Firearms Charges Defence
Nanaimo & All of BC
Charged with a firearms offence? These charges can carry significant sentences and a lifetime prohibition on possessing firearms. Get experienced defence before you say anything.
Firearms Defence Lawyers — Nanaimo, Vancouver Island & BC
Firearms offences occupy a unique and technically demanding area of criminal law. The Criminal Code, the Firearms Act, and the Storage, Display, Transportation and Handling of Firearms by Individuals Regulations together create a dense regulatory framework — licence requirements, storage obligations, transportation rules, prohibited and restricted classifications — and a conviction for breaching any of them can carry serious consequences, including significant sentences and a lifetime prohibition on possessing firearms.
At Zargarian Litigation, Babak Zargarian and Zoe Arghandewal have defended clients facing firearms charges across Nanaimo, Vancouver Island, and throughout British Columbia. These cases often involve complex Charter issues — unreasonable search and seizure (s. 8), arbitrary detention (s. 9), right to counsel (s. 10(b)) — and technical arguments about classification, licensing, and regulatory compliance. A firearms charge that appears straightforward on its face may be defended on grounds that are not obvious without careful analysis of the disclosure and a fulsome understanding of all the overlapping statutes and cases.
When you call, you will speak directly with an experienced criminal defence lawyer — never a student, assistant, or junior associate. We assess the Crown’s case thoroughly, identify the issues, and advise you on your realistic options. We have secured many strong results for firearms clients — from charges being dropped entirely to criminal records being avoided.
Where We Practise Nanaimo · Courtenay & the Comox Valley · Campbell River · Port Alberni · Across BC
How Firearms Are Classified Under the Criminal Code
A “firearm” is defined under s. 2 of the Criminal Code as a barrelled weapon from which a shot, bullet, or other projectile can be discharged and that is capable of causing serious bodily injury or death, or anything that can be adapted for that purpose. Whether a specific item meets this definition is a question of law that has been the subject of significant litigation.
Section 84 of the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act divide firearms into three categories. The classification of the specific firearm in your case is a legal determination — and it is not always as simple as it appears. This is also a politically sensitive area of law: classifications have shifted over the years through regulation, and what was lawful to possess yesterday may not be today.
Non-Restricted Firearms
Ordinary rifles and shotguns that do not meet the criteria for restricted or prohibited classification. Most long guns — hunting rifles, shotguns — fall here. Require a valid Possession and Acquisition Licence (PAL). Subject to safe storage and transportation rules.
Restricted Firearms
Handguns not meeting the prohibited definition, and certain semi-automatic rifles and shotguns designated restricted by regulation. Require a PAL with a restricted endorsement and an Authorization to Transport (ATT) for most movements. May only be discharged at approved ranges.
Prohibited Firearms
Fully automatic firearms, handguns with barrels 105mm or shorter or that discharge .25 or .32 calibre ammunition, and any firearm converted from semi-auto to full-auto. Possession is a criminal offence.
As the Supreme Court of Canada recognized in R v Nur, 2015 SCC 15, firearms offences capture a wide range of conduct — from purely technical regulatory non-compliance to serious criminality. Where on that spectrum your case falls matters enormously, and it is something we assess carefully from the outset.
Firearms Offences Under the Criminal Code
Firearms offences in Canada are prosecuted under the Criminal Code of Canada. Sentences vary significantly depending on the charge, the circumstances, and the accused’s background. Understanding what the Crown must prove on each charge is where the defence begins.
Using a firearm while committing or attempting to commit an indictable offence. This is a standalone offence charged in addition to the underlying offence. It captures any use — displaying, brandishing, pointing, or discharging — of a firearm in connection with the commission of another crime. Examples include a shooting, a road rage incident, or a domestic violence situation involving a firearm.
Up to 14 years; consecutive to any other sentence
Using, carrying, handling, shipping, transporting, or storing a firearm contrary to the applicable regulations, in a careless manner, or without reasonable precautions for the safety of other persons. The most common scenario is improper storage — particularly where a firearm is found accessible with ammunition nearby.
The storage requirements are set out in the Storage, Display, Transportation and Handling of Firearms by Individuals Regulations. Non-restricted firearms (s. 5) must be stored unloaded, with at least one of: a secure locking device, bolt removed, or locked container — and not readily accessible to ammunition. Restricted firearms (s. 6) must be stored unloaded, with a locking device and in a locked container or vault, and ammunition separately secured. All three conditions apply together for restricted firearms.
Technical regulatory compliance is a complete answer to this charge. Whether the specific storage arrangement met the applicable requirement is often the central question.
Up to 2 years (summary); up to 5 years (indictment)
Pointing a firearm — whether loaded or unloaded — at another person without lawful excuse. Intent to alarm or threaten is not required. The Crown need only prove the act of pointing. Commonly charged alongside assault or uttering threats where a firearm was produced during a confrontation.
Up to 5 years imprisonment
Possessing any firearm without holding a valid licence (PAL) authorizing its possession, or without being the holder of a registration certificate for a restricted or prohibited firearm. This charge may arise where a person inherits a firearm, borrows one, or never obtained or renewed a licence.
The Crown must prove: (1) possession; (2) the item is a firearm; and (3) the accused did not hold the required authorization. Possession is defined under s. 4(3) of the Criminal Code as knowledge of the item and some measure of control over it — it includes constructive and joint possession and requires more than mere physical proximity.
Up to 5 years imprisonment (indictment)
A more serious version of s. 91. The Crown must prove the accused knew their possession was unauthorized. This is a specific intent element — knowledge that the possession is unauthorized must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Applies to prohibited and restricted firearms where the accused knows they are not licensed or registered to possess them.
This charge arises in the context of prohibited firearms — handguns, modified semi-automatics, and sawed-off firearms — where the prohibited nature of the weapon is known to the accused.
Up to 10 years imprisonment (indictment)
Possessing a loaded prohibited or restricted firearm, or an unloaded prohibited or restricted firearm together with readily accessible ammunition, without being the holder of an authorization or licence permitting possession in that place. “Readily accessible” is interpreted broadly — in R v Felawka, 2014 BCCA 385, the BC Court of Appeal confirmed that ammunition stored in the same bag as an unloaded firearm was sufficient to establish the offence.
Up to 10 years imprisonment (indictment)
Manufacturing, transferring, or offering to transfer a firearm or prohibited weapon while knowing the transfer is not authorized. Trafficking does not require a commercial element — a single unauthorized transfer can ground the charge. This offence is treated seriously by the Crown and courts and typically results in significant custodial sentences.
Up to 10 years imprisonment
Transferring a firearm, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device, or prohibited ammunition to any person otherwise than under the authority of and in accordance with the Firearms Act. A licensing or registration deficiency on the part of either party to the transfer can ground this charge.
Up to 5 years imprisonment
Discharging a firearm at a person with intent to wound, maim, disfigure, endanger life, or prevent arrest. One of the most serious firearms offences. Examples include shootings, road rage incidents, and domestic violence situations. Requires specific intent — the Crown must prove what the accused intended when they fired.
Up to 14 years or life imprisonment
Possessing any firearm, cross-bow, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device, or prohibited ammunition while subject to a court order prohibiting that possession. Prohibition orders are routinely imposed following domestic assault convictions, drug charges, and other criminal convictions.
The existence of the prohibition order and the fact of possession are usually not contested — the defence typically turns on Charter arguments or the scope of the order.
Up to 10 years imprisonment
Firearms Prohibition Orders in BC — How We Can Help
A firearms prohibition order is one of the most significant consequences of a criminal conviction for many clients — particularly hunters, sport shooters, collectors, and people who use firearms for work. We can help with all stages: making submissions against the imposition of an order, applying to lift or vary an existing order, and defending against breach allegations. The framework under the Criminal Code is set out below.
