r/canadaguns • u/OCTS-Toronto • 21d ago

Application / Regulation advice Hypothetical gun abandonment question

I'm curious about the legal aspects of an abandoned restricted or prohibited firearm. If someone owned let's say an ar15 but went to live abroad for a while. They stored it at my house but then never returned. What is the legal status the the firearm? I would not have a registration certificate (in my name) and the owner can't be charged assuming they never return. Would I be in possession of an illegal firearm? If it was turned into the police and then the owner returned many years later would they be charged upon arrival with an offense?

Seems like lots of Canadians are leaving Canada lately and I wonder what happens if they don't live up to all the legislation on the way out.

53 Upvotes

84% Upvoted

24 comments sorted by

View all comments

61

u/DryPersonality7558 21d ago

if someone left a restricted at your place, and you didn't get an ATT or TSP you are not in a good spot legally.

52

u/milanskiv 21d ago

It was not his responsibility to get an ATT. It was the responsibility of the person who dropped it off. If OP has RPAL but no certificate and their location is not registered as alternative storage location for their friend, then OP is in an unauthorized possession of a prohibited firearm and should really get a lawyer for advice and not Reddit.

Hypothetically, op could shred the receiver set and not be in a possession of a prohibited firearm with no certificate and no alternative storage location… some could even argue that in the given scenario OP never had it …

2

u/SwampyUndies 19d ago

Hmm. Destroy it and claim it was like that before the move.

15

u/OCTS-Toronto 21d ago

I think the owner would be in trouble for not obtaining an ATT. And if they don't return to Canada then how could they be charged?

I suppose in might in possession of a firearm not registered to me. But what if it was a formerly non-restrictrd and now reclassified? This is all just for discussion....I don't have anyone else's guns.

9

u/DryPersonality7558 21d ago

Not a lawyer but if it was given to you while non restricted and is now prohibited that is a lot more defensible.. if it was always restricted then you hypothetically would be in hot water as you are in possession of it.

4

u/milanskiv 21d ago

Since this is AR15 in your scenario, whataboutism with “previously non restricted “ does not apply given that the amnesty is applicable to certificate holders only in case of restricted firearm.