What do you think? Antique or not?

762mm

762mm

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
35   0   0
Location
The Maple Carneyval
For a while now, I have been wondering about something... considering we are all aware of the provisions which outline an antique handgun and an antique rifle, what would you make of, let's say a Mauser 71/84 (magazine fed and made prior to 1898) in a similar configuration to this Mosin-Nagant:

27934d1261021480-mosin-nagant-obrez-9130.jpg


Now, as per what Canadian legalities dictate, shortening a barrel yourself would be illegal unless a shortened aftermarket barrel is installed on a non-restricted firearm, in which case the firearm is then reclassified to appropriate status within a 30 days period. But, hypothetically, what if you knew someone in the States who was selling a 71/84 with an already shortened barrel and a pistol grip installed? Could an antique letter be then obtained for such a "handgun"?

:confused:
 
Last edited:
Yes... but the modification was not made by you nor were they made on Canadian soil and the gun is already shortened. It might've even been shortened at the factory or later in its' service life for some unknown reason, there's basically no way to know.

In essence, as it is now, it has a pistol barrel and a pistol grip on it and satisfies all cartridge requirements of an antique handgun. I have not seen anywhere in the firearms act that antique guns need to have manufacturer-only configurations or manufacturer-only parts, as long as they satisfy all other provisions that define an antique handgun or rifle.

Catch 22, isn't it?

:D
 
I would not touch that.....if you want to get in trouble with something.....try JUST that! ;)

Something someone from some not so distant ghetto would want to carry around...... that is just something that could have the government to redefine antique firearm status...
 
Being intimately familiar with the quite stout recoil of the 7.62x54R round, I would not want to be the one firing that thing. Muzzle flash would be awesome however !
 
BadLieutenant said:
I would not touch that.....if you want to get in trouble with something.....try JUST that! ;)

Something someone from some not so distant ghetto would want to carry around...... that is just something that could have the government to redefine antique firearm status...
Click to expand...

Well... if they want to carry a Mauser 71/84 in that configuration around a ghetto, they better learn to reload the "rare as hen's teeth" .43 Mauser cartridge, starting with finding the proper brass, bullets and dies. That, plus I'd be positive that buying a stolen Glock 17 from their buddies would cost them 1/3 the price of carrying an antique.

My question was aimed exactly at finding out if getting in trouble is even at all possible, legally speaking. Because technically, such an antique would satisfy all of the antique gun provisions, as far as I know. Now, having said that, I don't know anyone selling such a gun, nor am I planning on looking for/buying one... my question is simply aimed at satisfying my own personal curiosity... and getting a nice discussion going!

:)
 
RobSmith said:
Being intimately familiar with the quite stout recoil of the 7.62x54R round, I would not want to be the one firing that thing. Muzzle flash would be awesome however !
Click to expand...

Haha... very true. The Nagant pictured above is called an "Obrez". To my knowledge, it was made by Russians in the early stages of WWII when they were seriously lacking pistols and other short firearms for 'close quarters' encounters with the Nazi invader (inside buildings, etc). I am not aware whether these modifications were made in the field or at the arsenals, however.

Here's a YouTube video of a guy firing one:

[youtube]rNFsUvh078I[/youtube]
 
its a sawed down rifle not a pistol. so the magazine thing would get you.
the mares leg comes to mind as the same kinda idea.
there was a thread about""If you found and orignal winchester pre 1898 made into a mares leg would they alow it and i never did here what the poster found out my guess is No!
The USA considers the modern factory made Mares leg a pistol not a sawed down rifle so its hard to say really.
there was no real mares legs in the 1800s that was a gun made for a Steve Mcqueen movie.
I asked once about a 45 70 trapdoor pistol i had and could i get a letter they said it was fine because the factory made some pistols from springfield trapdoor rifles in 45 70 for bufalo hunting.

But the factory never did what your showing here i dont think, so id say your grasping at slippery pig poop covered straws. :p




.
 
I think it would be classified as a rifle and therefore not antique. It is a modified 91 Mosin of some flavour, which is a rifle. Once it's a rifle it legally stays a rifle in the eyes of the gun-cops, regardless of modifications, and regardless of where the modifications took place.

