Actually, the real reason it was changed is even more comical. See, the basis of the prohibition on the AK series and derivatives is that it has no practical sporting purpose, and it looks scary (honestly, they went through guns digest and banned stuff based on looks alone in many cases). However, unbeknowst to the gun grabbers, the Valmets, which had been banned by name as a derivative, existed in very large quantities in Canada's north, where the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT had given out mass amounts to the Inuit, purchased on the cheap from Valmet when they closed up shop.
Faced with the ridiculous prospect of arresting the Inuit for posession of an prohibited firearm, on the basis that it had no sporting purpose, but that the same government had given them for the sporting purpose, the end result was a new OIC being issued undoing the ban.
That's my understanding, although I am welcome to be corrected.
I believe most of this is correct except for the "mass amounts" part. If Inuit had "mass amounts" of Valmets, they wouldnt be selling for 3-6k right now. Valmets were never even produced in "mass amounts", let alone sold to Canadian government at bulk prices.
Valmet factory never really went out of business, they got purchased by Sako, and Sako had little interest in military arms, especially after the Finnish army decided to go with Chineese AK's.
The truth is that the Canadian government did distribute some Valmets to the Inuit, because it was the only semi auto rifle that was reasonably accurate and could function reliably in the Arctic. I am willing to bet that 99% of those Valmets were sold to collectors long time ago.
The other theory as to why Valmets got de-prohibited is that Valmet supposedly had a legal battle with the Canadian goverment arguing that their rifles are suitable for hunting due to their accuracy. This simply not true.
Last edited: