Why are pump guns under 660mm suddenly legal?

Armedsask said:
Tiriaq, so the RCMP have stated that a altering pump action shotgun to be under 660mm OAL, by adding a pistol grip, is not considered "otherwise"?

This makes no sense. You can see why I am confused. Normally I just read the law and go by that but you people seem to be claiming that is incorrect?
Click to expand...

This would seem to be the case. Look, I am only commenting on what has been reported here; I don't own one of these shortguns, and don't have a need or use for one.
Personally, I tend to agree with your interpretation, that "otherwise" would include substitution of stocks.
Dlask is selling the pistol gripped 8 1/2" barrelled Remingtons openly, and the transfers are being approved, as non-restricted. In would seem that these Remingtons were not acquired by him as barreless, stockless actions, so their original configuration was not as they are being sold. Having held a business licence for many years, and being aware of the scrutiny to which a business can be subjected, there is no way that Dlask would be selling these guns if it was not legal to do so.
From reading the loooooooong thread discussing these shortguns, there is no doubt that there is an interpretation establishing that they are not prohibited, and that some versions are non-restricted.
As KaiBosh has suggested, most any CO or LEO, who sees the gun is going to assume that it is illegal.
 
tiriaq said:
Dlask is selling the pistol gripped 8 1/2" barrelled Remingtons openly
Click to expand...

NO, this is a key point. These shotguns are being sold with the normal stock, and a pistol grip is included with the purchase as a separate item. On a shotgun with a 16" barrel (for example), installing the pistol grip would still leave you with an OAL more than 26". That is not the case with a 12/5" barrel, and that is the point in contention.
 
JohnC said:
IIrC there was a post stating that in Saskatchewan, at least, CO's had been specifically briefed that the DLASK pistol gripped 8 1/2 " was non-restricted
Click to expand...

You are playing the telephone game here. The CO's were informed of the legal status of the shotguns as they came in the box, with SHORT BARRELS. Please point to a thread where it said the CO's were told that the firearm was legal with a pistol grip and under the required minimum 26" OAL.
 
Dlask Arms Shotgun Exchange Forum advert (October 2007)

http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=189735&highlight=dlask

…Those guns come with regular Remington 870 stock attached to it and Hogue pistol grip stock on the side. In this configuration, overall length is just over 660mm and it is clearly non-restricted. We are asking you to please keep it this way until we have court ruling confirming its non-restricted status in pistol grip with 8 ½” barrel configurations...

In this excerpt from the manufacturer they are clearly stating DON'T DO IT...DON'T GO UNDER 660mm. I vaguely remember a similar statement from CanAM as well.

These manufacturers are covering their ass. COVER YOURS. DON'T DO IT.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, Sawed Off. I think that sums it up and there is nothing more to say on this matter. If I recall Dlask has a court case 'pending' to settle this issue, it may be years away but in the meantime the message is clear.
 
It's very obvious after so many discussion:

1. There is NO clear legal regs defining the length of AFTER MARKET stocks.

2. There is sections of definition of restricted firearm define the length of OUT OF BOX STOCKS.

The law was writen when there isn't so many after market stocks so there is nothing in law about it. However, at that time, the sawed off barrels were popular so the length of barrel was well defined.

Common problem in many legal areas. Just remember, the law wouldn't define the legal length of your broom stick because it's not a concern.

The law wouldn't define the length of the AFTER MARKET STOCK as long as it is not a concern.

That's how legal system works.
 
When I received mine from Dlask it came with the pistol grip - period... and a non-restricted certificate. The long and short stock version came later. Dlask sent me a long stock later which took months to arrive because I had moved. So the government OK'd it with the PG only at one time. And like the pope, the government is infallible- we certainly pay them enough to be so :rolleyes:
 
Reading the regs certainly points out that under 660 is not a non-restricted weapon. No matter what type of grip is on, you can bet that "otherwise" is the key word here. A regular stock is what we all know it to be, the default factory stock for the 870, a pistol grip is "otherwise" modifying the firearm. I don't see Dlask winning their court action, but they've done very well marketing and selling these guns, good for them.

Troutseeker
 
JohnC said:
...So the government OK'd it with the PG...
Click to expand...
Can you clarify how the gluberment did that?



To the best of my knowledge, a physical verification or telephone verification doesn't require confirmation of the OAL. Ref CFC verification PDF.
http://www.cfc-cafc.gc.ca/online-en_ligne/form-assistance/pdfs/804_e.pdf
I'm sure Dlask technically performed their duties right as verifiers but without the requirement for OAL they got themselves into this gray area. After that, the s**t hit the fan with their SMD-12 and they subsequently had to cough up full length stocks for everyone.