Under s. 109 of the Criminal Code, a firearms prohibition order is mandatory on conviction for any designated offence. Designated offences include indictable offences involving violence or threatened violence, all drug trafficking and production offences, and most serious firearms offences. The court has no discretion — it must impose the order.
A s. 109 order prohibits the person from possessing any firearm, cross-bow, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device, or prohibited ammunition. The duration is: 10 years for a first designated offence; lifetime for a second or subsequent designated offence or where the offence involves bodily harm, use of a firearm, or was prosecuted by indictment and carries a maximum of 10 years or more.
Because the order is mandatory, the defence focus at sentencing shifts to: (a) whether the conviction is for a designated offence in the first place — this is a legal question that should always be verified; and (b) whether it is a first or subsequent designation for the purpose of duration. Effective submissions on these questions can affect whether the order is lifetime or 10 years, which is a significant difference for a client who wishes to eventually possess firearms again.
Where s. 109 does not apply, the court may impose a discretionary prohibition order under s. 110. This applies to convictions for offences involving the use, carriage, or handling of a firearm, as well as to certain summary conviction offences. The court considers whether making the order is appropriate given the circumstances of the offence and the offender.
Unlike s. 109, a s. 110 order is not automatic. For some unlawful storage convictions, the prohibition is discretionary — which means we can make submissions on whether any order should be made at all, and if one is made, on its duration (up to 10 years). Where the client has a legitimate reason to possess firearms — employment, rural living, hunting — those submissions carry real weight.
Section 113 allows a court to partially lift a prohibition order to permit a person to possess specified non-restricted firearms for the purpose of sustenance — hunting or trapping for food — or as a condition of employment where the person’s livelihood genuinely requires it. This is the primary mechanism by which a person subject to a prohibition can regain any limited access to firearms.
The legal test under s. 113 requires the applicant to satisfy the court on two grounds: (1) that they need a firearm for sustenance or that their employment genuinely requires it; and (2) that an order lifting the prohibition is not contrary to the public interest. An application under s. 113 requires careful preparation and legal argument.
Section 111 allows a peace officer, firearms officer, or Chief Firearms Officer to apply to a provincial court judge for an order prohibiting a person from possessing firearms — without any criminal charge or conviction. This is a preventive mechanism, not a punishment. It can be sought where there are reasonable grounds to believe that it is not in the interests of the safety of the person or of any other person for the person to possess a firearm.
The procedure under s. 111 begins with a notice of application served on the subject. A hearing is scheduled at which the subject has the right to appear, lead or challenge evidence, and make submissions. At the hearing, the applicant bears the burden of demonstrating on a balance of probabilities that the safety concerns are founded.
If a s. 111 order is made, the person must surrender all firearms, prohibited weapons, restricted weapons, prohibited devices, and prohibited ammunition. The order can be appealed. A person subject to a s. 111 application should retain counsel immediately — the order can be imposed quickly and its consequences are immediate and far-reaching, even though no charge has been laid.
Section 117.02 is an exception to the general requirement for a search warrant. It gives a peace officer authority to conduct a warrantless search of a person, vehicle, or place — and to seize any firearm or prohibited item found — where the officer has reasonable grounds to believe that a prohibition order has been violated and that delay in obtaining a warrant would be unsafe or impractical. This is a narrow power that requires both the reasonable grounds and the exigent circumstances to co-exist.
What constitutes “exigent circumstances” was addressed by the Supreme Court of Canada in R v Paterson, 2017 SCC 15, which confirmed that exigency requires genuine urgency making it impracticable to obtain a warrant — the officer’s belief must be based on objectively discernible facts, not a generalized sense of urgency. Where those conditions were not present at the time, the search may violate s. 8 of the Charter and any items seized may be excludable under s. 24(2).
Under s. 117.01, it is an offence to possess any firearm, cross-bow, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device, or prohibited ammunition while subject to a prohibition order made under ss. 109, 110, 111, or any other provision of the Code prohibiting possession.
