r/canadaguns • u/833psz • Apr 21 '26
Misc Police shot my friend’s pistol. Any idea why?
A friend of mine went through a messy divorce; long story short his wife made a false statement and used the OPP as a weapon against him. His firearms were stored in an OPP “vault” for approximately five months.
This S&W revolver, a 686 Plus Perfomance Centre, was BNIB and unfired. The cylinder was clean, he has photos of it after purchasing and it was never brought to the range.
They had a bunch of rifles but the only ones that appear to have been fired are this revolver and a G19 that had a red dot.
This occurred a couple years back, it’s something we discuss out of curiosity once in a while, and he has no desire to confront the OPP or complain. We are just curious.
Is it normal for the police to shoot your guns once confiscated?
Why did they only shoot two handguns and no rifles?
Thanks!
167
u/ThrowRA_That_Owl_25 Apr 21 '26
Probably some shmuck target shooting in his leisure.
109
u/xXxDarkSasuke1999xXx Apr 21 '26
He's lucky his stuff didn't come back covered in rust, I've heard that's pretty common with guns that end up in police custody for whatever reason.
20
u/IntelligentGrade7316 Apr 21 '26
All the horror stories out of the High River fiasco!
3
u/CorsicanMastiffStrip Apr 21 '26
Come to think of it, building the Lowlands Police Station next to High River might have been a mistake.
34
u/ThrowRA_That_Owl_25 Apr 21 '26
Or scrstched the shit out of them.
2
u/DBTeacup Apr 21 '26
Can confirm. But unclear if it was the police handling or the pos who stole them in the first place. Likely column A and B.
2
u/ThrowRA_That_Owl_25 Apr 21 '26
That would be the same person.
1
u/DBTeacup Apr 21 '26
Local PD were super chill in my case and I have little shade to throw at em here. The legal system however? Oof, that is frustration embodied.
1
u/ThrowRA_That_Owl_25 Apr 21 '26
Are you that naive that you think when police have a custody of someone's firearms some third party gets access to said guns to go plinking?
Well, Im not naive to think that even for a second. I dont know what's up with you.
1
u/DBTeacup Apr 22 '26
Eh? No, I am saying that in my situation I can't say if the scratches were from the POS who stole the firearms, or from the police handling them. I know they test them (my local PD sent them to the RCMP for testing) and I assume part of that is them shooting them.
21
u/StuPuff86 Apr 21 '26
or destroyed. a friend had his stuff seized illegally and fought it. when he won the case 3 years later, he found out they thought they were gonna win, so they destroyed it all 5 mo after stealing it all from his house.
6
u/IPSC_Canuck Apr 21 '26
One round?
6
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
it looks like three were fired. however someone gave the cylinder a wipe. one chamber was still lined up with the barrel and so didnt get cleaned as much as the other 2.
-2
u/IPSC_Canuck Apr 21 '26
Oh I see. But either way, I just can’t see this being target practice. Why would anyone risk their livelihood to go shoot three rounds out of a fairly common revolver and a pistol that’s fairly similar to the one on their hip? It just doesn’t make sense.
9
4
u/black_covfefe_please Apr 21 '26
Police are like Teflon. No chance their livelihood would be at risk.
1
3
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
I actually agree with you 100%. I’m on team forensic testing. I suspect they were trying to build up their database.
My buddy believes they were playing around, says the nicer guns didn't get played with because they wouldnt have had ammo available without using his. He has a Dan Wesson 1911 in 10mm, an Sig P229SAS in .357Sig and a S&W 627PC (I think is nicer than 686+) and an HK P7 of some kind; none were fired.
6
u/XxSpruce_MoosexX Apr 21 '26
What if they committed a crime and will now frame OP!
1
u/ThrowRA_That_Owl_25 Apr 21 '26
Riiiiiiigggghhhhtttt! Frame OP when the revolver is suppose to be in police custody. Stop and think what nonsense you are saying!
1
u/FRANK_R-I-Z-Z-O Apr 22 '26
Because they can't hang onto the ballistic data or spent round for use at a later time or anything.
1
146
u/lolingcats Apr 21 '26
The rifling in the barrels of firearms leave impressions on the bullets they fire that are unique enough that the bullet can be used to indentify the firearm that fired it pretty reliably.
