Carrying S16 for SD

**DirkB** · 12-12-2021, 19:11

Originally Posted by BradTH

I am aware of the subsections you refer to, and yes, the reason for using your firearm is more important than the sec the firearm is licenced under.
I have always held that unless a court of law clarifies issues of interpretation or opinions, all interpretations and opinions made by "experts" or SC are only that ........... their opinions or interpretations.

But if indeed a crime, it must be clearly defined, avoiding any vagueness, according to this lawyer.

**Ds J** · 12-12-2021, 19:42

Very simple:

This is SA. I may defend myself with any means, provided it is not excessive force. Therefore I may use a shovel, or a plastic toy, or a branch, or a firearm taken from a criminal to defend myself.

Thus I also may defend myself with a S.16 firearm.

The trouble may start when the court decides that you deliberately got a S.16 firearm to do S.13 work.

**mic** · 12-12-2021, 20:18

I have told our provincial DFO exactly that. I WILL use my S16 firearm for SD as they refuse to move my current S13 over to S17 as I requested.

**Davidc** · 12-12-2021, 20:50

Originally Posted by mic

I have told our provincial DFO exactly that. I WILL use my S16 firearm for SD as they refuse to move my current S13 over to S17 as I requested.

Adding to that there was a report on GOSA FB if I recall correctly where a S13 was refused because the applicant already has a S16 that can fulfill that role.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**Ds J** · 12-12-2021, 21:49

Originally Posted by Davidc

Adding to that there was a report on GOSA FB if I recall correctly where a S13 was refused because the applicant already has a S16 that can fulfill that role.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We do not have a government which trusts us and serves our best needs. We also (often) do not have capable and willing LEOs etc

Hence we cannot reckon with logic and service as we would like to have it.

**ror123** · 14-12-2021, 09:04

The section of your license doesn't matter in a life threatening situation as long as the boxes are ticked based on the legal test (competency) as this is your framework for justifying legal use of force.

I am wondering, during the Oscar P case if the section of firearm used was raised in court? Will be interesting to see if it even matters in a court of law. I wasn't following the Oscar P case so closely.

Sent from my MAR-LX1M using Tapatalk

**curious george** · 14-12-2021, 09:14

From personal real life experience, the ONLY thing saps was interested in was whether my sec15 firearm was legally licensed, end of the story.

Edit* Very recently a friend and fellow forum member also used a S16 in a sd shooting incident, nobody from saps cared about which section it was licensed under.

**oafpatroll** · 14-12-2021, 09:17

Originally Posted by curious george

From personal real life experience, the ONLY thing saps was interested in was whether my sec15 firearm was legally licensed, end of the story.

I had exactly the same experience as this.

**Skaaphaas** · 14-12-2021, 09:21

It was an issue, SAPS wouldn’t have attempted to change the law on it with their latest round of proposed amendments.

**GAZZAMCK** · 14-12-2021, 09:22

Originally Posted by curious george

From personal real life experience, the ONLY thing saps was interested in was whether my sec15 firearm was legally licensed, end of the story.

Edit* Very recently a friend and fellow forum member also used a S16 in a sd shooting incident, nobody from saps cared about which section it was licensed under.

My DFO as uninformed and useless as he is, has explicitly stated he would arrest me for 1) carrying a sect 16
2) not having my license on me

I couldnt even apply for a duplicate, as he told me to wait three weeks

As much as I know the law and would love a wrongful arrest payout, HIV and AIDS in the holding cell is forever lol