The Crown must prove: (1) the existence of the prohibition order; (2) that the accused was aware of it; and (3) that the accused possessed an item within the scope of the order. Knowledge of the order is usually established by the record of the sentencing proceeding or surrender documentation, but it is an element the Crown must actually prove. The scope of the order — exactly what items are prohibited — is a question of law, and whether a specific item falls within the terms of a particular order is not always obvious.
Breach of a prohibition order is treated seriously by the Crown and courts. A conviction adds a new criminal record entry, typically triggers a further or extended prohibition order, and can result in a jail sentence. Where a client is subject to a prohibition order, any interaction with items that may be captured by its terms — including attending at locations where firearms are stored, handling a firearm in any context, or transporting a weapon — should be discussed with counsel first.
Up to 10 years imprisonment
How Firearms Charges Arise in BC
The following are common circumstances in which a charge begins — and the circumstances of discovery are often the most important legal issue in the case.
A vehicle stop is a common scenario in which a firearms charge arises. Police stop a vehicle for a traffic infraction or on suspicion — and during the interaction, a firearm becomes visible, or police seek consent to search, or they claim grounds to search incident to arrest. Firearms found in vehicles raise immediate possession questions (who knew, who controlled it) and often significant Charter questions about whether the search was lawful.
Where a firearm is found in a vehicle with multiple occupants, the Crown must identify who possessed it. Each occupant’s location relative to the firearm, the ownership of the vehicle, and what was said at the stop are all relevant.
Police responding to domestic calls or wellbeing checks may encounter firearms in residential settings. Where an assault or domestic disturbance is alleged, police may attend the home and observe firearms in plain view, or the caller may have told them about firearms on the property, or police may search following an arrest. Typically, any firearms found are seized and, if any potential legal issue exists, the owner is charged with unsafe storage (s. 86), unauthorized possession (s. 91), or — if subject to a prohibition order — breach (s. 117.01).
Domestic calls or wellbeing checks may also trigger a s. 111 application by police — seeking a pre-charge prohibition order — even where no criminal charge is laid or offence alleged. Retaining a lawyer early in a case involving firearms can prevent you making bad and permanent decisions on your own.
Careless storage charges under s. 86 may arise in one of several ways: police attend a home for a domestic call and observe firearms in an accessible location; a break-in results in stolen firearms and police investigate the storage conditions; or police execute a search warrant for another offence and find firearms stored in a manner that appears non-compliant.
The charge turns entirely on whether the specific storage arrangement met the requirements of the Storage Regulations. Homeowners often assume their storage is compliant without realizing the regulations require more — particularly for restricted firearms. Careful analysis of exactly how the firearms were stored, and exactly what the regulation requires, is important. You need a lawyer who understands all the overlapping rules and regulations.
Police obtain search warrants by swearing an Information to Obtain (ITO) before a justice, setting out their grounds for believing that evidence of an offence will be found at the location to be searched. A warrant authorizes the search — but its scope is limited to what is specified in it. A search conducted beyond the scope of the warrant, or based on an ITO that did not meet the legal standard, may be unlawful.
When police execute a search warrant, you are entitled to see it. Note the time, what police said, how the search was conducted, and what was taken. Do not consent to any search beyond the warrant’s terms and do not make any statements. The ITO — which is typically sealed at the time of the search — is something we obtain through the disclosure process and review carefully for legal sufficiency. A deficient ITO can lead to the warrant being quashed and the evidence excluded.
A common and often inadvertent route to a firearms charge is a lapsed or expired Possession and Acquisition Licence. Once a PAL expires, continued possession of any firearm — even a long gun that has been in the family for decades — becomes unauthorized possession under s. 91. Police typically discover the lapse through a routine records check following a stop or call, or through a complaint.
