Section 13 vs. Section 15 - Practically Speaking...

**cerop** · 13-05-2010, 08:29

Hi all,

My interpretation is that the "parameters" required in a situation before you can use a firearm to defend yourself are the same regardless of what type of license you have, i.e. Section 13 or Section 15. In other words, there must be no other alternative than having to draw your firearm, etc. Yes? Am I missing something?

So, my question is this: What is the point of having different licenses i.e. SD, Occasional Sport, Dedicated Sport, etc.? OK, dedicated status I can uderstand, because of the exclusions regarding ammunition, etc., but let's assume one handgun in this case.

Why would anyone bother applying specifically for a Section 13 as opposed to a Section 15, which "seemingly" has slightly less hoops to jump through?

I mean, at the end of the day, the circumstances under which you are allowed to draw and use your firearm in self-defense is the same under both licenses? i.e. if this is your LAST resort in ensuring survival, then the license type really is irrelevant.

What am I missing??

Again, and as always, open for debate ;-) If this has been raised in another thread, sorry...

**SSP** · 13-05-2010, 08:38

You are broadly correct. It makes no difference what the gun is licenced for. Strictly, you can use an unlawfully possessed firearm to defend yourself. That it is unlawfully possessed does not mean that your shooting in SD was not lawful.

Indeed, when I renewed the official view was that one of your handguns "had to" be licenced for SD.

**Mulligan** · 13-05-2010, 09:01

I think that the real difference comes with regards to your intentions. If you license your handgun for occasional sport-shooting, you shouldn't be carying it around with you where ever you go. I reckon if it can be proven that you carry you sporting firearm around with you where ever you go then you could be in for a little heat.

Just my two cents. Might not be worth much, but I personally won't be carrying my sporting handgun around with me unless it is to take it to the range or if I am going away on holiday where there is a high likely hood that I'll be able to stop off at a range or something.

**hjo** · 13-05-2010, 09:04

Hey,

Here's my take on it:

A firearm not licensed for SD may not be stored in a loaded state, this is probably not a deal breaker, until it comes to carrying it on your person. I would be very hesitant to carry a firearm licensed for sport shooting on me for self defense. All depends on your intention for use - but you'll have more options if going the SD route.

The other point would be that if you already have the max of 4 firearms licensed as a sport shooter, you can get a fifth under the SD license.

(Edit: I see Mulligan beat me to it)

**wormyzn** · 13-05-2010, 09:13

The major risk is been stopped by a nana police man who does not understand the law and how it works u end up with dwang.... Maybe some one with a bit more know can comment further.

I do know of a chap who used his sport firearm for SD one night, the duty officer said ok just make a statement that when you opened the safe to get a firearm you grabbed that one not your SD licence and used it as life was at risk and time was not on your side. Went to court and got off with Thumbs Up. !!

**SSP** · 13-05-2010, 09:15

Carrying is not the same as storage.

There is nothing in the act or regs which prohibits or limits the carrying of a sport gun. Your licence entitles you to be in possession. If you wanted to, and could carry them concealed or in a bag you could walk around all day with all your guns.

**cerop** · 13-05-2010, 09:18

Originally Posted by ssp

You are broadly correct. It makes no difference what the gun is licenced for. Strictly, you can use an unlawfully possessed firearm to defend yourself. That it is unlawfully possessed does not mean that your shooting in SD was not lawful.

Exactly my point! I don't agree that you should be carrying your sport firearm all over the place, neither should you use it for SD, but I think in a situation where you need to use one (or anything for SD), the type of license goes out the window.

Originally Posted by Mulligan

I think that the real difference comes with regards to your intentions. If you license your handgun for occasional sport-shooting, you shouldn't be carying it around with you where ever you go. I reckon if it can be proven that you carry you sporting firearm around with you where ever you go then you could be in for a little heat.

Just my two cents. Might not be worth much, but I personally won't be carrying my sporting handgun around with me unless it is to take it to the range or if I am going away on holiday where there is a high likely hood that I'll be able to stop off at a range or something.

I 100% agree you shouldn't carry a sport firearm with you always, or as a SD firearm, but in terms of the Act I could, because it doesn;t make specific provisions as to what firearms you may carry when, it only specifies the manner in whcih firearms should be carried in public. But like I said, I agree with your statement.

Originally Posted by hjo

The other point would be that if you already have the max of 4 firearms licensed as a sport shooter, you can get a fifth under the SD license.

But only one handgun if I am not mistaken, i.e. if you have a handgun for sport, then you cannot have another handgun for SD.

Would it be possible to, for example, re-license a firearm you have for sport as an SD firearm?

**Mulligan** · 13-05-2010, 09:27

Originally Posted by cerop

Would it be possible to, for example, re-license a firearm you have for sport as an SD firearm?

According to my DFO yes. It's called a change of Purpose/Circumstance application or something along those lines.

**shooter** · 13-05-2010, 09:29

You CAN have a handgun for SD and one for occasional sport even if you are not dedicated. My question is: What are they going to charge you with for carrying a sport gun?