10. (1) An individual may transport a non-restricted firearm only if

(a) except in the case of a muzzle-loading firearm that is being transported between hunting sites, it is unloaded; and

(b) in the case of a muzzle-loading firearm that is being transported between hunting sites, its firing cap or flint is removed.

(2) Subject to subsection (3), an individual may transport a non-restricted firearm in an unattended vehicle only if
I would not attempt this...
Here is an excerpt from the Storage, Display, Transportation and Handling of Firearms by Individuals Regulations (SOR/98-209)

(a) when the vehicle is equipped with a trunk or similar compartment that can be securely locked, the non-restricted firearm is in that trunk or compartment and the trunk or compartment is securely locked; and

(b) when the vehicle is not equipped with a trunk or similar compartment that can be securely locked, the non-restricted firearm is not visible from outside the vehicle and the vehicle, or the part that contains the non-restricted firearm, is securely locked.

You become the vehicle, and the firearm is visible...

(3) If, in a remote wilderness area that is not subject to any visible or otherwise reasonably ascertainable use incompatible with hunting, an individual is transporting a non-restricted firearm in an unattended vehicle that is not equipped with a trunk or similar compartment that can be securely locked, and the vehicle or the part of it that contains the non-restricted firearm cannot be securely locked, the individual shall ensure that the non-restricted firearm

(a) is not visible; and

(b) is rendered inoperable by a secure locking device, unless the individual reasonably requires the non-restricted firearm for the control of predators.

These above restrictions apply to an unattended vehicle.

OK then...go for it.

I like to poke the bear.

So far as I understand it you should be able to carry a non restricted firearm as long as it is in a case (out of site and under your direct control)... However a simple phone call to the CFO should clear up any questions you have. They will answer your questions definitively and provide you with the proper legislation as to if you can or cannot. Also there are municipal by laws to consider when carrying a fire arm.

I called the Canadian Firearms Program, they could find nothing so they transferred me to the CFO. My called was answered by a very rude woman who told me contrary to the transportation regulations that along with being unloaded, firearms MUST be out of sight. There is no regulation stating this... it is merely a suggestion. The call lasted about 30 seconds.

I checked the city bylaws which have nothing extra concerning transportation.

So then I googled the question and came across this post regarding transportation by bicycle:

"I have been requested to address your questions that relate to the legal transportation of a non-restricted firearm on a bicycle.

The requirements for transporting a non-restricted firearm on a bicycle are the same as in a motor vehicle. As per the Firearms Act a non-restricted firearm must be unloaded. As you are transporting the firearm and not storing it you are not required by law to have a trigger lock on it. That being said the more precautions you take will only make matters better. My suggestion is to 1) Unload the firearm—mandatory--, 2) Trigger lock or remove the bolt, and 3) Have the firearm in a lockable hard sided firearm case. Suggestions 2 and 3 are above and beyond what is required by the Firearms Act but in the case of firearm safety more is better. If you meet these requirements and you have a valid firearms license and registration you will not be breaking any laws with regards to the transportation of a non-restricted firearm. The likelihood of being stopped by a Police Officer while you are transporting your firearm on a bicycle is very high. If you are seen you can count on being pulled over and spoken to. As I mentioned earlier you are not breaching the transportation requirements but it is not common to see someone on a bicycle with a firearm and for the safety of all persons involved I would imagine you would be stopped and spoken to.

I hope this information is of assistance to you. Please feel free to contact me if you have any further questions.

Cst L. John Burke #2890
Firearm Support Unit
Calgary Police Service"

Sure it's stupid, but why not exercise the ability and normalize the carrying of non-restricted?

When I was 17, I bought a .22 semi-automatic rifle on my lunch break from school. I walked the rifle back to school in a soft sided case to attend afternoon classes. I brought it into the office and told the secretary that they should keep the rifle in the office till after school, just so I didn't have it in my locker.
After school, I walked home with it in the case.
I lived in a major city, and this was an inner city school.
I don't imagine the same thing could be done today.

