new belt fed coming so now rpd????

[fenceline]

As a matter of fact they do and it would have to be proof beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a very high threshold.

If and when the semi RPDs are approved, and assuming the RCMP decides to continue with this frankly silly interpretation of a pretty clear part of the statute, I will happily challenge them pro bono...

Lawyers who shoot from the hip are, well, awesome. Haha

[bfiles]

Lol^^^^^

[jonythebeast]

I read on another rpd thread the following: "a belt fed machine gun designed to fill the need for a role for a SAW style weapon". Under this reasoning the RCMP prohibited them, my question is where in the FA does it say belt feds are prohibited? This seems like something the RCMP just made up one day.

[fenceline]

I read on another rpd thread the following: "a belt fed machine gun designed to fill the need for a role for a SAW style weapon". Under this reasoning the RCMP prohibited them, my question is where in the FA does it say belt feds are prohibited? This seems like something the RCMP just made up one day.

There isn't anything. You assume the belt fed issue is the reason.

Firearms, specifically rifles, can only get banned for specific reasons by the RCMP...

1 full auto or easily converted to full auto

2 guns originally manufactured as full auto converted to full auto

3 guns that are a variant of a rifle that where named prohibited by the firearms act through an order in council

That is how the law is written. The law is poorly written throughout, hence the classifications are difficult to understand. As the law is not logical, the classifications appear not to be logical, but they do follow the pattern as dictated by the law.

[haha49]

There isn't anything. You assume the belt fed issue is the reason.

Firearms, specifically rifles, can only get banned for specific reasons by the RCMP...

1 full auto or easily converted to full auto

2 guns originally manufactured as full auto converted to full auto

3 guns that are a variant of a rifle that where named prohibited by the firearms act through an order in council

That is how the law is written. The law is poorly written throughout, hence the classifications are difficult to understand. As the law is not logical, the classifications appear not to be logical, but they do follow the pattern as dictated by the law.

You can convert most rilfes into machine guns if you know how it works. Now making it work well as one that's a whole another ball game. You just slam fire so what's that a firing pin stuck forward well some glue or a weld can do that there easy to convert done every semi auto is easy to convert that way 1 weld or some glue pull the bolt back and let you it will keep firing till it jams or the magazine is empty. so... ya... It's silly...

[fenceline]

You can convert most rilfes into machine guns if you know how it works. Now making it work well as one that's a whole another ball game. You just slam fire so what's that a firing pin stuck forward well some glue or a weld can do that there easy to convert done every semi auto is easy to convert that way 1 weld or some glue pull the bolt back and let you it will keep firing till it jams or the magazine is empty. so... ya... It's silly...

Did I not just say the law wasn't based on logic?

[cdm123]

You can convert most rilfes into machine guns if you know how it works. Now making it work well as one that's a whole another ball game. You just slam fire so what's that a firing pin stuck forward well some glue or a weld can do that there easy to convert done every semi auto is easy to convert that way 1 weld or some glue pull the bolt back and let you it will keep firing till it jams or the magazine is empty. so... ya... It's silly...

Buy the way STFU or all semi's will be prohibited next.

[Leonidas]

An intentional malfunction is hardly true full auto fire, you would be lucky not to have the gun blow up from firing out of battery. I wouldn't worry too much, I worked in the lab and not even the RCMP techs are that stupid.

[Leonidas]

Double post...

[ckc123]

So.. in the "firearm in service prior to 1945" and the "belts being manufactured after 1945" (Aka. reproduction and "stamping date" on belts)..

then how come MG34-MG42 belts which are "post-war mfg" are legal..

http://www.marstar.ca/dynamic/produc...roductid=78627