new FN SCAR 16

I would be very surprised if you could re-barrel this and make it a NON-restricted. The RCMP will classify this as Restricted on looks alone unfortunately, just as they did with the AR-15.

Hopefully they prove me wrong cause I would buy one if it was a non-restricted, as would a lot of other CGN members I'm sure.
 
Pfft. Look at the Tavor - unrestricted. I'm betting that so long as they don't pull a T97 and ban it altogether, we'll have an unrestricted version as fast as Mark can get them built and shipped!

ajayofcanada said:
I would be very surprised if you could re-barrel this and make it a NON-restricted. The RCMP will classify this as Restricted on looks alone unfortunately, just as they did with the AR-15.

Hopefully they prove me wrong cause I would buy one if it was a non-restricted, as would a lot of other CGN members I'm sure.
Click to expand...
 
ajayofcanada said:
I would be very surprised if you could re-barrel this and make it a NON-restricted. The RCMP will classify this as Restricted on looks alone unfortunately, just as they did with the AR-15.

Hopefully they prove me wrong cause I would buy one if it was a non-restricted, as would a lot of other CGN members I'm sure.
Click to expand...

They cant add anything to the "restricted" (or prohib) list BY NAME without a vote in the house IIRC.

They can only classify guns as variants, or auto/converted auto etc... etc...

Anything that could use an AR15 upper (or looked similar to the AR15) was deemed a variant... With guns like the XCR, it was functionally too different, so they couldn't justify it.

Another reason why Henderson is so important, it would require them to make the judgments based on operational components, not "appearances" as the RCMP is so fond of...
 
F22_RaptoR said:
They cant add anything to the "restricted" (or prohib) list BY NAME without a vote in the house IIRC.
Click to expand...

Orders-in-Council can be made by the Governor in Council on the recommendation of Cabinet. They are regulation and are not legislation. Legislation would require a vote in Parliament.
 
ajayofcanada said:
I would be very surprised if you could re-barrel this and make it a NON-restricted. The RCMP will classify this as Restricted on looks alone unfortunately, just as they did with the AR-15.
Click to expand...

The AR-15 is classed as restricted by statutory instrument, not by the RCMP. Re-barrelling it to a longer length would make it non-restricted provided the OAL with the stock folded is at least 26 inches. That is the legal definition.

As I've said in various other threads, the SCAR is overrated. I'm sure if you're dropped into the Sahara to take over Libya it will be great for that but it's nothing special as far as a semi-auto 5.56 goes for civilians, not a particularly good trigger pull for example. More of a collector's item really as last I heard SOCOM were re-thinking the use of them.
 
tootall said:
funny thing about FA.
I have been to a FA shoot in Abany, Oregon, and had the chance to burn a few mags.
A dumb as it sounds, I was trying to make the moment last and not blow up US $20 in 3 seconds flat, so I found myself taking short little bursts.:confused:
Click to expand...
For some reason I did the same in Vegas? The RO couldn't understand why I didn't let completly fly?
 
cybershooters said:
The AR-15 is classed as restricted by statutory instrument, not by the RCMP. Re-barrelling it to a longer length would make it non-restricted provided the OAL with the stock folded is at least 26 inches. That is the legal definition.
Click to expand...
AR's are Restricted regardless of barrel length.
 
ajayofcanada said:
I would be very surprised if you could re-barrel this and make it a NON-restricted. The RCMP will classify this as Restricted on looks alone unfortunately, just as they did with the AR-15.

Hopefully they prove me wrong cause I would buy one if it was a non-restricted, as would a lot of other CGN members I'm sure.
Click to expand...
It doesn't work that way, buddy. Welcome to the 90 Percenters.
 
I don't think you have to worry about the RCMP. It's the US State Dept. They won't issue export licenses for these. They classified it as a military weapon and non-exportable.
 
FPembleton said:
Orders-in-Council can be made by the Governor in Council on the recommendation of Cabinet. They are regulation and are not legislation. Legislation would require a vote in Parliament.
Click to expand...

Ahh my bad I thought it was a voted issue. I guess if its the Prime Ministers cabinet, we're a little less likely to get things added by OIC then :D

ajayofcanada said:
AR's are Restricted regardless of barrel length.
Click to expand...

I think he was referring to the SCAR for the barrel length change (course he should have said that :p)
 
lets hope that she goes non-restricted with the 18.5 barrel. Something tells me that because there is a eerie similarity between the ar family, she might be classified as restricted, regardless of barrel lenght
 
All I can say is non-restricted scar would be extremely prime, would probably want the larger caliber in it though. Non-restricted Scar-H please.

The US Export laws bite. If they can't export those to Canada they have issues they should solve. We're their best friends ffs. Do they fear Canada will use them against the US in a war?? Geez
 
martinjozwa said:
lets hope that she goes non-restricted with the 18.5 barrel. Something tells me that because there is a eerie similarity between the ar family, she might be classified as restricted, regardless of barrel lenght
Click to expand...

Did you not even read the posts before you. They can not make it restricted because it looks scary. This would require an Order In Council! If they are to make it retricted it would have to be considered a variant of an AR or it would have to have a short barrel. They will not be able to call this a variant and these can be rebarreled to be non restricted. Its that easy.

The Beretta CX4 Storm is a perfect example. It is scary and was actually used in a school shooting, but they cannot restrict it on any other basis than barrel length. So many people have had them rebarreled and changed their registration certificates to be non restricted!

I would be more concerned with actually getting the RCMP to issue an FRT period. Look at what is happening with the S&W M&P 15-22. It has been months now and no word as to an FRT.
 
martinjozwa said:
lets hope that she goes non-restricted with the 18.5 barrel. Something tells me that because there is a eerie similarity between the ar family, she might be classified as restricted, regardless of barrel length
Click to expand...

How do you possibly get an "eerie similarity" to the AR family? While the SCAR rifles (all SCAR test rifles) were designed to make the transition from the M4 to the new rifle easy because of commonality in control placement and ergonomic similarity, they could not be more different looking.

The only similarity they have is that they are both rifles, use the same mags, have a pistol grip that is similar and that is about it. And as of right now, unless Questar actually does get some 18.5 barrels made, it will be restricted as FN does not produce a barrel for the 16S that would make it non-restricted in Canada.

Finally, IT is a rifle. IT is not a she or he. IT is an IT. "lets hope that she goes" should be "lets hope that IT goes" etc. It never ceases to amaze me that people refer to rifles as "SHE". What an insult to women.
 
severus said:
How do you possibly get an "eerie similarity" to the AR family? While the SCAR rifles (all SCAR test rifles) were designed to make the transition from the M4 to the new rifle easy because of commonality in control placement and ergonomic similarity, they could not be more different looking.

The only similarity they have is that they are both rifles, use the same mags, have a pistol grip that is similar and that is about it. And as of right now, unless Questar actually does get some 18.5 barrels made, it will be restricted as FN does not produce a barrel for the 16S that would make it non-restricted in Canada.

Finally, IT is a rifle. IT is not a she or he. IT is an IT. "lets hope that she goes" should be "lets hope that IT goes" etc. It never ceases to amaze me that people refer to rifles as "SHE". What an insult to women.
Click to expand...


take it easy....IT's just a rifle. Not meant to offend anybody here...All i hope that the prices drop and maybe a 18 inch barrel version makes its way here
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom