C21 is going to prohibit The Canadian Cadets rifle.

[Doors of Perception]

The Canadian Cadets have an amazing marksmenship program for our youth. They compete in 10m air rifle and use the Crossman 853c and 953c. These rifles were created specifically for the program and are designed to operate at 495fps. The us models are 550 or so fps which makes them a firearm in Canada. Being identical, I suppose they would be included in the bill.

I purchased a 953c for my son to practice in our basement. Seems that the liberals are targeting my son for his ambition to one day serve in our military.

 

[1ABNDT]

Say goodbye to the Canadian Olympic shooting squad.

 

[grauhanen]

The Canadian Cadets have an amazing marksmenship program for our youth. They compete in 10m air rifle and use the Crossman 853c and 953c. These rifles were created specifically for the program and are designed to operate at 495fps. The us models are 550 or so fps which makes them a firearm in Canada. Being identical, I suppose they would be included in the bill.

I purchased a 953c for my son to practice in our basement. Seems that the liberals are targeting my son for his ambition to one day serve in our military.

The title C21 is going to prohibit The Canadian Cadets rifle incorrectly suggests that the proposed legislation will outlaw the single shot, sub-500 fps, non-replica air rifles. They are not being prohibited. Perhaps the OP has these confused with airsoft guns that are replica guns.

The air rifles in question are not Crosman products. They are made by Daisy.

 

[Ribstaylor]

The title C21 is going to prohibit The Canadian Cadets rifle incorrectly suggests that the proposed legislation will outlaw the single shot, sub-500 fps, non-replica air rifles. They are not being prohibited. Perhaps the OP has these confused with airsoft guns that are replica guns.

The air rifles in question are not Crosman products. They are made by Daisy.

Here is the wording bellow. It would appear this wording would indicate they would prohibit it. Unless I'm a moron and don't know legalize, if so please explain how this new wording doesn't prohibit air rifles like the one mentioned in this thread.

"1 (1) The definition replica firearm in subsection 84(1) of the Criminal Code is replaced by the following:
replica firearm means any device that is designed or intended to exactly resemble, or to resemble with near precision, a firearm that is designed or adapted to discharge a shot, bullet or other projectile at a muzzle velocity exceeding 152.#4 m per second and at a muzzle energy exceeding 5.#7 Joules, and that itself is not a firearm, but does not include any such device that is designed or intended to exactly resemble, or to resemble with near precision, an antique firearm; (réplique)
(2) Section 84 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (3.#1):
Certain firearms deemed to be prohibited devices
(3.#2) For the purposes of sections 99 to 101, 103 to 107 and 117.#03, a firearm is deemed to be a prohibited device if
(a) it is proved that the firearm is not designed or adapted to discharge a shot, bullet or other projectile at a muzzle velocity exceeding 152.#4 m per second or at a muzzle energy exceeding 5.#7 Joules; and
(b) the firearm is designed or intended to exactly resemble, or to resemble with near precision, a firearm, other than an antique firearm, that is designed or adapted to discharge a shot, bullet or other projectile at a muzzle velocity exceeding 152.#4 m per second and at a muzzle energy exceeding 5.#7 Joules."

 

[garmic]

I dont think it will apply to cadet rifles or any conventionally styled airguns whether or not they have over 500fps variations of the same rifle. It sounds like any replicas that have action carriers or trigger frames that kits available on line can be used with to create what is referred to as a ghost gun.

 

[Doors of Perception]

Here is the wording bellow. It would appear this wording would indicate they would prohibit it. Unless I'm a moron and don't know legalize, if so please explain how this new wording doesn't prohibit air rifles like the one mentioned in this thread.

"1 (1) The definition replica firearm in subsection 84(1) of the Criminal Code is replaced by the following:
replica firearm means any device that is designed or intended to exactly resemble, or to resemble with near precision, a firearm that is designed or adapted to discharge a shot, bullet or other projectile at a muzzle velocity exceeding 152.#4 m per second and at a muzzle energy exceeding 5.#7 Joules, and that itself is not a firearm, but does not include any such device that is designed or intended to exactly resemble, or to resemble with near precision, an antique firearm; (réplique)
(2) Section 84 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (3.#1):
Certain firearms deemed to be prohibited devices
(3.#2) For the purposes of sections 99 to 101, 103 to 107 and 117.#03, a firearm is deemed to be a prohibited device if
(a) it is proved that the firearm is not designed or adapted to discharge a shot, bullet or other projectile at a muzzle velocity exceeding 152.#4 m per second or at a muzzle energy exceeding 5.#7 Joules; and
(b) the firearm is designed or intended to exactly resemble, or to resemble with near precision, a firearm, other than an antique firearm, that is designed or adapted to discharge a shot, bullet or other projectile at a muzzle velocity exceeding 152.#4 m per second and at a muzzle energy exceeding 5.#7 Joules."

Thanks how I interpreted as well.

 

[Suther]

I dont think it will apply to cadet rifles or any conventionally styled airguns whether or not they have over 500fps variations of the same rifle. It sounds like any replicas that have action carriers or trigger frames that kits available on line can be used with to create what is referred to as a ghost gun.

Air rifles that shoot >500fps are firearms. Do you agree with that?

Non-firearms that exactly resemble a firearm are going to be prohibited. Do you also agree with that?

Assuming you agree on the first two points, How would a non-firearm air rifle, that exactly resembles a firearm (even if that firearm is an air rifle) NOT be banned by bill C21?

The way I am reading it, if there is a >500fps variant of an air rifle the sub-500fps versions will be prohibited if this bill passes. If there is no >500fps variant then the sub-500fps gun doesn't change its legal standing in any way.

 

[Ribstaylor]

I dont think it will apply to cadet rifles or any conventionally styled airguns whether or not they have over 500fps variations of the same rifle. It sounds like any replicas that have action carriers or trigger frames that kits available on line can be used with to create what is referred to as a ghost gun.

Now someone who knows more then me can correct me. But the problem with that thinking is that Air guns are still considered firearms under the current law. They just fall into the unregulated category of firearms, so those that are above 366fps but bellow 500 fps. This goes for both paintball, airsoft and pellet/BB guns.

Here is the section the new wording replaces

"84(1) In this Part, “replica firearm” means any device that is designed or intended to exactly resemble, or to resemble with near precision, a firearm, and that itself is not a firearm, but does not include any such device that is designed or intended to exactly resemble, or to resemble with near precision, an antique firearm;":

Replaced with;

"1 (1) The definition replica firearm in subsection 84(1) of the Criminal Code is replaced by the following:
replica firearm means any device that is designed or intended to exactly resemble, or to resemble with near precision, a firearm that is designed or adapted to discharge a shot, bullet or other projectile at a muzzle velocity exceeding 152.#4 m per second and at a muzzle energy exceeding 5.#7 Joules, and that itself is not a firearm, but does not include any such device that is designed or intended to exactly resemble, or to resemble with near precision, an antique firearm; (réplique)"

These videos may help some understand the law a bit better. I'll end here saying I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, and my opinion of this and the videos are just that opinion.

[youtube]YT4jtjCVdpw[/youtube]
[youtube]q2oIWs_h3Vc[/youtube]

 

[Ex3dy]

Air rifles that shoot >500fps are firearms. Do you agree with that?

Non-firearms that exactly resemble a firearm are going to be prohibited. Do you also agree with that?

Assuming you agree on the first two points, How would a non-firearm air rifle, that exactly resembles a firearm (even if that firearm is an air rifle) NOT be banned by bill C21?

The way I am reading it, if there is a >500fps variant of an air rifle the sub-500fps versions will be prohibited if this bill passes. If there is no >500fps variant then the sub-500fps gun doesn't change its legal standing in any way.

With a small amount of oil every airgun is capable (there's that word again) of gaining 25%+ FPS, so anything 400fps+ would be "capable" of 500fps easily.

 

[grauhanen]

Below is the relevent section of Bill C-21.

Ensure mid-velocity 'replica' firearms are prohibited
Update the Criminal Code to ensure that any device, including an unregulated airgun that looks exactly like a conventional regulated firearm (i.e., shoots over 500 feet per second), is prohibited for the purposes of import, export, sale and transfer.
Current owners may keep their 'replicas' but cannot transfer them to anyone else.
No further 'replica' firearms could be imported into, or sold/transferred in Canada.
This amendment does not affect other types of airguns that do not exactly replicate a conventional regulated firearm.

h t t p s://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/cntrng-crm/frrms/c21-en.aspx

What this appears to mean is that replica firearms -- that is, those designed specifically to look exactly like "real" firearms -- will be prohibited.

Which "real" firearms do the Daisy air rifles in question look exactly like? For owners of sub-500 fps break barrel air rifles, for example, what "real" firearms do they look exactly like?

The Bill is after "real" firearm look-a-likes, not the Daisy 853 or 953, which don't look exactly like any "real" firearms.

 

[HuskyDude]

Say goodbye to the Canadian Olympic shooting squad.

I would much rather say Good Bye to the Turd and his bagget of employed Douche Bags.

And don't let the door hit them on the way out either.

 

[rifleman762]

Below is the relevent section of Bill C-21.

Ensure mid-velocity 'replica' firearms are prohibited
Update the Criminal Code to ensure that any device, including an unregulated airgun that looks exactly like a conventional regulated firearm (i.e., shoots over 500 feet per second), is prohibited for the purposes of import, export, sale and transfer.
Current owners may keep their 'replicas' but cannot transfer them to anyone else.
No further 'replica' firearms could be imported into, or sold/transferred in Canada.
This amendment does not affect other types of airguns that do not exactly replicate a conventional regulated firearm.

h t t p s://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/cntrng-crm/frrms/c21-en.aspx

What this appears to mean is that replica firearms -- that is, those designed specifically to look exactly like "real" firearms -- will be prohibited.

Which "real" firearms do the Daisy air rifles in question look exactly like? For owners of sub-500 fps break barrel air rifles, for example, what "real" firearms do they look exactly like?

The Bill is after "real" firearm look-a-likes, not the Daisy 853 or 953, which don't look exactly like any "real" firearms.

Where does the proposed bill state that only replicas of powder burners will be prohibited? Answer: it doesn't. Read the actual text, as quoted above. It clearly captures any sub-500 fps air gun that has a 500+ fps version.

 

[Suther]

Below is the relevent section of Bill C-21.

Ensure mid-velocity 'replica' firearms are prohibited
Update the Criminal Code to ensure that any device, including an unregulated airgun that looks exactly like a conventional regulated firearm (i.e., shoots over 500 feet per second), is prohibited for the purposes of import, export, sale and transfer.
Current owners may keep their 'replicas' but cannot transfer them to anyone else.
No further 'replica' firearms could be imported into, or sold/transferred in Canada.
This amendment does not affect other types of airguns that do not exactly replicate a conventional regulated firearm.

h t t p s://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/cntrng-crm/frrms/c21-en.aspx

What this appears to mean is that replica firearms -- that is, those designed specifically to look exactly like "real" firearms -- will be prohibited.

Which "real" firearms do the Daisy air rifles in question look exactly like? For owners of sub-500 fps break barrel air rifles, for example, what "real" firearms do they look exactly like?

The Bill is after "real" firearm look-a-likes, not the Daisy 853 or 953, which don't look exactly like any "real" firearms.

What you are missing is the fact that any air gun that is over 500fps IS a real firearm. The daisy 953c looks EXACTLY like the daisy 953, which is a real firearm. The 953 is 560fps, so it's a firearm according to the law: https://www.airgundepot.com/daisy-953-target-pro.html

I see no exemption in the bill for air rifles.

 

[nowarningshot]

It applies to anything the personal biases of the judge says.it applies to. Intentionally worded thus.

 

[chanman]

What you are missing is the fact that any air gun that is over 500fps IS a real firearm. The daisy 953c looks EXACTLY like the daisy 953, which is a real firearm. The 953 is 560fps, so it's a firearm according to the law: https://www.airgundepot.com/daisy-953-target-pro.html

I see no exemption in the bill for air rifles.

They will probably dodge by saying the 953c is neither a replica of a 953, nor designed to look like a 953, but that it is one and the same air gun. Most non-PAL air guns don't have separate model designations from the PAL airgun of the same design. I think the 953c might have different sights, but in the case of springers, it seems like a given that all they would have to do is show PAL and non-PAL rifles of the same model coming off the same line to make their argument since there's no Canadian equivalent of the German F-mark 'proof' mark. ie, there's no way to distinguish a 495 fps HW77 from a 950 fps HW77. It is an HW77.

If you expect otherwise, you underestimate the Teflon-like ability of the Libs to dodge bad press and self-inflicted wounds through the magic of vague phrasing and creative interpretation when it's to their advantage to do so.

 

[Ex3dy]

They will probably dodge by saying the 953c is neither a replica of a 953, nor designed to look like a 953, but that it is one and the same air gun. Most non-PAL air guns don't have separate model designations from the PAL airgun of the same design. I think the 953c might have different sights, but in the case of springers, it seems like a given that all they would have to do is show PAL and non-PAL rifles of the same model coming off the same line to make their argument since there's no Canadian equivalent of the German F-mark 'proof' mark. ie, there's no way to distinguish a 495 fps HW77 from a 950 fps HW77. It is an HW77.

If you expect otherwise, you underestimate the Teflon-like ability of the Libs to dodge bad press and self-inflicted wounds through the magic of vague phrasing and creative interpretation when it's to their advantage to do so.

Are you familiar with the Mossberg Blaze 47?

Let's not have a 12ga bore dia. repeat where we make an absolute claim and give billy a great sound bite to placate the masses.

 

[BeaverMeat]

I think my cadet squadron was the last to use .22 rifles... at the range in the high school basement. I remember going to Penhold and being handed an air rifle thinking “wtf is this”? Lol

 

[chanman]

Are you familiar with the Mossberg Blaze 47?

Let's not have a 12ga bore dia. repeat where we make an absolute claim and give billy a great sound bite to placate the masses.

Yeah, and the 715T and the M&P 15-22/other AR-shaped .22s. I'm well aware. I'm just pointing out that the vague phrasing and weasel words leave gigantic gaping loopholes in interpretation - I assume deliberately so so that they can avoid getting caught by any PR blowback. Don't forget the lovely 'variant' word that does all that lifting to get the Dragunov classified as an Kalishnikov 'variant'. You can just assume they'll use whatever definition and the widest or narrowest interpretation that is most politically expedient based on the circumstances of that day and scandal.

 

[grauhanen]

Where does the proposed bill state that only replicas of powder burners will be prohibited? Answer: it doesn't. Read the actual text, as quoted above. It clearly captures any sub-500 fps air gun that has a 500+ fps version.

The bill's purpose is to prohibit all replicas that look like real firearms. Replica firearms are not replicas of air rifles. Nevertheless, the current ambiguity of the language of the Bill ought to be made more clear in the months to come. The language of a Bill can be very different from the language of an Act, the final version that is passed into law. In any case, it's likely that this Bill will not be passed by the current Parliament given the likelyhood of Canadians going to the polls sooner rather than later.

On a more general note, the argument that the Daisy 953c looks like the Daisy 953 is a circular argument. If it's legal to own an over-500 fps Daisy 953 by virtue of having a PAL, would the same rifle in the Canadian "c" 953c version become a prohibited weapon, even though it only exactly mimics itself?

It's worth keeping in mind that it's primarily the "airsoft crowd" in Canada that seems more concerned with the related provisions in the Bill.

As I understand it, under current law air soft guns don't require the "orange tip" that's often required by law in other jurisdictions. This orange tip distinguishes an air soft replica from the "real McCoy," the genuine firearm it may replicate. The the UK, for example, air soft guns must have 60% of their visible surface in one of several specific colours -- orange, blue, neon green, for example.

For some details on pre-Bill C-21 air soft laws, see this 2017 video h ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6p3JpvoWMpU

In Canada, until the changes proposed in the new Bill, the law has required air soft guns to be within a certain MV and energy range to be immune from being considered a prohibited replica. As a result air soft guns could look very "real" -- just like the powderburning firearms they exactly look like.

As easily imagined, the trouble with air soft guns that look very much like genuine firearms is that people in general and law enforcement officers in particular can't easily tell the difference, especially under quickly moving circumstances. The new bill proposes to eliminate air soft guns that mimic real firearms. Perhaps this will require future air soft guns to have "orange tips" or have an easily identifiable colour scheme similar to that used in the UK.

 

[thepolinator]

The Canadian Cadets have an amazing marksmenship program for our youth. They compete in 10m air rifle and use the Crossman 853c and 953c. These rifles were created specifically for the program and are designed to operate at 495fps. The us models are 550 or so fps which makes them a firearm in Canada. Being identical, I suppose they would be included in the bill.

I purchased a 953c for my son to practice in our basement. Seems that the liberals are targeting my son for his ambition to one day serve in our military.

The cadet program is specifically excempt, but you are right that your son won't be able to own one.