They likely collected the fired bullets of your friends firearms to see if either firearms were used in connection with a crime they are investigating, or to just keep and catalog incase those firearms are ever used in crimes.
Let your friend know if they want to get down for whatever reason, to reach for something else.
27
u/thxxx1337 Apr 21 '26
This is almost definitely it. His barrel pattern will forever be on file now.
23
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
We thought maybe there were unsolved crimes in the area where .355 diameter projectiles were recovered (would include .38Special/.357Magnum and 9mm) and they couldn’t resist testing BUT there were other firearms in 9mm that were unfired.
Also, are there no protections against things like that in Canada? I know in the US doing so would violate some constitutional amendment.
10
u/Reptilian_Brain_420 Apr 21 '26
"Also, are there no protections against things like that in Canada?"
You could try a Section 8 charter violation but that would be an extremely difficult and expensive process.
18
u/Rogan403 Apr 21 '26
Actually it mostly isn't because the practice of matching bullets to a specific gun is considered junk science by more & more states and thus inadmissible as evidence therefore in those situations it wouldn't violate any constitution that I can think of.
7
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
The junk science is the problem my friend has with this whole thing. If the firearms are now in some ballistic database, he wants to surrender them for destruction rather than live as some permanent target of a potential forensic fuck up something like bite mark evidence.
2
u/Rogan403 Apr 21 '26
Fuck I didn't even think of it that way either. I had only considered them trying to match it to an existing bullet used in a crime that has already been committed. Fucking bullshit all around.
2
u/CanadAR15 Apr 21 '26
I wonder if your friend could file a claim for diminished value on the previously BNIB firearms.
35
Apr 21 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
98
u/AdditionalLoss7274 Apr 21 '26
... They would investigate themselves. And find they did nothing wrong... Are you new here???
8
Apr 21 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
22
u/androstaxys Apr 21 '26
Yes. Law enforcement can legally test the firearm in any non-destructive way they want to, without a warrant, as long as they legally obtained the firearm.
In the case of OPs story, it sounds like they legally obtained it.
I’m not sure how normal it is to do lab testing like that.
8
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
Can you point me to the law that says they can legally test any firearm in their possession without a warrant?
Curious because if the firearm isn’t related to the case, are they really testing the firearm? Sounds more like they are building a secret ballistic database?
6
u/PatsNeg-CH Apr 21 '26
I am qualified as a police firearms analyst (not with OPP) and we do not test fire all the guns that come into our possession.
Test fires are done for two reasons, to confirm that the firearm meets the legal criteria in support of firearms charges, and to submit samples to the Ballistic Identification System. Ballistics submissions can be done in suspicion that a certain weapon was involved in an offence, or they can be done just to be added to the database in case a later retrieved bullet matches the microscopic firing pin impressions, tooling marks, etc.
OP I am skeptical this was a test firing that occurred for ballistic-forensic purposes. IBIS guidelines require multiple casings to be submitted after firing, and it would be unusual for them to test fire, eject the spent casing and load into the same chamber. A typical test fire would have the analyst loading 3+ chambers and firing repeatedly from there, so the fact that only one chamber is fouled suggests to me that this was either a single fire (strange, I’ve never done this and don’t know a reason you’d ever only fire once unless the firearm cracked during firing or somehow became unsafe to shoot further) or (more likely IMO) it is fouling from the factory test fire that wasn’t entirely cleaned, or was wiped and looked clean but after sitting has become more visible, etc.
1
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
Thank you very much for speaking up. The gun was surrendered with a clean cylinder, there is a Reolink 4K security camera 3ft from the gun safe. The revolver sits open nearby the entire time they are removing the guns. The cylinder is visibly clean. The photo I posted was from unpacking the guns after picking them up. The evidence tags are visible in the background. Whatever happened, happened after the firearms were out of his possession.
After you test a gun, would you wipe it down? Im guessing not.
There are 3 dirty chambers, the dirtiest one was lined up with the barrel. So someone did a casual wipe but wasn’t concerned enough to do a good job.
1
u/PatsNeg-CH Apr 22 '26 edited Apr 22 '26
I would not wipe or otherwise clean a gun after test firing it, no. As with all forensic testing, the aim is to interact with the item/firearm as little as possible and to document all actions so that they can be spoken to in court and to be able to present the item in court in as close to the exact physical condition it was found in.