Dlask Arms Advisory (June 2007)
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=161596

...as per advice of our lawyer, it will be important to maintain non-restricted status until this issue is resolved in the court of law. That can be done by substituting the pistol grip stock with the full size stock. We will be supplying all of our customers with the full size stock FOR FREE AND WE WILL COVER THE SHIPPING COST....

+1 KaiBosh
+1 Armedsask

We have to be rational here. Just because someone on the internet says it's okay doesn't mean it is. If you were approached by a CO/PO what would you say? "Some dude on the internet said it was Kosher...":bsFlag:
 
Last edited:
I thought I read a thread somewhere on here that there is no court challenge pending.
IIRC Dlask was going to transfer a shotgun and the AR pump gun to Dave Tomlinson , And then he (with the NFA) was going to challenge it.
With Dave's untimely passing, the challenge has gone with him.
So from what I understand from the multitude of threads and thousands of posts is;
- nobody else wants to be a ginnea pig.
- most people still have no idea about the legal conditions of these shotguns.
- Everyone is waiting for some poor unsuspecting soul to be busted by the feds to see if the trinket their gun came with is worth anything more than a paper weight.
This intresting idea has not passed the scrutiny of a judge, is clearly pushing a grey area in the legislation ( all over one word too) and I would have a had time believing a cop or CO would take one look at it and not go to town on your arse. I'm figuring the unlucky bast$rd who gets to go through this will get charged, lose his firearms and hunting licences, have all his firarms siezed, his house would be turned upside down and forget about traveling outside Canada. Not to mention the legal costs could bankrupt a small nation.
So who's up to fight the good fight?
 
There was a letter I can not find right now from the RCMP that said, replacing a stock with a pistol grip does NOT fall into the "otherwise" section of the law, there for it was OK.

this was brought about by dlask, he then came out with a 8.5"barreled pistol grip shotty and every thing was fine, then the RCMP flopped on there decision and said it was NOT OK, hence the sending out of full stocks.


At this time it seems to the law it is ok (IMHO) to do this,, but as pointed out, would pull some heat is the law felt like it. We will have to wait and see.

I am thinking about a lightly longer med fed, so I could Pistol grip it for some fun and still be OK in the long run no matter which why the law went.
 
A lot of good people will state they have an FRT number for their short barreled shotgun and they do. I won’t argue that. Refer to the barrel re-registration sticky at the top. The question is, does an FRT number/designation include or stipulate the OAL of the shotgun (modified or not)?

I assume the FRT number/designation only details the barrel length, etc. which coordinates with the required data on the verification form. So even if you presented your beloved FRT number to an inquiring CO/PO I don’t think it will help you. Firstly, the CO/PO will not personally possess the Firearms Reference Table to check your number. Secondly, if the FRT number/designation does not indicate the OAL then you’ve got some explaining to do.

Other good people will state it boils down to whether or not <660mm is achieved by bolting something on or just clicking a button... Again, in the field how would you justify the installation of a pistol grip (bolt-on or not)? You could say it’s an OEM part and I really didn’t saw my full length stock off. Whatever you say I’m sure the CO/PO will just view it as being “modified” to <660mm.

Additionally, the so called “RCMP Letter” is only good for wipe. I acknowledge it held some water early on but is now full of holes, retracted and is a “moot point”. Also, would you show that to a CO/PO with all the pretty X's to justify your shorty?


Dear #########,

Thank you for your telephone call today with regard to the legal classification of the Remington 870 shotgun and the MCS system, ################################################xx ################################################xx ############. Short barreled pump action shotguns with folding stocks are controlled within the Criminal Code of Canada, and it specifically details that the firearm is reduced to a length of less than 660 mm by means of folding, telescoping or otherwise. The otherwise does not take into consideration replacement with commercially available stocks such as a pistol grip stocks. Thus it is very legal and does not change the class of a non semi automatic firearm if you put a manufactured short barrel and pistol grip on the gun.
################################################xx ################################################xx ################################################xx #######################################
I trust this response has met your needs, please feel free to call if I can be of any further assistance.

Regards,
#########
Manager
Firearms Technical Analysis Section
Canada Firearms Centre | Centre des armes à feu Canada
Royal Canadian Mounted Police | Gendarmerie royale du Canada


Remember, stupid is as stupid does. The only time I modify my shotgun to be <660mm with a bolt-on pistol grip is at home for the purpose of posting evil pics on the internet:stirthepot2:
 
I thought we were going to throw jdman in the deep end and see if he floats?:D

Thanks CanFire. Do you know if the FRT number/designation includes or stipulates the OAL?
 
The Dlask 8 1/2" gun may be too new to be on any of the disc sets in circulation. A dealer verifier should be able to access the on-line version. Normally o.a.l. isn't part of an FRT entry, but there may be special comments or photos.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom