In Canada, anyone over the age of 18 can own as many firearms as they want provided they have taken a course, passed the exam and application procedure, and obtained what is known as a PAL. If they wish to own restricted weapons, such as handguns, they must take an additional component to their course and obtain an RPAL.
The bottom line is that unless an individual has some sort of criminal charges against him, or is a public safety risk, virtually anyone can own firearms.
We can ship them directly to each other, no FFL dealer required. Rifles and shotguns do not need to be registered any longer (once the bill passes the Senate). We cannot carry handguns, except to and from approved ranges, unless the handgun qualifies as an antique. There are certain prohibited weapons such as fully auto guns, handguns with very short barrels and in certain calibers, sawed off shotguns, etc.
An excellent summary of the basics. But the devil's in the details!
What KirkD's post fails to convey is the extraordinarily biased interpretation and application of the regulations, to the detriment of gun owners.
It is utterly common knowledge here in Canada that if your marriage fails, get the guns out of your name because if you don't, with just the slightest nudge from the ex's lawyer, the courts and police will.
Your home just got robbed? They broke into your safe? You will be charged at the very least with unsafe storage. Even if it took the thieves three days while you were away on holidays to break into your gun vault.
Someone at the Firearms Centre (anti gun bureaucrat) decides a certain gun, currently classified as legal as it meets all technical requirements, looks too much like some other "prohibited" guns? Reclassify and use the registry to find them and instruct the police to go confiscate the offending guns, no compensation. Problem solved.
Your 4 year old draws a picture of daddy with a gun, protecting her from the "bad guys and monsters" and find yourself arrested, strip searched, your home searched without a warrant and the rest of your family interviewed by police who won't even explain why. And not an apology to be found from any of the agencies involved. Not the elementary school, who knew the father and called social services, not the social services who called the police and are still "investigating" the family and not the police, who claimed the 4 year olds drawing was similar to other descriptions of a gun used in recent crimes.
What a simple summary of the laws doesn't tell you is the enthusiasm exhibited by the upper levels of law enforcement, all strata of social services, and the unthinking freedom fearing general population have for infringing on the rights of those who would disagree with them.
All of the above examples are happening now, in Canada.
It would be interesting to know if the zeal of the anti gun crowd has similarly got the best of them in GB and Australia. Are the laws easy to understand, for both layman and courts and are they applied in an even handed manner?
I have just edited this to say that, given Forum rules, perhaps this thread should have been posted in Misfires.