Yeah I see the other fouling present around the other chambers now (just glanced quickly at your OP photo before my initial reply), it sounds like it probably was test fired. As I mentioned, my agency’s policy is only to test ‘crime guns’, ie. firearms seized that were involved in a criminal offence (used, brandished, possessed illegally, etc). The only caveat to that for ballistics testing/submissions would be for where otherwise justified by circumstances, for example a found firearm where its history/circumstances are unknown, owner suspected to be involved in organized crime, something like that where it was be common sense that it should be investigated.
I think your best bet is to ATIP the file, see exactly what is documented as being done with the firearms once they were seized, then go from there (could discuss with a lawyer if firearms ballistic analysis would be considered an unreasonable search beyond just their seizure and safekeeping).
8
u/androstaxys Apr 21 '26 edited Apr 21 '26
There isn’t a law saying they can’t test the firearm.
Someone would need to take LE to court over the testing but you’d probably have to show that LE didn’t have a good reason to seize your firearms.
However a complaint that makes LE believe you are a danger to yourself or those around you is grounds to temporarily seize your firearms. Which is what OPs story describes.
Also people saying they’re secretly making a bullet tool marking database are silly.
If that’s actually a worry: simply take your seized and released firearm to the range a few times and suddenly your bullets won’t match previous rifling/tool marks. The faster and larger number of bullets sent down range the faster the barrel marks change. 🤷♂️
1
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
…so what purpose does it serve to operate a database like this if the information is useful only for such a short period of time? I don’t buy it.
I think there’s some confusion here. Some people are talking like firearms need to be compared directly to individual projectiles/cases. Others seem to think there is some searchable database of projectiles, cases and guns.
I don’t know. That’s why I’m asking.
You did answer my question about what law allows them to do it, thank you.
1
u/androstaxys Apr 22 '26
Purpose of testing is that if you don’t, you’ll never find a match. If you do: maybe.
A database of tool markings wouldn’t necessarily be useful for a short amount of time.
It soley depends on how much one shoots, how hot the barrel gets, and how aggressively you clean the barrel.
If you don’t shoot much and/or don’t use too many harsh chemicals/abrasives often, your microscopic markings will mostly match for a long time.
5
2
u/PopperChopper Apr 21 '26
What law are you expecting to read that says they are allowed to do it?
The guy you’re responding to already answered. If they obtained the gun legally, why wouldn’t they be able to test it?
It’s like if you voluntarily went in to answer questions, or were legally compelled to for whatever reason - why wouldn’t they be able to ask you questions?
1
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
The question wasn’t asked regarding the act of testing, it was intended to be about storing the data.
1
1
14
u/Rogan403 Apr 21 '26
This is actually becoming viewed as junk science by those who know more about this kind of thing than me. Lots of states don't even accept this as evidence and thus deem it inadmissible.
5
u/miketangoalpha Apr 21 '26
Their also pairing the firing pin markings and ejector claws (when applicable) to build out a more robust markings systems. Casings are far more evidentiary now then mangled bullets that have been fired
2
u/lolingcats Apr 21 '26
Yeah, I don't doubt that. Hence my use of 'pretty reliably.' Courts using the 'beyond reasonable doubt' standard would find that lacking. It is a way for police to have an idea of who to investigate. Same way a lie detector is used to see if someone MAY be lying, but does not meet the criminal court standard.
2
2
u/HALF-PRICE_ Apr 21 '26
Nope, this is in Canada for one thing so take your freedom units and do what you want.
1
u/Rogan403 Apr 21 '26
Yes I realize that. I am Canadian. I only brought it up because if the cops did this, then not only is that shitty of them to do but also they did it for reasons that have started to be increasingly viewed as junk science. That's all.
1
u/black_covfefe_please Apr 21 '26
To be honest, this is a pseudo science. But, yes, the police will use it. Consider having the barrel changed.
1
u/lolingcats Apr 22 '26
Copied from another comment I made: Yeah, I don't doubt that. Hence my use of 'pretty reliably.' Courts using the 'beyond reasonable doubt' standard would find that lacking. It is a way for police to have an idea of who to investigate. Same way a lie detector is used to see if someone MAY be lying, but does not meet the criminal court standard.
51
u/Hot_Cheesecake_905 Apr 21 '26
his wife made a false statemen
Was the wife ever charged?
129
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
Yeah funny about that eh.
First question I asked after the matter was resolved in his favour... what happens to her?
Apparently women don’t give false statements they just make mistakes.
58
12
u/Drfresh49 Apr 21 '26
The crazy thing is that dude 100% spent some nights not sleeping thinking about what would happen because of her lies. I get the women are angry at their ex's but that shit is cold
14
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
It’s worse than you can imagine. Until the crown releases disclosure/discovery which only happens 30 days after the charge, he had no idea what he was even accused of doing. The police don’t tell you.
Not only that but apparently the crown embellishes and spins whatever statement was made to police into this polished horror story. And the entire time that’s the version of events CAS, family court, your own lawyer gets to hear.
Its quite a disgusting process and honestly makes me think quite differently about our justice system.
3
u/AlonzoMosely88 Apr 21 '26
It makes me f***ing livid reading all of this. I'm assuming your friend is completely in the clear now?
You mentioned that your friend's ex-wife never faced any criminal penalties for this (WTF). Would pursuing damages on the civil side would be an option for him (ie defamation of character/libel/slander)?
These kinds of horror stories are the exactly the reason why I'm so closed off about this hobby with other people (besides folks I run into at the range) and don't tell people what I have. It makes me reluctant to ever get into any kind of relationship.
2
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
Charge was stayed by the crown. Which means the prosecutor acknowledges it’s not in the best interest of the crown to pursue the case.
My friend had his fingerprints and photos destroyed. But will forever have to answer “yes” to questions like “have you ever been charged with a crime“ or “have you ever been arrested”. Depending on one’s line of work, that can be a big deal or not. For him it unfortunately is.
The stay didn’t help his case in family court because the judges there can have their own interpretation on what that means.
Thankfully, his kids are smart and both chose to live with him and not Satan.
Lesson to be learned here folks is make sure the common areas on the interior and exterior of your home have good cameras. If you have no evidence to contradict false claims, the system simply sides with the accuser. Nobody investigates or asks hard questions.
1
u/AlonzoMosely88 Apr 21 '26
Thanks for elaborating!
What a load of crap from the courts. It's truly terrifying that someone can just make an unsubstantiated accusation, turn someone's life upside down, and get away with it. Our government is a disgrace (I know I'm preaching to the choir here).
I really hope your friend gets all the help he needs to get out from under this and move on with this life.
26
6
6
8
u/Unfortunate_Sex_Fart al Apr 21 '26
My guess is they test-fired it for forensics to see if it was involved in any other shootings.
8
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
Just to clarify, the firearm was not involved in a shooting, nor was it alleged to be involved in a shooting. They couldn’t be testing it to see if it’s involved in ”any other shootings”.
They may have been testing to see if it was ever involved in any shooting… but my question is why did they choose these two guns out of ~25-40 guns. And is it normal/permitted for them to do so!
7
u/Unfortunate_Sex_Fart al Apr 21 '26
I’m not suggesting the firearm was involved in a shooting, but how would the police know unless they sent it to their ballistics lab and tested it?
As for why they chose that gun? Possibly because that specific model/calibre of firearm may have used in the past in an unsolved crime? Like they aren’t going to test a 9mm glock if an unsolved murder involved a .357 magnum.
5
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
I know, I only clarified because you said “any OTHER shooting” lol. I didn’t want people thinking this is all related to an alleged shooting because yes, that would be change things.
As far as the forensics part, I’m not sure if you can easily tell from most recovered projectiles whether they are 9mm vs .357 considering both are .355 diameter. That’s why I brought up elsewhere that its odd for only 2 of ~25-40 guns go be tested when there were plenty more that would leave a .355” hole.
3
u/Unfortunate_Sex_Fart al Apr 21 '26
On your first point, fair enough.
On your second point, while I’m no ballistics expert, I would imagine forensic investigators would very much be able to tell a .357 from a 9mm because there would be more trace evidence than just the diameter of the hole. Aside from how these 2 rounds punch paper differently, there’s penetration and cavitation to consider. Also recovering the projectile itself. Things way beyond our base knowledge.
3
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
I guess you’re right. In my mind I think what are the odds of recovering fully intact projectiles that can be weighed to determine caliber, with intact jackets where rifling marks are visible etc but it must happen because I can’t argue they do spend the time doing ballistics lol
1
u/Rogan403 Apr 21 '26
Which is fucked because matching bullets to the gun that fired them or to other bullets being fired by the same gun is becoming considered by many experts in the states as complete junk science to a point that many states treat the evidence as completely inadmissible.
8
u/oliveoillube Apr 21 '26
It matched a calibre of a gun used for nefarious activities and they took a ballistic sample to try and match striating marks.
Source: I have watched law and order
4
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
We thought of that especially since both calibers of both fired guns leave the same size hole (.355”). However, there were 30 or 40 guns confiscated and more than just those two firearms would leave that size of hole.
For almost two years my buddy and I have been going back and forth about this and we keep coming back to the idea that someone took those two pistols for a joy ride in the 48hrs before they were sealed into bags and put in the vault.
We were curious if you guys could come up with a better reason.
1
4
u/PositiveHot1421 Apr 21 '26
S&W does test fire coming off the line
3
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
I’m aware of that, the casing is in the plastic case. However, the cylinder was clean and the gun never went to the range prior to being in police custody.
8
u/Derringer373 Apr 21 '26
There has been a push in the last few years in Canada to trace all firearms taken by police.
Firearms are test fired and their casings are sent through a special imaging device that photographs all the small features left from the fired casing. That info is then stored in a database for possible future use.
Police agencies try and do this to most crime guns and for the agencies that can afford the imaging device they will try to do it to every firearm they get in their possession. As far as I am aware there are no hard and fast rules on it in Canada yet but seems to be the way things are trending.
2
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
Thank you. If I wanted to FOIA records related to this, would that be something I go after the OPP for or is there another organization running the database?
2
u/Derringer373 Apr 21 '26
Not 100% versed in this. But I would suspect as some have mentioned to ATIP "access to information and privacy" the request towards what ever agency you dealt with. Just note private requests are slow, and results aren't guaranteed.
3
u/IcySkyDream Apr 21 '26
The first few handguns I purchased in 2015 came with the fired case from the factory still inside a small manila envelope inside the case.
Sometime in the next year or two, I noticed these factory-fired cases were no longer included in the cases of the same handgun manufacturer.
Do as you will with this information.
2
u/PTRDude Apr 21 '26
That was to comply with the few jurisdictions in the States that had ballistic finger printing laws. You were supposed to supply those casings with your handgun registration. Pretty sure those laws are gone now so they just recycle the test brass.
3
u/Swellchapo95 Apr 21 '26
They likely shot it to get the ballistics so that if it’s ever used in a crime then they’d know which firearm it was
3
u/Ok-Raise-5115 Apr 21 '26
A friend of a friend had something similar happen, when he got all his long guns back he sold them but when he got his restricteds back all the firing pins were damaged on them, fuck the OPP
4
u/Fistfullofdong Apr 21 '26
Depending on if charges were laid, often times a firearm needs to be tested (velocity) to legally prove it is a firearm as per the criminal code.
So if crazy wife was alleging he was committing specifically a firearm offence with a handgun then it’s likely they’d need to test the two handguns to say they are indeed firearms as per the definition.
2
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
The firearms had nothing to do with the alleged offence.
The question is, are there rules stopping them from “joy riding” confiscated firearms? And are they allowed to do ballistic testing on confiscated firearms? And also why only 2 firearms out of ~25-40?
4
u/ItchYouCannotReach Apr 21 '26
It would depend on exactly what was said. If she alleged he threatened her with that particular gun and he was charged with something related then that particular firearm would be section 2 tested by an analyst to certify it is a functional firearm
2
u/diseasedcanadian Apr 21 '26
Family are gun collectors as were our friends in the 1980s-2000s before we took a step back. There was never a gun that they held that wasn’t fired, the more exotic/unique the more rounds.
No idea if this is common place now, but Metro Toronto and RCMP both did this to our family and friends numerous times.
2
u/hatethelcbo Apr 21 '26
To have the ballistics of that firearm on file for future investigations. Highly illegal, tell your friend to hire a lawyer and launch an investigation
2
u/KdF-wagen Apr 21 '26
I swap all my firing pins out before I leave my house, I always do, looks right, need a micrometer to tell but the gun don’t shoot.
3
1
4
u/Relative_Context_122 Apr 21 '26
If the weapon was involved in the offence and the police laid firearms charges, they will fire it in order to confirm it’s a functioning firearm.
