you're willing to put up all you own against taking it on faith that a judge/ Crown prosecutor will go with the implications or "spirit" of the law, then you have WAY more faith than me. If they want to get you... Murphy's Law reigns supreme.
Considering the specificity of the language that lawyers use, this line caught my eye. "I'm not normally a fan of inviting strangers into my bedroom", emphasis on "not normally",lol. I really enjoy your videos, keep up the great work!
"Reasonable" has become a word that cops abuse and judges look the other way on. "Reasonable" has included the slaughter of an entire family or bloodline with no repercussions in respect to the Brotherhood of Law Enforcement and Sentencing. This law can be used to enter ANYONE'S house for no reason, and claim anyone they want to is breaking the law. "Well, if your not breaking the law, then prove it." Refuse the inspection, and become an instant criminal
Idk Canada but in United States, "reasonable" is definined by the reasonable person test. Basically means, if you could convince a average local person of something, than its reasonable. But common sense is not common, and there's lots of dumb people in my area. I live in Florida. so why would one expect that the average person couldn't be persuaded by a fast talking lawyer into agreeing with anything.
@@checkmate058 love it, but with the Entitled Butthurt crowd, the only way they see reasonable is if they get mugged by the very Left they are so proactive in.
You mentioned how officers might know how many guns a person has. I know from personal experience they continue to use data from the old registry, in my city at least. They are aware of any firearms purchased before it was ended. I found this out during a requested inspection of my storage during the summer of 2019.
I found this to be informative and helpful, especially where it comes to the part that they generally have to find a reasonable time to do it and aren’t ‘supposed to’ go on fishing expeditions.
frightening that we allow people to enforce laws who lack the information to go about enforcing them. i mean any idiot knows that 250-3000 is negative 2750 and the best place to keep that important calculation is on the barrel of an old Savage 99 ... sheeeesh!!!
@Jordon Carlson my inspection had nothing to do with gun collecting. It was when we were forced to register our guns and I put “unknown” in almost every field for every gun, just as the NFA suggested we do. If everyone had done that the whole registration scheme would have fallen flat. They came to fill in the unknowns after I got the certs with unknown dutifully recorded.
As a Canadian ex-pat who is also an American citizen living in the USA, this makes me so thankful for the second amendment. I'm hugging my suppressors and machine guns right now.
your "S. A." you are so proud of makes you apply and pay for those suppressors and m.g.'s . Is that really a right if there are restrictions and "allowances"?????.
Just to address constitutionality of these searches/inspections. I dont get how police/governments would prefer Constitutional rights didnt exist at all and often times pretend they dont exist. For the longest time I believed that the police and government are suppose to be the guardings of human/people rights, at least, here in Canada. Boy, was I living in the dark. :-)
@@RunkleOfTheBailey if you go down that road please look at GunVault products and do you think they would qualify as designed for firearms ( in Canada )
@@RunkleOfTheBailey It may be the opinion of some that the way the storage laws are written, it seems somewhat open as to what might be considered "good enough".
yeah no kidding eh? "ammo may be stored separately or together with" To me that sounds like I can store ammo anywhere I damn well please. And why would I have to lock up my ammo to make sure unlicensed members of my family do not have access to it? What are they going to do, eat it?
Great video. Thanks for doing them. Had a guy who was adamant that inspections only applied to those that were licensed for restricted or prohibited firearms. Even after showing him the laws as written he just blew me off by saying "Well you're not a lawyer". Told him to look into you and directed him to this video. His reply a bit later..."Ya, I guess I was was wrong". Don't know if it would be a topic worthy of its own video, but there seems to be the same kind of confusion over who is included in Continuous Eligibility Screening. I see people just as adamant that only RPAL holders are included but I am under the impression that everyone with a license, PAL or RPAL, is subject to CES.
i was told matter of fact, when I was renewing my FAC to be turned into PAL / RPAL, by the lady on the phone that if I renewed with just the PAL and not RPAL (assuming I had no Restricted firearms requiring the R designation) that the PAL afforded me the extra right of not having late night visits of the local constabulary checking to make sure my restricted firearms were put to bed properly.. This was coming straight out of the mouth of someone representing the CFO. so i'm sure that guy who was adamant came about it honestly, if those who are enforcing the rules can't even tell you correctly
I had a Surprise Firearms Inspection only a few nights ago. At 1745 Hours, Two South Australian Police Officers arrived unannounced at My Front Door. They asked politely if now was a good time for a Surprise Firearms Inspection. I said yes and invited them in. Their Inspection of Guns, Gun Storage, Ammunition Storage, Bolt Storage and Magazine Storage took 45 Minutes. They asked a number of questions and recorded My answers. They appeared very happy with what they saw and heard. My previous Inspection was probably around 15 Years Ago, Back when all the Rules and Regulations were very different.
so what i'm hearing then is... 1) since I am obligated to help them, I am not only being compelled to be a witness to proceedings held against myself in a potential criminal matter (based on our Canadian Charter), I could also implicate myself in a subsequent crime, contravening my right against self-incrimination (again, based on our Canadian Charter). 1a) if I have to "help" the police, but I am not a licensed individual, but am there with someone who is, my assistance could put me in a position that I am now illegally in possession of firearms if the officer in some way asks me to open, hold or otherwise be expected to be in care and control of a firearm during the inspection? 2) I should ALWAYS refuse entry to my dwelling-house, because allowing entry without warrant gives them broader access (as you said, fishing expedition) , whereas a warrant would limit to suspected places only. During this warrant/inspection, what-have-you, do I have a right to keep my mouth shut to prevent any of the above becoming something used against me? Much of the language in the charter, and some of the language in the laws say things like "any person charged with an offense has the right", so do my rights to privacy, silence, self-incrimination, etc not even take effect until such time that charges are laid against me? Not looking for legal advice, this kind of stuff is extremely interesting to me, especially as we learn deeper what rights we truly have in our society. i'm not asking the above to be obtuse or cause drama, i truly am confused about what side of these rights/laws/charters, etc to be most knowledgable about in the unlikely event I need them. I love the channel, thanks very much for taking the time making these videos!!!