These cases often involve people who had no criminal intent whatsoever — the licence expired, renewal was overlooked, or the person was unaware of the requirement. While lack of intent is not a complete defence to unauthorized possession, the circumstances bear heavily on how the case can be resolved — and in many cases, these charges can be addressed without a criminal record.
Firearms charges frequently arise as a secondary charge in drug investigations. Where police execute a search warrant for drugs and find a firearm — particularly a loaded or prohibited firearm — charges of possession of a restricted or prohibited firearm with ammunition (s. 95) or weapons trafficking (s. 99) are commonly added. The combination of drug and firearms charges significantly increases the gravity of the jeopardy and the complexity of the defence.
In these cases, possession is often the central legal question — was the firearm in the accused’s possession, or in the possession of another person in the same space? The Charter issues from the drug search apply equally to the firearms evidence. These cases require careful coordination of the defence across all charges.
Defending Firearms Charges in BC
Every case is different. The right defence depends on the charge, the facts, and the evidence. Call now for an assessment of your specific case. Common defences include:
Firearms are frequently discovered during vehicle stops, home searches, or arrests. If police conducted a search without lawful authority — without a warrant, without valid grounds for a warrantless search, or in excess of the scope of a warrant — the search violates s. 8 of the Charter. Where a s. 8 breach is established, the firearm — often the only evidence in the case — may be excluded under s. 24(2), applying the three-part framework from R v Grant, 2009 SCC 32: the seriousness of the breach, the impact on the accused’s Charter-protected interests, and society’s interest in adjudication on the merits. A serious or deliberate violation is more likely to result in exclusion.
BC courts have excluded firearms evidence on this basis in a range of circumstances. In R v Nolet, 2011 BCCA 277, the Court of Appeal confirmed that where the grounds for a vehicle search were insufficient, evidence discovered in that search — including firearms — was subject to exclusion. In R v Kwok, 2015 BCCA 28, firearms seized following an unlawful entry were excluded as the breach was serious and the conduct fell below the standard expected of police. Police commonly rely on consent searches, plain view doctrine, and search incident to arrest — each has specific legal requirements that we scrutinize carefully in every disclosure.
Upon arrest or detention, police must immediately inform you of your right to retain and instruct counsel without delay and must provide you with a reasonable opportunity to do so before questioning: Charter s. 10(b). Where police failed to inform you of this right, delayed your access to a lawyer, or continued questioning after you invoked the right, any statement you made may be excluded under s. 24(2).
A s. 10(b) breach can also result in the exclusion of real evidence — including a firearm — where there is a sufficient temporal, causal, or contextual connection between the rights violation and the discovery of the evidence. In R v Edwards, 2017 ONCA 404, the Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed that real evidence obtained following a s. 10(b) breach is subject to the s. 24(2) analysis. In R v Pino, 2016 ONCA 378, the court made clear that real evidence need not causally flow from the breach to be subject to exclusion — a contextual or temporal connection is sufficient, and the court excluded real evidence obtained after a right to counsel violation even in the absence of strict causal flow.
A successful challenge to classification can defeat or significantly reduce a charge. The classification of a specific firearm as prohibited, restricted, or non-restricted is a question of law. Police and Crown sometimes misclassify firearms — particularly with modified or unusual weapons. Where the Crown relies on a classification that is wrong in law, the offence charged may not be made out.
Whether a particular item meets the legal definition of “firearm” under s. 2 of the Criminal Code is not always obvious. An expert report may be required — and can be challenged.
Possession under s. 4(3) of the Criminal Code requires both knowledge of the item and some measure of control over it. The Supreme Court of Canada confirmed in R v Morelli, 2010 SCC 8 that the knowledge and control elements are distinct requirements that the Crown must separately establish — awareness alone, without control, is not sufficient. Where a firearm is found in a shared space — a vehicle, home, or storage unit — the Crown must prove that the accused specifically knew of the firearm’s presence and had some measure of control over it. In multi-occupant situations, that is not automatically established. Possession arguments are especially powerful where the firearm was not found on the accused’s person.