1
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
The firearms had nothing to do with the alleged offence.
The question is, are there rules stopping them from “joy riding” confiscated firearms? And are they allowed to do ballistic testing on confiscated firearms?
2
u/No-culture5942 Apr 21 '26
To get its ballistic "finger prints" . If its been used in a crime or if its ever used un one, this firearm is now in their database and they will know.
3
1
u/beginnerdoge Apr 21 '26
The OPP is one of the most corrupt departments in the country. Good luck dude and be smart
1
u/NemrahG Apr 21 '26
They probably either checked the bullet to see if it matches with any crimes, or they were checking if the guns were functional.
1
u/Thegreatgazoo2 Apr 21 '26
Cops may have sent it to weapons forensics, to confirm its a functioning firearm, an verify it meets legal definition. Part of the process is to prove it can fire a projectile at so many joules of energy to meet the legal definition, so maybe that could possibly explain it.
But I would imagine some of it would depend on the context of the complaint from his ex spouse, that process is ussually done when police believe the guns may be part of offence or evidence to be used in court.
1
u/JustACanadianGuy07 Apr 21 '26
Likely to get ballistic markings for future reference if it is used in a crime.
1
u/Psyex Apr 21 '26
They will test to see if it has been used in a crime. I had a gun that a family member found in the estate of another family member. One of those handguns put into a box and forgotten for 50 yrs. He gave it to me because he knew I had handguns. I spoke to the Canadian Firearms Program on one of their Amnesty drives and asked if it could be registered. I told them of the origin and they took custody of it for about a year the gun was a Ruger Mk1 Standard. They did their tests and it came back as not having been used in any "known" crime (got to love how they word that). From there it was registered into the system. When I got it back it was dirty AF. So short answer from my experience they do this, might just be because of what I described but I used to work for the police for a time, and from my experience they test firearms they have in their custody. Even just for training for technicians.
1
u/Crazy-Ad-2161 Apr 21 '26
Just to be sure your friend does know BNIB doesn't mean the firearm has not been shot, all firearms must be fired to ensure function and pressure testing when being sold to retail market. Now having said that yet police will fire firearms in the firearms lab to retrieve data for the firearm database.
1
u/NorthernRambo Apr 21 '26
Depending on why they had it likely firearms testing to confirm that the firearm is functional and capable of discharging a round. Which if it was involved in firearms charges or the possibility of firearms charges would be required for court.
1
u/KeyFall3584 Apr 21 '26
make sure you document the fact that it was shot with some sort of legal proof. you don’t want this to cause you any problems in the future
1
u/jreditsoudidnthaveto Apr 21 '26
Shot it to log the striations, incase it is ever used it in the commission of a crime.
1
u/Bambam4040 Apr 21 '26
Had the same thing when they recovered my hand guns that were stolen but they asked if they could go shoot them
1
u/under_hunter82376 Apr 21 '26
he didnt deserve to have it confiscated . the fact that the wife lied about it is just fucking horrible .
1
1
1
1
u/SFRC-Canada Business Account Apr 22 '26 edited Apr 22 '26
I think you’ll find those are the factory proof load marks. S&W doesn’t clean them after they fire them so a brand new gun would have them. You usually see them spaced out, one fired cylinder, one not fired and then another one fired….which is what I see in the picture. When you could buy handguns we got asked about factory new dirty S&W’s multiple times a week. Could they have fired it I can’t say but that is exactly how many S&W’s look out of the box.
1
u/georgeofthejungle71 Apr 22 '26
Can it be rebarrelled? Calm me paranoid, but if it was my firearm I'd put a new barrel in it and a new hammer and would destroy the old ones. Same for the barrel and striker for the glock
1
u/Dizzy-Wedding5769 Apr 22 '26
One of my friends had 40 guns seized by a police and none of them came back fired, this is an incredibly weird situation
1
u/lerateblanc Apr 22 '26 edited Apr 22 '26
Not gonna lie; from someone that does LE-related work and knows tons of people that work in LE and is related to them...
They probably just thought it was cool and wanted to shoot it. Shit blows these days even for the people working in LE man. If you think that because of their job it's easy to find random cool sidearms because they are employed by a constituted body/law enforcement branch and have a permit to carry what unfortunately now is considered a prohibited sidearm essentially..... nah, they don't. Stores are fucked right now.
I'd just assume that they thought your firearms looked sweet and wanted to test em. Just because they're LEOs doesn't mean they ain't human, a lot of em are just as passionate as you are about firearms. Honestly, most of them are; shit's why almost nationally, even all of the federal police disagreed to be supporting or enacting the gun grabbing policy dogshit. All of us fuckin' hate it and think it's pointless and stupid and know that it's performative and counterproductive hogwash.
(Also it very well could've been used for something else, I'm not fully certain and this is just my assumption. If it was used for something else I'd be pretty fuckin astonished and mortified that someone had the gall to do that with a civilian's firearms.)
Be aware that the Politicians are trying to basically bring in enforcement that isn't federal or provincial/municipal law enforcement or our national intelligence to try and force their policies anyway because they know that law enforcement refuse to.
They're planning some fucked up shit and a lot of people don't know this even though it's been circling around in the public for a while now.
The people in power aren't the kind and friendly people that everyone thinks they are.
1
u/dirtyoldguy1966 Apr 23 '26
Might be as simple as an older officer reliving the old days of a wheel gun? Showing the "kids" what it felt like to fire a real gun?
1
u/fartsNdoom Apr 23 '26
Because what's he gonna do? Complain? They'll just take his guns permanently and tell him to go fuck himself.
1
-2
u/NotCriminallyRespons Apr 21 '26
Looks like Cops just having fun at there private range at tax payers expense (free ammo) and your friends collection value. But they will likely never admit this and just say it’s the way it came in etc
15
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
Honestly, the firearms were well taken care of. In individual plastic bags with MDT chamber flags in them. The evidence tags were string, no stickers or obnoxious stuff to remove.
They even returned his prohibs, fought to get him an ATT for them when CFP hesitated to issue an ATT for prohibs.
They also returned a box of 10mm Black Talon and a bunch of WWII .30-06 black tip and tracer.
We honestly have nothing bad to say about the way the OPP handled this. We are just curious what happened and if it’s a case of a “joy ride” or some wider policy of ballistic testing random confiscated guns?
0
u/Thespritz00 Apr 22 '26
YES she obviously LIED about him and they have registered a spent bullet and it's unique grooves caused by travelling thru the barrel in a forensics DATABASE...
0
u/King_Merovingian Apr 23 '26
As most are telling you it’s because a round was fired and the ballistics were compared to open cases and placed on file somewhere
-18
Apr 21 '26
[deleted]
8
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
No, there’s nothing more to the story. Firearm went into police custody unfired and came back fired.
My friend was accused of not allowing his wife to leave the house after she expressed wanting to leave because she “felt scared”. His lawyer brought video from their security cameras where a verbal argument can be heard where he actually begs her to leave and she refuses stating she will call the police to make him leave. When police arrived they noted he was asleep in his bed and his wife was sitting in the kitchen. The allegations don’t include anything about the firearms and there would be no need to test them for that case.
One other thing I didn’t mention is that it took the OPP two days to catalogue two safes and one ammo cabinet. So the guns didn’t make it to the “vault” until 48hrs after being confiscated. This is described in the officers notes received during discovery.
2
u/DrinkLuckyGetLucky All guns are beater guns Apr 21 '26
Likely what happened is she mentioned the firearms in her false statement. If the police were considering the charge of Kidnapping it is a straight indictable offence if a restricted or prohibited firearm was used. In order for them to meet that standard they would have an analyst certify the guns legal classification and that the firearms were functional at the time of the offence. This typically involves shooting 3 rounds through the firearm to certify that it functions properly.
2
u/833psz Apr 21 '26
The firearms were not a part of the case. She said he put his hands on her shoulders and physically restrained her when she tried to leave. The charge was Assault - Spousal. Even though she claimed on the phone with 911 she wasn’t able to leave, when OPP arrived my friend was in bed asleep and she was at the kitchen table 15ft from the door and next to keys for both vehicles in the driveway. I’m sure they would have taken her word on the kidnapping too if it wasn’t for that.
We’ve got her statement both video and written. The firearms don’t come into play.
Interestingly, my friend says the first people to mention the firearms were the police themselves. So they responded already knowing he was an RPAL holder.
12
332
u/dirkdiggler2011 Apr 21 '26
File a Ontario Information and Privacy Request. It costs $5 and you may be able to find out if there is a legit reason.