I'm not in Canada, and don't take this a criticism it isn't. I am about an hours drive away from Canada and have visited your country many times. But to me as an US citizen it is completely confusing that you would allow your government such powers. I find it so alien that any peoples would invite their government into their home or business with such broad powers. Again I am not criticizing what your country does. If the people are happy with the laws then so be it. But from an outsiders point of view this is amazing. I find the idea that refusing to allow a police officer into ones home is grounds for a warrant to do what was just refused. That idea is astonishing.
@@zebatov In the USA you must present your drivers license during a traffic stop in every US state. But only in a traffic stop. Some states have a stop and identify law, but they all very on when and what an officer can demand.
Well, as a fellow American, I remember how eager many people were in 2001 to support the "Patriot" Act. Those who claimed these powers would be abused were criticized as paranoid and unpatriotic. Sometimes all you have to do to get people to embrace tyranny is to scare them a little.
@@kevinwalsh1619 Yeah I've been against the patriot act from day 1. I was also against both invasions of Iraq. But I take your point. I guess 20 years later those powers are so important the government cant stop spying on you.
As a Canadian i feel that we have no rights in Canada any more or never really did at least not enough to stop this sort crap from happening. we need to stand up and fight this in court, as a law abiding citizen this apparently means nothing in Canada. although they release criminals back on the streets of Canada shortly after there arrest for possession of e-legal guns and use. we are a nanny state here in Canada I would move to the States if I had the option..
@@RunkleOfTheBailey the obligation to assist somehow becomes much less burdensome when the CFO shows up and she's a Jennifer Lawrence lookalike! "Why the hell did I move the guns out of the bedroom?! Idiot!!!" - spoken in the voice of Chris Farley, may he rest in peace
Thanks Ian love you’r videos as always 😊however you always have the proper information and The correct information for anyone and their questions! & truly appreciate it tomorrow end my friend thank you for all the information and help you share with all of us guys’ thank you brother! I truly like you meet you some day to shake your hand 🤚 thank you my friend!
great video, every country needs someone like you to help understand laws better. Hopefully keep some people out of jail who want to do good just dont know certain details of the law.
What "type" of businesses qualify under s.104? Any business or does it have to be a firearms-related business? Many people have home businesses so this would be a very wide-sweeping authorization if it only has to be just any home business. It is also important because this term is not defined in subsection 2(a). Please comment and advise Runkle Of The Bailey
my question surrounds 104(1) - between clauses (a) and (b) there is an "and" meaning that if you do not give consent they cannot enter unless they have a warrant. I wonder how often these warrants are granted given the charter protections provided against unreasonable search in your dwelling place and the right not to incriminate yourself (among others!).
Question for Mr. Bailey: If someone is considering getting a Private Investigator Agency licence, could that trigger an inspection, even if firearms are not used in the Agency? Would it be better to rent an office away from the residence? Investigations are all cyber and no personal contact is made with clients or targets, although surveillance may take place using a vehicle. Just curious why having a non-firearm business would nullify the privacy protection of the residence.
Watched a few of your videos now and all I can say is Thank you sir! you are a doing a great job on “unfortunately” a taboo subject . it would be easier to be so many other things that are questionable vs a firearms owner in this leftest world
I hope you’ll do a video on prohibited replica firearms and the other miscellaneous classes. In particular the difference between a sub-500fps airgun, a prohibited air-soft gun, a non-prohibited air-soft gun, and a deactivated firearm.
How can ammunition be prohibited? Doesn't the classification apply to the firearm and not the ammunition? For example, although .357 Magnum and .44 Magnum ammunition are usually considered types of pistol ammunition, some rifles also shoot the same types of ammunition.
Thank you this is very informative on what my Canadian brother firearms owns have to live with at least in the states the state has to have a reason to get a warrant not just think that we are criminals to search our property
So informative! Idk why your channel came up but I’m so happy it came up on my recommendations! I have one question, if I have a safe that has a code I have to enter to open my safe or a key do they have the right to ask for the passcode or key to open the safe themselves?
Hypothetical question. You are a parent of a grade four through six so 10 to 12 year old in a rural agricultural Ontario community. Your child is visiting a friend same age and grade range. When they come home they tell you about how their friend said hey come check out dad's guns. Then proceeded to the workshop and put in the safe combination. What are your next steps?
apply for a carry permit to test how pro-gun he is. It is allowed for in the FA for your CFO to issue you a carry permit (or at a minimum tell you the training requirements required and where you can obtain them before he will issue the permit).
TaxpayerDave nope. Not a chance. Easier to get one relatively speaking, but there are requirements that are out of the CFO’s hands like getting your local police to sign off that they cannot provide sufficient protection to protect your life. And that same PD is the one that’s going to give your UOF training. Good luck with that. Most people don’t have a police file on a credible threat to their life to begin with let alone needed police protection.
@@mouthbreather280 Seems trivial for the police to recognize that, just look at the NS murders used for Trudeau and Blair's gun ban. They can't protect anyone adequately.
Thanks Ian! Regarding the "no force" inspection, if you refuse and they get a warrant and then you still refuse to let them in, then will they use force to come in or will they leave and send ERT later? -asking for a friend :)
Interesting video, thanks. I have a question though, that comes up often in many of these gun related issues. As far as I know, the federal laws are sort of a base, and provincial CFOs and governments can add to the existing federal laws/restrictions etc... I'm wondering if this is something that could be addressed in a video? I know it may be too big a topic to discuss, but perhaps something just to make us more aware? Or maybe, of you're having a hard time finding topics, you could do a series. Just a thought.
Hi Ian. I have a question. If I were to have been drinking and the law comes to my door to check out my stuff, should I refuse? Can they charge me if I open the safe for them and am intoxicated? Will I be giving them the ability to charge me with having guns out while intoxicated? Hopefully I asked that correctly. Thanks for your help.
If I were to be at a hunting store for the purpose of purchasing new arrows (I practice archery) at the time of inspection, could I be forced to help with the inspection even though I'm not there for any firearms related reason?
One question that comes to mind I didn’t see in the act where business specifically targeted firearms business; or could use for example an artist home studio, that would be a business quality under the act as a trigger for an inspection?
Thanks, this one is valuable. It's my hope that one day soon you will be redoing this video after Erin O'Toole orders a reform of the firearms act after he's elected this Fall. Otherwise post May 2022 will be a stressful time for honest Canadians under the current dictatorship.
It would be nice to one day have to rewrite or amend a lot of these. Like, "Hey, this video is being left up for historical reasons, but is now way inaccurate."
@@RunkleOfTheBailey The videos should be left up for posterity so that future generations of gun owners know what kind of unjust laws we fought against and, in the event the laws are repealed or amended, future gun owners hopefully will resist attempts to reinstate similar laws.
@@クルックシャンクバド I don't plan on taking any videos down, but I may need to add a pinned comment to some of them to indicate changes in law. At least, it'd be nice.
Otoole would be wise to appoint Sloan as MOPS and let him dos his own campaign promised firearms since that single issue was a massive % of is support ie completely revoke ALL of c-68 / 72 / etc and the "firearms act" back past trudeau sr's bs etc and if they listen closely they should even go back to remove everything passed into law since the 1930s.. ie: start of the LGR and registration etc Same for other prohibs like suppressors, balasongs etc Then craft new legislation that actually creates a Canadian 2nd per se to help prevent any future gov from this BS and finally new legislation re actual criminals and such MUST be crafted s s to pass the "bad law test"
Only allowed if the firearm is restricted and registered as such and even then they must give 24 hours notice.....anything else they must have a warrant to enter your home.
Hi Ian, You mentioned that the CFO monitors forums/social media, like CGN. Does the CFO/RCMP maintain a database of users' handles and IP addresses, and the real identity they belong to? Or do they have to go through the process of getting a warrant to connect a forum user to a real identity?
They probably have the special software that lets them enter your name and then produces your life's history including anything you ever commented on in social sites.
In the 70ties I knew a guy who was s gun smith and a good one at that. He moved the business to his home in his basement. He has to my knowledge retired and moved. I have no idea if hes still alive. I know some people that have guns and gun safes they play ball with the law and have everything in order. One such guy has a separate room for his gun safe, this I know.
Wouldn't using a warrant to enter a home be using force? What do they do if even with a warrant you refuse to give consent to enter? Do the arrest you and then just do the inspection anyway? Wouldn't that constitute force?
Hey would you be interested in doing a video on what to do if your section 8 and 9 charter rights have been violated. Besides call a lawyer what is the process for fighting arbitrary detainment and unlawful search if no charges are laid. And what are some things to prove that it was in fact arbitrary/ unlawful.
There's nothing stopping you from recording them. Canada is a one-party recording state, which means that you can record a conversation/discussion/etc so long as one person present/involved is aware. I've been planning on making a video about this, and why it's very worthwhile to record interactions with firearms officers.
@@RunkleOfTheBailey Please make a video so I can "keep it with me" next time they show up. They didn't record their search, disabled all of my security cameras (internal and external) and threatened me with charges if I recorded them (rcmp)! After showing them which of my keys opened up my gun cases (they had a cooperation warrant) they "magically" found some of my guns sitting out, on the bed, no trigger lock = boom, unsafe storage. Absolute joke. Can't wait to see the video, thanks!
No.. It's in the Eye of those with the Power ( Them) and how they choose to interpret all of the rules in your situation... like: It might have been leading up to a normal inspection, but if the Starbucks girl spills his latte on him, and then he shows up at your house pissed, you're gonna get a lot less reasonable than you could have. Or if he got chewed out by a superior, or his wife ( same thing) that morning. Or if his chief tells him he needs to set a precedent....
Many different ways......that is the crux of the problem. It needs to be clearly spelled out under what circumstances they can enter your home. In general they should be required to go to a judge and obtain a warrant to enter anyone's home unless there is eminent danger, and just because is not acceptable which is why a judge needs to beinvolved.
None of the above--I note that I'm a Canadian firearms lawyer, this is a Canadian federal statute. If you're in the U.S. this doesn't apply to you, and so is of interest only likely as a curiosity about the crap we Canadians have to put up with.
@@RunkleOfTheBailey Thank you Sir - I can easily sympathize with you - Unfortunately, there are so many here in the States who really have no good understanding of the freedoms secured by our constitution, and how easily they can be stolen from us by our apathy and self-centered indulgent mindsets.
Just as a note, this is with respect to Canadian law.
I like and share your videos but they also upset me. The feeling that we as good gun owners are treated like criminals is frustrating. Even if we offered the CFO a cup of coffee they could take all your property and we can't do anything about it, makes me think we are helpless and nothing more than cattle for the government.
Hard to keep respect for Canadian law, they move the line all the time !
you should start off with that, after all this is youtube.com not youtube.ca
So does running your UA-cam channel count as a business?
@@Emenblade yup, make over 600 bucks and you need to claim it.... in the good old USA that is.
Apparently, numerous phone calls about an illegal stash of guns and a previous assault charge will NOT trigger an inspection.
At least in Nova Scotia.
Or the $400,000 plus he received ....
It's increasingly looking like the Nova Scotia shooter was some sort of RCMP informant or agent. At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if the RCMP were aware but were looking the other way. All the following news stories were posted on mainstream media websites.
www.google.ca/amp/s/www.macleans.ca/news/canada/the-nova-scotia-shooter-case-has-hallmarks-of-an-undercover-operation/amp/
www.google.ca/amp/s/www.macleans.ca/news/canada/the-nova-scotia-killer-had-ties-to-criminals-and-withdrew-a-huge-sum-of-cash-before-the-shooting/amp/
www.google.ca/amp/s/www.macleans.ca/opinion/the-nova-scotia-shooting-encapsulates-all-thats-wrong-with-the-rcmp/amp/
www.halifaxexaminer.ca/featured/an-epic-failure-the-first-duty-of-police-is-to-preserve-life-through-the-nova-scotia-massacre-the-rcmp-saved-no-one/
globalnews.ca/news/7222849/nova-scotia-gunman-allegedly-smuggled-guns-and-drugs-from-u-s-court-docs/
@Machine Green I know someone who has never had a PAL/RPAL, who owns guns, and who has been getting other people to buy their ammunition for them for years because they know they can't buy it themselves without a license. I reported all this to Crime Stoppers, the RCMP, the CFO, and Child Welfare Services (because the person in question left a loaded gun on the ground in their back yard while their kids were outside playing there). As far as I know, none of the authorities lifted a finger to do anything about it.
クルックシャンクバド
That’s interesting but not surprising the RCMP only like harassing lawful legal citizens!
@@J72-w9t Going after actual criminals would be too much work.
"Laws prohibiting the carrying of handguns will have the effect of disarming the person who ought to be armed, and arming the rowdies." -Sir John A. Macdonald
Second.
our last PM with a lick of common sense
No
no thanks, dont wanna end up like the U.S
@Justin Ryce where some mass shooters get stopped before cops are even on the scene? Here they Go on for hours\days...
Under what authority did the RCMP enter private residences and seize firearms during the High River flood? Nothing in the Firearms Act permitted it, emergency legislation doesn't expand their powers in that regard, and there was no overriding public safety issue because the town was evacuated and supposedly secured.
They just wanted to make sure the firearms did not rust..... ;-)
our country is going down the tube
@@billjames8036 They stacked them in piles, damaging them far beyond a little humidity.
@@topduk I am sure they stacked them in a way to protect them until they were returned to their rightful owners..... ;-)
and seeing how the registry was apparently "destroyed", how did they know the firearms were there?
As it's been asked a couple of times: "Business" in this context means a firearms business, not just any business. They don't get easier inspections just because you have a nail salon or something.
thank the gods, i was going to ask about home offices and if they could look at computers
Well oops for asking my other question!
But that's not specifically stipulated in the regulations.... it merely states " the operation of a business". not necessarily a firearms-related business.... They will always seek to abuse the Letter of the law, rather than the Spirit of the law, when it suits THEIR purposes. The "Interpretation" of the letter of the law is in their favour... not yours. That's why laws and regulations and contracts are written thusly: to allow for " wiggle-room " in situations where it benefits the person with the power at times of their choosing.
@@scottcrawford3745 0:55 - it's mentioned right off the top, at section "102(1) Subject to section 104...", which is likely where the type of business is defined as relating specifically to firearms.
Elsewhere in these comments Mr Runkle mentions that while he neglected to explicitly state it in the video, it was implied from the above and it is the case that the business in question must be one that the firearms act applies to, ie only involving guns.
@@ironymatt Implied... but not stated, defined, or stipulated in any way... and that wiggle-room is enough to get you charged.... Mr. Runkle has other videos with convictions on much thinner implications than that. like the 2 Sudbury lads with the buck knives. Just KNOWING that it's possible to do something makes you guilty of a crime if you have that item in your possession... Even if the judge BELIEVES otherwise when you say you don't know. If you're willing to put up all you own against taking it on faith that a judge/ Crown prosecutor will go with the implications or "spirit" of the law, then you have WAY more faith than me. If they want to get you... Murphy's Law reigns supreme.
Well done. Really appreciate your time and effort to break these down for us laymen.
Draconian redictious power given to law Breaking cops . CFO power should drastically be reduced .
Considering the specificity of the language that lawyers use, this line caught my eye. "I'm not normally a fan of inviting strangers into my bedroom", emphasis on "not normally",lol. I really enjoy your videos, keep up the great work!
A whole lot of this depends on a very subjective and slippery word: reasonable.
“Reasonable” is defined in law.
"Reasonable" has become a word that cops abuse and judges look the other way on.
"Reasonable" has included the slaughter of an entire family or bloodline with no repercussions in respect to the Brotherhood of Law Enforcement and Sentencing.
This law can be used to enter ANYONE'S house for no reason, and claim anyone they want to is breaking the law.
"Well, if your not breaking the law, then prove it."
Refuse the inspection, and become an instant criminal
Idk Canada but in United States, "reasonable" is definined by the reasonable person test. Basically means, if you could convince a average local person of something, than its reasonable.
But common sense is not common, and there's lots of dumb people in my area. I live in Florida. so why would one expect that the average person couldn't be persuaded by a fast talking lawyer into agreeing with anything.
@@checkmate058 love it, but with the Entitled Butthurt crowd, the only way they see reasonable is if they get mugged by the very Left they are so proactive in.
@@macgyveratlarge2133 i don't follow
It's crazy how different the laws are just a few miles away. I feel for you all.
You mentioned how officers might know how many guns a person has. I know from personal experience they continue to use data from the old registry, in my city at least. They are aware of any firearms purchased before it was ended. I found this out during a requested inspection of my storage during the summer of 2019.
@Yance Taylor yes. they are using data illegally to this day
You are the very first person I've ever had the desire to do the "Patreon" thing for/with. I just joined
Much appreciated!
I found this to be informative and helpful, especially where it comes to the part that they generally have to find a reasonable time to do it and aren’t ‘supposed to’ go on fishing expeditions.
I had an inspection once, this CFO and a verifier. It took them 30 minutes to figure out what 250-3000 stamped on the barrel of a Savage 99 meant.
frightening that we allow people to enforce laws who lack the information to go about enforcing them. i mean any idiot knows that 250-3000 is negative 2750 and the best place to keep that important calculation is on the barrel of an old Savage 99 ... sheeeesh!!!
@@mr.behaving I just spit my beer on my monitor.
@Jordon Carlson my inspection had nothing to do with gun collecting. It was when we were forced to register our guns and I put “unknown” in almost every field for every gun, just as the NFA suggested we do. If everyone had done that the whole registration scheme would have fallen flat. They came to fill in the unknowns after I got the certs with unknown dutifully recorded.
As a Canadian ex-pat who is also an American citizen living in the USA, this makes me so thankful for the second amendment. I'm hugging my suppressors and machine guns right now.
your "S. A." you are so proud of makes you apply and pay for those suppressors and m.g.'s . Is that really a right if there are restrictions and "allowances"?????.
But you are absolutely better off than us here in Canada.
Thank you for explaining the intricacies of a Firearms Act inspection. Very helpful to hear it in a relaxed atmosphere.
Thank you for all the info and clarification of our current laws! Its greatly appreciated.
Just to address constitutionality of these searches/inspections. I dont get how police/governments would prefer Constitutional rights didnt exist at all and often times pretend they dont exist. For the longest time I believed that the police and government are suppose to be the guardings of human/people rights, at least, here in Canada. Boy, was I living in the dark. :-)
So if the inspector opens my range bag and finds my lunch, he can sample it and just needs to give me a receipt?
I'm sure he'd be willing to give your sampled lunch back to you when he's done with it... :)
Could you do a video about the storage requirements and some of the legal language that surrounds that?
I think I could, yeah.
@@RunkleOfTheBailey if you go down that road please look at GunVault products and do you think they would qualify as designed for firearms ( in Canada )
@@snowgorilla9789 There is nothing in the law that necessitates a storage appartus to be "designed for firearms".
@@RunkleOfTheBailey It may be the opinion of some that the way the storage laws are written, it seems somewhat open as to what might be considered "good enough".
yeah no kidding eh? "ammo may be stored separately or together with" To me that sounds like I can store ammo anywhere I damn well please. And why would I have to lock up my ammo to make sure unlicensed members of my family do not have access to it? What are they going to do, eat it?
Great video. Thanks for doing them.
Had a guy who was adamant that inspections only applied to those that were licensed for restricted or prohibited firearms. Even after showing him the laws as written he just blew me off by saying "Well you're not a lawyer".
Told him to look into you and directed him to this video.
His reply a bit later..."Ya, I guess I was was wrong".
Don't know if it would be a topic worthy of its own video, but there seems to be the same kind of confusion over who is included in Continuous Eligibility Screening. I see people just as adamant that only RPAL holders are included but I am under the impression that everyone with a license, PAL or RPAL, is subject to CES.
i was told matter of fact, when I was renewing my FAC to be turned into PAL / RPAL, by the lady on the phone that if I renewed with just the PAL and not RPAL (assuming I had no Restricted firearms requiring the R designation) that the PAL afforded me the extra right of not having late night visits of the local constabulary checking to make sure my restricted firearms were put to bed properly.. This was coming straight out of the mouth of someone representing the CFO. so i'm sure that guy who was adamant came about it honestly, if those who are enforcing the rules can't even tell you correctly
I had a Surprise Firearms Inspection only a few nights ago.
At 1745 Hours, Two South Australian Police Officers arrived unannounced at My Front Door.
They asked politely if now was a good time for a Surprise Firearms Inspection.
I said yes and invited them in.
Their Inspection of Guns, Gun Storage, Ammunition Storage, Bolt Storage and Magazine Storage took 45 Minutes.
They asked a number of questions and recorded My answers.
They appeared very happy with what they saw and heard.
My previous Inspection was probably around 15 Years Ago, Back when all the Rules and Regulations were very different.
so what i'm hearing then is...
1) since I am obligated to help them, I am not only being compelled to be a witness to proceedings held against myself in a potential criminal matter (based on our Canadian Charter), I could also implicate myself in a subsequent crime, contravening my right against self-incrimination (again, based on our Canadian Charter).
1a) if I have to "help" the police, but I am not a licensed individual, but am there with someone who is, my assistance could put me in a position that I am now illegally in possession of firearms if the officer in some way asks me to open, hold or otherwise be expected to be in care and control of a firearm during the inspection?
2) I should ALWAYS refuse entry to my dwelling-house, because allowing entry without warrant gives them broader access (as you said, fishing expedition) , whereas a warrant would limit to suspected places only.
During this warrant/inspection, what-have-you, do I have a right to keep my mouth shut to prevent any of the above becoming something used against me? Much of the language in the charter, and some of the language in the laws say things like "any person charged with an offense has the right", so do my rights to privacy, silence, self-incrimination, etc not even take effect until such time that charges are laid against me?
Not looking for legal advice, this kind of stuff is extremely interesting to me, especially as we learn deeper what rights we truly have in our society. i'm not asking the above to be obtuse or cause drama, i truly am confused about what side of these rights/laws/charters, etc to be most knowledgable about in the unlikely event I need them. I love the channel, thanks very much for taking the time making these videos!!!
I'm not in Canada, and don't take this a criticism it isn't. I am about an hours drive away from Canada and have visited your country many times. But to me as an US citizen it is completely confusing that you would allow your government such powers. I find it so alien that any peoples would invite their government into their home or business with such broad powers. Again I am not criticizing what your country does. If the people are happy with the laws then so be it. But from an outsiders point of view this is amazing. I find the idea that refusing to allow a police officer into ones home is grounds for a warrant to do what was just refused. That idea is astonishing.
We can’t refuse to give ID during a traffic stop like you can when citing the fourth amendment, either. We are extremely policed here.
@@zebatov In the USA you must present your drivers license during a traffic stop in every US state. But only in a traffic stop. Some states have a stop and identify law, but they all very on when and what an officer can demand.
Well, as a fellow American, I remember how eager many people were in 2001 to support the "Patriot" Act. Those who claimed these powers would be abused were criticized as paranoid and unpatriotic. Sometimes all you have to do to get people to embrace tyranny is to scare them a little.
@@kevinwalsh1619 Yeah I've been against the patriot act from day 1. I was also against both invasions of Iraq. But I take your point. I guess 20 years later those powers are so important the government cant stop spying on you.
As a Canadian i feel that we have no rights in Canada any more or never really did at least not enough to stop this sort crap from happening. we need to stand up and fight this in court, as a law abiding citizen this apparently means nothing in Canada. although they release criminals back on the streets of Canada shortly after there arrest for possession of e-legal guns and use. we are a nanny state here in Canada I would move to the States if I had the option..
"Not normally a fan of inviting strangers into my bedroom" but then the CFO is dummy thicc...
Yeah, I realized after I said that that I was like "Well..."
@@RunkleOfTheBailey the obligation to assist somehow becomes much less burdensome when the CFO shows up and she's a Jennifer Lawrence lookalike!
"Why the hell did I move the guns out of the bedroom?! Idiot!!!"
- spoken in the voice of Chris Farley, may he rest in peace
Thanks Ian love you’r videos as always 😊however you always have the proper information and
The correct information for anyone and their questions! & truly appreciate it tomorrow end my friend thank you for all the information and help you share with all of us guys’ thank you brother! I truly like you meet you some day to shake your hand 🤚 thank you my friend!
another interesting Canadian lawyer. I enjoyed your video so I'm feeding your algorithms
Another interesting and informative vid Ian, thanks for taking the time to put it out.
Thanks Ian, I've been looking for a video explaining this.
I was getting a fair number of questions about it, so I figured I had better make a video to explain.
great video, every country needs someone like you to help understand laws better. Hopefully keep some people out of jail who want to do good just dont know certain details of the law.
Very good video. Appreciate your time in posting this.
What "type" of businesses qualify under s.104? Any business or does it have to be a firearms-related business? Many people have home businesses so this would be a very wide-sweeping authorization if it only has to be just any home business. It is also important because this term is not defined in subsection 2(a). Please comment and advise Runkle Of The Bailey
Firearm businesses as specified in the firearms act.
my question surrounds 104(1) - between clauses (a) and (b) there is an "and" meaning that if you do not give consent they cannot enter unless they have a warrant. I wonder how often these warrants are granted given the charter protections provided against unreasonable search in your dwelling place and the right not to incriminate yourself (among others!).
more often than the liberal communist media is talking about for sure.
Please do more videos. Like this breaking down the firearms act. This is awesome and we neeed more videos like this.
Very helpful and informative, thanks for the great video as usual Ian!
Question for Mr. Bailey: If someone is considering getting a Private Investigator Agency licence, could that trigger an inspection, even if firearms are not used in the Agency? Would it be better to rent an office away from the residence? Investigations are all cyber and no personal contact is made with clients or targets, although surveillance may take place using a vehicle. Just curious why having a non-firearm business would nullify the privacy protection of the residence.
Thank you for this video! I was always curious how this process would work as they don't go through this in the course.
Watched a few of your videos now and all I can say is
Thank you sir! you are a doing a great job on “unfortunately” a taboo subject
. it would be easier to be so many other things that are questionable vs a firearms owner in this leftest world
I hope you’ll do a video on prohibited replica firearms and the other miscellaneous classes. In particular the difference between a sub-500fps airgun, a prohibited air-soft gun, a non-prohibited air-soft gun, and a deactivated firearm.
How can ammunition be prohibited? Doesn't the classification apply to the firearm and not the ammunition? For example, although .357 Magnum and .44 Magnum ammunition are usually considered types of pistol ammunition, some rifles also shoot the same types of ammunition.
For example, explosive ammunition is prohibited in Canada.
@@RunkleOfTheBailey Thank you for the clarification.
Body-armour-piercing projectiles, flechettes, etc.
Wondering if inspector shows up at your door with a number of police . Wouldn’t they need a warrant as it could be considered a search .
Thank you this is very informative on what my Canadian brother firearms owns have to live with at least in the states the state has to have a reason to get a warrant not just think that we are criminals to search our property
Curious if you ever posted the audio of the actual inspection? I can’t find it but I also don’t know what I’m looking for.
Sadly, the person who provided it backed out. Had the entire video good to go, but I'm not about to burn the guy if he's changed his mind.
So informative! Idk why your channel came up but I’m so happy it came up on my recommendations! I have one question, if I have a safe that has a code I have to enter to open my safe or a key do they have the right to ask for the passcode or key to open the safe themselves?
It's unclear in this case, because the statute says you have to assist them, but there are Charter/constitutional issues with that.
@@RunkleOfTheBailey thank you 🙏🏻
Clean cut! Bring it back!!
Hypothetical question. You are a parent of a grade four through six so 10 to 12 year old in a rural agricultural Ontario community.
Your child is visiting a friend same age and grade range. When they come home they tell you about how their friend said hey come check out dad's guns. Then proceeded to the workshop and put in the safe combination.
What are your next steps?
We in SK just got a very pro-gun CFO. Interesting to see what will happen with that.
apply for a carry permit to test how pro-gun he is. It is allowed for in the FA for your CFO to issue you a carry permit (or at a minimum tell you the training requirements required and where you can obtain them before he will issue the permit).
TaxpayerDave nope. Not a chance.
Easier to get one relatively speaking, but there are requirements that are out of the CFO’s hands like getting your local police to sign off that they cannot provide sufficient protection to protect your life. And that same PD is the one that’s going to give your UOF training. Good luck with that. Most people don’t have a police file on a credible threat to their life to begin with let alone needed police protection.
@@mouthbreather280 Seems trivial for the police to recognize that, just look at the NS murders used for Trudeau and Blair's gun ban. They can't protect anyone adequately.
The duty to assist is interesting.
I wonder how far that extends.
Just how helpful do you need to be?
coffee and doughnuts at the very least, and it had better be good coffee
@@erg0centric you'd better have cream, not just whitener.
I will assist no one. That is my Duty as a free person.
When you say to contract a lawyer, must it be one who specializes in firearms, and how would one find such a lawyer? Thanks.
Ideally one familiar with it. Honestly, ask them about s. 101 inspections under the firearms act. If they have to look it up, they're not your choice.
Thank you.
if you're wealthy enough to afford one
Thanks Ian!
Regarding the "no force" inspection, if you refuse and they get a warrant and then you still refuse to let them in, then will they use force to come in or will they leave and send ERT later? -asking for a friend :)
I expect they'd come in with force at that point.
@@RunkleOfTheBailey And if you have a strong safe and refuse to open it up, I presume they'll get a safecracker in?
@@aakoksal don’t do either of those things. It’s a lose lose for you either way.
Thanks for the info. You do this well!
Glad it was helpful!
can you post a link to the audio/video follow up to this in the description?
Interesting video, thanks. I have a question though, that comes up often in many of these gun related issues. As far as I know, the federal laws are sort of a base, and provincial CFOs and governments can add to the existing federal laws/restrictions etc... I'm wondering if this is something that could be addressed in a video?
I know it may be too big a topic to discuss, but perhaps something just to make us more aware? Or maybe, of you're having a hard time finding topics, you could do a series.
Just a thought.
I LOLed at the awkward pause after "I'm not normally a fan of inviting strangers into my bedroom."
does the data accessing provision meant for businesses mean the CFO can request to see your Reddit/CanadianGunNutz profile on your phone or computer?
That'd be for firearms businesses. So, going into P&D or Cabela's or wherever and getting their records.
Thanks for making this video! I lived in fear of being randomly picked for inspection
Hi Ian. I have a question. If I were to have been drinking and the law comes to my door to check out my stuff, should I refuse? Can they charge me if I open the safe for them and am intoxicated? Will I be giving them the ability to charge me with having guns out while intoxicated? Hopefully I asked that correctly. Thanks for your help.
If I were to be at a hunting store for the purpose of purchasing new arrows (I practice archery) at the time of inspection, could I be forced to help with the inspection even though I'm not there for any firearms related reason?
They're not asking customers to help with inspection. That'll be pointless. Obviously if you worked there that'll be different.
One question that comes to mind I didn’t see in the act where business specifically targeted firearms business; or could use for example an artist home studio, that would be a business quality under the act as a trigger for an inspection?
Very informative - Thank You!
Thanks, this one is valuable. It's my hope that one day soon you will be redoing this video after Erin O'Toole orders a reform of the firearms act after he's elected this Fall. Otherwise post May 2022 will be a stressful time for honest Canadians under the current dictatorship.
It would be nice to one day have to rewrite or amend a lot of these. Like, "Hey, this video is being left up for historical reasons, but is now way inaccurate."
@@RunkleOfTheBailey I agree, and hopefully we can all learn something.
@@RunkleOfTheBailey The videos should be left up for posterity so that future generations of gun owners know what kind of unjust laws we fought against and, in the event the laws are repealed or amended, future gun owners hopefully will resist attempts to reinstate similar laws.
@@クルックシャンクバド I don't plan on taking any videos down, but I may need to add a pinned comment to some of them to indicate changes in law. At least, it'd be nice.
Otoole would be wise to appoint Sloan as MOPS and let him dos his own campaign promised firearms since that single issue was a massive % of is support
ie completely revoke ALL of c-68 / 72 / etc and the "firearms act" back past trudeau sr's bs etc and if they listen closely they should even go back to remove everything passed into law since the 1930s.. ie: start of the LGR and registration etc
Same for other prohibs like suppressors, balasongs etc
Then craft new legislation that actually creates a Canadian 2nd per se to help prevent any future gov from this BS
and finally new legislation re actual criminals and such MUST be crafted s s to pass the "bad law test"
Thanks very much! Great explanations.
Can you cover the business aspect? I live on a farm and an considering getting my PAL.
Thanks for breaking it down.
Very well done. Thanks.
Did you ever post the followup to this with commentary on an actual inspection?
I am having trouble finding the follow up video containing audio of an actual search that was mentioned in the begining of this video
Only allowed if the firearm is restricted and registered as such and even then they must give 24 hours notice.....anything else they must have a warrant to enter your home.
Can you please point out the name of the video of the firearms inspection you refer to?
Very interesting, thank you.
Does liking and subscribing equate to, 'reasonable grounds for believing that entry will be refused' based on social media posting?
It keeps saying "Reasonable Grounds", so unless you are running a business, they have to prove in court the narrow reason for the search.
Hi Ian,
You mentioned that the CFO monitors forums/social media, like CGN. Does the CFO/RCMP maintain a database of users' handles and IP addresses, and the real identity they belong to? Or do they have to go through the process of getting a warrant to connect a forum user to a real identity?
They probably have the special software that lets them enter your name and then produces your life's history including anything you ever commented on in social sites.
Great video, thanks for sharing!
What if I’m not home? I work out of town and the other occupants of the house can’t open the safe.
In the 70ties I knew a guy who was s gun smith and a good one at that.
He moved the business to his home in his basement. He has to my knowledge retired and moved.
I have no idea if hes still alive.
I know some people that have guns and gun safes they play ball with the law and have everything in order.
One such guy has a separate room for his gun safe, this I know.
How does what you say differ if at all if you are a resident of QC where there still is a long gun registry. thank you.
That would make it a lot easier to find out if you have more than 10+ firearms.
Why don't you "Ian" post a list of lawyers that will and can provide counsel in every province. This would be specific to firearms.
Thank you for doing these videos.
Wouldn't using a warrant to enter a home be using force? What do they do if even with a warrant you refuse to give consent to enter? Do the arrest you and then just do the inspection anyway? Wouldn't that constitute force?
What would prohibited ammo consist of?
Hey would you be interested in doing a video on what to do if your section 8 and 9 charter rights have been violated. Besides call a lawyer what is the process for fighting arbitrary detainment and unlawful search if no charges are laid. And what are some things to prove that it was in fact arbitrary/ unlawful.
Great info sir thanks
Thanks, great information and well presented.
Look at the Food and Drugs Act or CDSA. Inspection powers are pretty consistent and those have stood up in court for Dwelling Houses.
Thank you!! Very informative cheers
Is this for Non Restricted and/or Restricted?
If I work from home does that count towards a business being conducted
Would you be allowed to video the event incase of potential damage caused?
What are the rules about recording the inspection on video??
There's nothing stopping you from recording them. Canada is a one-party recording state, which means that you can record a conversation/discussion/etc so long as one person present/involved is aware. I've been planning on making a video about this, and why it's very worthwhile to record interactions with firearms officers.
@@RunkleOfTheBailey Please make a video so I can "keep it with me" next time they show up. They didn't record their search, disabled all of my security cameras (internal and external) and threatened me with charges if I recorded them (rcmp)! After showing them which of my keys opened up my gun cases (they had a cooperation warrant) they "magically" found some of my guns sitting out, on the bed, no trigger lock = boom, unsafe storage. Absolute joke. Can't wait to see the video, thanks!
@@toysareforboys1 Wow. That's not right at all. I can't see anything allowing them to force you to shut off your cameras or not record them.
What happened to the video of the audio of an inspection occurring?
I do not have firearms but I do operate a business. The CFO can request an inspection of any business?
Yes.
Did you ever get a chance to make a video about the inspection recording? UA-cam search isn't helping...
i guess this is Canadian law? would be nice to state what jurisdiction this relates to
The problem is that reasonable is in the eye of the beholder.
No.. It's in the Eye of those with the Power ( Them) and how they choose to interpret all of the rules in your situation... like: It might have been leading up to a normal inspection, but if the Starbucks girl spills his latte on him, and then he shows up at your house pissed, you're gonna get a lot less reasonable than you could have. Or if he got chewed out by a superior, or his wife ( same thing) that morning. Or if his chief tells him he needs to set a precedent....
how do they define a "business" in this context? Like say you have a home business completely unrelated to firearms?
Thought the "Newly prohibited:" could not be touched for 2 years?
How does the loss of Section 337 of the Criminal Code affect Section 102?
Great stuff .
Many different ways......that is the crux of the problem. It needs to be clearly spelled out under what circumstances they can enter your home. In general they should be required to go to a judge and obtain a warrant to enter anyone's home unless there is eminent danger, and just because is not acceptable which is why a judge needs to beinvolved.
What is "The Firearms Act" - There should be an identifier - is this a municipal ordinance, a state law, or a US Federal law ?
None of the above--I note that I'm a Canadian firearms lawyer, this is a Canadian federal statute. If you're in the U.S. this doesn't apply to you, and so is of interest only likely as a curiosity about the crap we Canadians have to put up with.
@@RunkleOfTheBailey Thank you Sir - I can easily sympathize with you - Unfortunately, there are so many here in the States who really have no good understanding of the freedoms secured by our constitution, and how easily they can be stolen from us by our apathy and self-centered indulgent mindsets.