Many firearms offences have licensing or authorization as an essential element of the Crown’s case. If the accused held a valid PAL, ATT, or other authorization at the time of the offence, the charge may not be made out. Licence status and whether the applicable authorization covered the specific firearm and circumstances are questions that should always be examined carefully.
Storage charges under s. 86 turn entirely on whether the applicable storage regulations were complied with. Whether the specific storage arrangement met the regulatory standard — and whether the Crown can prove it did not — is often the central question in these cases.
Where a conviction is likely, strong advocacy at sentencing can make a significant difference — including the difference between jail and a conditional sentence served in the community. The accused’s background, employment, family circumstances, Indigenous heritage (s. 718.2(e) Criminal Code, R v Gladue, [1999] 1 SCR 688), remorse, and rehabilitation potential are all relevant to sentence. Firearms prohibition orders, their duration, and whether a discretionary order should be made are also matters on which effective submissions can be made.
What Happens After a Firearms Charge in BC
Most people facing firearms charges have never been through the criminal court process. Understanding what happens at each stage helps you make informed decisions and prepares you for what is ahead.
Firearms charges almost always begin with a police search — of a vehicle, a home, or a person. If police contact you at any stage — at a traffic stop, at your door, or by phone — you have the right to remain silent and the right to retain and instruct counsel without delay. Exercise both rights before saying anything. Do not consent to any search and do not provide a statement until you have spoken with a lawyer.
If police have a search warrant, they are entitled to execute it. Note the time, what they said, whether they showed you the warrant, and what was taken. These details are critical to any subsequent Charter application. A lawyer retained at the investigation stage can advise you on how to conduct yourself and can begin building the defence before any charge is laid.
After arrest, police will either release you directly or hold you for a bail hearing. Release can take several forms: a promise to appear (s. 493), an undertaking with or without conditions (s. 503), or a release order following a hearing (s. 515). Under s. 503, if held for a hearing it must occur within 24 hours of arrest. Release conditions in firearms cases almost always include a prohibition on possessing firearms and weapons. For more serious charges, the Crown may seek strict residential conditions or detention.
Where the Crown seeks detention, a bail hearing proceeds before a judge. The Crown bears the burden of showing detention is justified on one of three grounds: primary (flight risk), secondary (public protection), or tertiary (maintaining public confidence in the justice system). Strong representation at the bail hearing matters — conditions imposed at release govern your daily life for the entire duration of the case, which may be a year or more.
A first appearance is not a trial. The early appearances in a criminal matter are procedural — they exist to set timelines and manage the file. You do not need to attend any of them. We appear on your behalf.
The critical work at this stage is obtaining and reviewing the Crown’s disclosure package. In a firearms case, disclosure typically includes the search warrant and Information to Obtain, police reports, photographs of the seized firearm, expert classification reports, and any statements made by the accused. Each document is reviewed for legal issues — the lawfulness of the search, compliance with warrant requirements, and the accuracy of any classification.
Where the disclosure reveals a Charter breach — an unlawful search (s. 8), a failure to advise of your right to counsel (s. 10(b)), or an arbitrary detention (s. 9) — a Charter application is brought before or at trial. The application requires written argument and a hearing before the trial judge.
Where a breach is proven, the remedy under s. 24(2) is not automatic — exclusion of the evidence requires the court to weigh three factors identified in R v Grant, 2009 SCC 32: (1) the seriousness of the Charter-infringing conduct; (2) the impact of the breach on the accused’s Charter-protected interests; and (3) society’s interest in adjudication on the merits. Deliberate or serious police misconduct weighs heavily in favour of exclusion. If the application succeeds and the firearm is excluded, the Crown often cannot prove its case and the charge cannot succeed.
Not every firearms case goes to trial. Where the Crown’s case has weaknesses — a questionable search, a possession argument, a classification issue — those can be leveraged in negotiations with Crown Counsel toward a withdrawal, a reduced charge, or a resolution that avoids a criminal record. Many firearms cases, including most storage and possession matters, resolve through negotiation rather than trial.