What we could do back in the day, compared to what we could do now, is a very different thing indeed!

When I was living up in the middle of no where, it was very very common to be or see folks carrying and not much was thought about it, however even there, certain spots, area's and or business it was considered off-limits.

I think there is a difference between poking a bear and bringing the wrath of a SWAT team onto you. Unfortunately, when it comes to guns, legal doesn't always equal smart to do. After all the mass shootings at public places, people are very edgy with seeing people with guns in the city! I would start your stop watch to see how long it would take before someone calls 911.

From the Criminal Code of Canada....

" 86. Careless use of firearm, etc.

Careless use of firearm, etc.

86. (1) Every person commits an offence who, without lawful excuse, uses, carries, handles, ships, transports or stores a firearm, a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device or any ammunition or prohibited ammunition in a careless manner or without reasonable precautions for the safety of other persons.

There are times when one may want to test the law and to pull the tail of the bear... to do so precipitously without due diligence and without forethought is just plain stupid. To do what you propose may lead to personal legal issues. What you propose to do would DEFINITELY lead the public to fear and condemn your actions and provide more ammunition to the "anti's". Because I can... as a rationale would NOT go well in the court of public opinion. This is a stupid idea.

JAB

I'm with JAB and others on this one all the way /// Back in the day I personally carried an AR15-A1 with a duffle containing 25 x30rnd mags on a City bus in downtown London, ON weekly to go to the last stop & hike to the range, all while wearing BDU bottoms & combat boots no less, a few eye brows - yes, but act in an amicable manner & all was good. Hell I even regularly cycled in Lloydminster to the range, open carry across my back at 16 years old - never a question /// That said - these are different times, I think you'd just as likely get your self shot, or cause a mass panic if you tried this, at the very least you'll make National news as they take you & the group down /// While I do admire your spirit M590a1, there is a lot more liberals out there than you seem to give credit for, all backed up by a very well armed & determined quasi Police State with a very liberal media to script with much drama for the rest of them to nod in approval to, so please, I implore you - don't do this /// The timing is not right & it only strengthens the liberal minded position

Respectfully, and With Out Prejudice,

Twenty3rdPsalm

Don't hold back JAB, tell him what you really think 😀

This is similar to OH&S legislation which I do know a lot about. There are many regulations about what a company and an individual must do and what they must not do. Not everything conceivable is identified under the "must-nots".

In most court cases I have reviewed, the crown prosecutor did not reference the more Complicated Code or all of the possible "must-nots". They instead referenced the very general Section 2 of the Act,

2(1) Every employer shall ensure, as far as it is reasonably practicable for the employer to do so,
(a) the health and safety of
(i) workers engaged in the work of that employer, and
(ii) those workers not engaged in the work of that employer but present at the work site at which that work is being carried out, and
(b) that the workers engaged in the work of that employer are aware of their responsibilities and duties under this Act, the regulations and the adopted code."

Why do they do this even when an employer made an obvious error in judgement or omission? It is a simple statement that you gotta do what you gotta do to keep people safe and if someone got hurt, then you obviously didn't do everything you could have. They don't use the more difficult Sections to prove out.

For this reason, I JAB makes a good point. Most legislation has a catch-all phrase that a Crown Prosecutor can apply to most situations to ensure the "Spirit" and not just the "Letter" of the law is being met.

M590a1 please reconsider this and make the choice to NOT do this. Yes, technically legally you may have every right to do this. However the ensuing krap storm would be to the detriment of all of us law abiding gun owners. Yes we need to protect our rights, but this is not protecting them, as you said it is poking the bear. Poke the bear and you risk getting "eaten".

We just got rid of the LGR, why give the liberal media more crap they can sling? I don't hide that I am a shooter, but I sure don't advertise it either. With today's mentality the first person to see you would have 911 dialed up in a heartbeat.