Alternative measures, peace bonds, and discharges are all outcomes available in appropriate cases. What is realistic depends on the specific charge, the strength of the Crown’s case, and your individual circumstances. We assess that picture honestly and advise you on what each option means.
Firearms trials proceed before a judge or a judge and jury. The Crown must prove every element of the offence beyond a reasonable doubt. The accused does not need to testify or prove anything. The key issues in many firearms cases are whether the search was lawful and whether the accused possessed the firearm — these are often the questions that determine the outcome.
The choice between judge alone and judge and jury is itself an important strategic decision that depends on the nature of the charge, the facts, and the specific legal issues in the case. We discuss this with every client in detail.
If convicted — whether after trial or by guilty plea — sentencing is a separate proceeding. The sentence depends on the specific charge, the circumstances, and the accused’s background. Strong advocacy at sentencing can make a significant difference — including the difference between jail and a conditional sentence served in the community, and between a criminal record and a discharge.
A prohibition order under s. 109 is mandatory on conviction for most serious firearms and designated offences, restricting possession for 10 years to life. Where a discretionary order under s. 110 is proposed instead, effective submissions can influence whether it is made at all and its duration. Although a prohibition is sometimes mandatory, it is not always — and even where it is imposed, a partial exemption for employment or sustenance purposes may be available under s. 113. We can help with all of that. Forfeiture of the seized firearm is also addressed at sentencing.
Common Questions About Firearms Charges in BC
Questions people commonly have after being charged with a firearms offence in British Columbia.
Not necessarily. Sentencing for firearms offences varies significantly depending on the specific charge, the circumstances, and the accused’s background. For offences like careless storage or unauthorized possession, a conditional sentence served in the community, or a discharge (a finding of guilt that does not result in a criminal record), is possible. For other charges, custodial sentences are more likely. The range of outcomes in firearms matters was discussed in R v Lam, 2021 BCCA 61, where the BC Court of Appeal confirmed that the surrounding circumstances — including how the firearm was used, the accused’s record, and the purpose of possession — are central to where in the range a sentence falls. Call us to discuss your situation.
Yes — but proving possession in a shared vehicle is not straightforward. The Crown must prove not only that you knew of the firearm’s presence but also that you had some degree of control over it. In a vehicle with multiple occupants, those elements are not automatically established. The location of the firearm, who the vehicle belongs to, what was said, and the circumstances of the stop are all relevant. DNA evidence on the firearm — or the absence of it — can also be a significant factor. We have experience in this scenario and have secured strong results for clients in this situation.
Yes — if police violated your Charter rights in discovering or seizing it. An unlawful search, an arbitrary detention, or a failure to advise you of your right to counsel can all result in the firearm being excluded under s. 24(2) of the Charter. Without the firearm in evidence, the Crown typically cannot prove its case. Charter arguments in firearms matters are among the most powerful and frequently successful defences available. Whether the grounds exist depends on the specific facts of the search — which is why reviewing the disclosure carefully is the first step.
A charge alone does not automatically revoke a PAL — but it can. The Chief Firearms Officer has authority to revoke a licence where the holder is subject to a prohibition order, or where the CFO has reasonable grounds to believe the holder is not eligible. On conviction for most serious offences, a prohibition order under s. 109 is mandatory and your licence will be revoked. On release conditions, a condition prohibiting weapons possession is standard in firearms cases. Speak to a lawyer early — the conditions attached to your release can be addressed at the bail stage.
A firearm seized by police is held as evidence pending the outcome of the case. On acquittal or stay, the firearm may be returned — the question of its return should be addressed with counsel as part of the resolution of the case. On conviction, forfeiture of the firearm is typically ordered at sentencing alongside the prohibition order. If you have a legitimate interest in a seized firearm, raise it with us early.
The rules are set out in the Storage, Display, Transportation and Handling of Firearms by Individuals Regulations. The requirements differ depending on whether the firearm is non-restricted or restricted.
Non-Restricted Firearms — s. 5 of the Regulations
A non-restricted firearm must be stored: (a) unloaded; (b) with at least one of the following — rendered inoperable by a secure locking device, rendered inoperable by removal of the bolt or bolt-carrier, or stored in a securely locked container or room that cannot readily be broken into; and (c) not readily accessible to ammunition — unless the ammunition is stored in a securely locked container that cannot readily be broken into. All three conditions apply together.
There are two exceptions: the locking/container requirement does not apply where the firearm is temporarily stored for predator or animal control in a place where it may lawfully be discharged; and neither the locking nor the ammunition requirement applies where the firearm is stored in a remote wilderness area not subject to any use incompatible with hunting.
Restricted Firearms — s. 6 of the Regulations
A restricted firearm must be stored: (a) unloaded; (b) rendered inoperable by a secure locking device and stored in a securely locked container that cannot readily be broken into — or stored in a vault, safe, or room specifically constructed or modified for the secure storage of restricted firearms; and (c) not readily accessible to ammunition, which must be stored in a securely locked container or in that same secure vault or room. All three conditions are cumulative.
The distinction matters: non-restricted storage requires one of three locking methods; restricted storage requires locking and secure containment together. Most compliant setups involve a locked gun safe with a trigger lock on the firearm and ammunition stored separately. If you have been charged under s. 86, call us — the specific language of the regulations matters and the charge is not always as straightforward as it appears.
No. You have the right to remain silent and you should exercise it. Anything you say to police — including explanations that seem innocent or helpful — can and will be used against you. Police are trained to elicit statements that help build their case. The time for telling your story is after you have retained a lawyer, reviewed the Crown’s evidence, and received legal advice on how to proceed. Do not provide a statement under any circumstances before speaking with a lawyer.
What We Have Achieved for Firearms Clients
Zargarian Litigation has defended clients facing firearms charges across British Columbia. Our results range from charges withdrawn before trial to acquittals and no-record outcomes.
Charges Dropped
Careless storage (s. 86) — charges dropped in multiple cases after regulatory analysis and negotiations with Crown.
Firearms Returned
Charges dropped and successful applications for return of seized firearms in multiple firearm forfeiture matters.
No Criminal Record
Clients facing storage and possession charges achieved discharge or negotiated resolution outcomes — criminal record avoided entirely.
Every case is different. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Call us to discuss the specific facts of your case.
What Our Clients Say
“Babak was professional, knowledgeable, friendly and compassionate. In court he is confident, determined, and an excellent defender. When we won our case, he congratulated us with the enthusiasm of someone who had been truly rooting for us, not just collecting a paycheck. He is the absolute best.”
— M.J.“I was working with a different lawyer for 9 months, and within a week of hiring Babak he made progress and had my case settled. He took the time to make sure I understood everything clearly, and actually listened to my story. Very happy with the service.”
— A.C.“An amazing criminal defence lawyer. After being charged with a case that was destined to ruin everything I have, Babak took it on without judgment, communicated thoroughly, and obtained the best possible resolution. I highly recommend him.”
— T.C.“Babak was fantastic — very professional and got me a better outcome than I could have imagined. I appreciate everything he did on my behalf.”
— G.V.“I am grateful for the time and effort Babak put into my case. He is professional, courteous, genuine, and very knowledgeable. He helped put my mind at ease when I was anxious and unsure. I would highly recommend him.”
— A.D.“Babak was organized, efficient, and knowledgeable. His years of experience combined with his great communication and work ethic makes for top notch legal representation.”
— N.A.Get in Touch
Call or send a message. No intake staff, no assistants. Everything you share is protected by solicitor-client privilege.
Confidential. No obligation.
250-713-8821All information shared with us is protected by solicitor-client privilege.