That's how I understand it, anyways. But you could talk to a tech and see what they say. If they allow it, be sure to get it in writing. ;)
 
dingus said:
its a sawed down rifle not a pistol. so the magazine thing would get you.
the mares leg comes to mind as the same kinda idea.
there was a thread about""If you found and orignal winchester pre 1898 made into a mares leg would they alow it and i never did here what the poster found out my guess is No!
The USA considers the modern factory made Mares leg a pistol not a sawed down rifle so its hard to say really.
there was no real mares legs in the 1800s that was a gun made for a Steve Mcqueen movie.
I asked once about a 45 70 trapdoor pistol i had and could i get a letter they said it was fine because the factory made some pistols from springfield trapdoor rifles in 45 70 for bufalo hunting.

But the factory never did what your showing here i dont think, so id say your grasping at slippery pig poop covered straws. :p
Click to expand...


An interesting argument you bring, Dingus.

As for my initial question, it came from the fact that, according to the Firearms Act, when you shorten a rifle's barrel to less than 18", you need to have it reclassified within 30 days to a 'restricted' status (which is the case of the VZ-58 rifles versus the CZ-858... one is restricted like a handgun while the other is not, despite being the exact same rifle. The only difference is the barrel that's on them and all parts are fully interchangeable).

Likewise, if you transform a restricted revolver into a "revolver rifle" which meets all the barrel/OAL length requirements of a rifle, you could have it reclassified as a 'non-restricted' firearm, despite the fact that the modification is not factory.

Now... why wouldn't that same concept apply to antique firearms?

:confused:


jethunter said:
I think it would be classified as a rifle and therefore not antique. It is a modified 91 Mosin of some flavour, which is a rifle. Once it's a rifle it legally stays a rifle in the eyes of the gun-cops, regardless of modifications, and regardless of where the modifications took place.

That's how I understand it, anyways. But you could talk to a tech and see what they say. If they allow it, be sure to get it in writing. ;)
Click to expand...

Well, that's where the catch 22 is at!

The Mosin-Nagant "Obrez" pictured above would have to be legally registered as a restricted firearm in Canada and therefore require an RPAL to possess, in other words same as if it were a handgun. So, if a Mauser 71/84 rifle suffers the same type of a "modification" (shortening to handgun specs), shouldn't it also be reclassified as a handgun? And since that particular handgun would be pre-1898 and would meet all the cartridge requirements, it would automatically fall into the "antique handgun" category by default.

Aren't legal discussions fun?

:D
 
Brutus said:
To what end, if it is not a project one can pursue with all the benefits of an antique or non-restricted firearm?
Click to expand...

Either you haven't been reading the complete thread or you don't understand the legalities of what's involved.

Yes, technically speaking, you could benefit from antique status on such a rifle IF it is in a pistol configuration, made prior to 1898 and chambered in an appropriate caliber. That's the whole point of why I've asked the question in the first place...

d:h:

Besides, there's nothing wrong with a little philosophy and brainstorming on legal matters every now and then! It's a healthy thing for democracy... ;)
 
The gun was built as a rifle then cut down. At no point was it a prescribed antique. Both bore size and a repeating action keep it from antique status. When you cut a non restricted rifle barrel below 18" or OAL of 26" you create a prohibited weapon. If the gun you started with was an antique similar to Dingus's trapdoor there would be no issue. Barrel length and OAL length are not applicable to antiques as they are already deemed not to be firearms.
 
RobSmith said:
Being intimately familiar with the quite stout recoil of the 7.62x54R round, I would not want to be the one firing that thing. Muzzle flash would be awesome however !
Click to expand...

I have a pic of that lol, it says if you want to put a huge hole in a guy and set him on fire at the same time lol.
k68204_obrez1.jpg
 
Last edited:
tactical870 said:
The gun was built as a rifle then cut down. At no point was it a prescribed antique. Both bore size and a repeating action keep it from antique status. When you cut a non restricted rifle barrel below 18" or OAL of 26" you create a prohibited weapon. If the gun you started with was an antique similar to Dingus's trapdoor there would be no issue. Barrel length and OAL length are not applicable to antiques as they are already deemed not to be firearms.
Click to expand...

If so, then how do they determine what is an antique rifle vs. what is an antique handgun? We all know this passage:

RIFLES

3. A rifle manufactured before 1898 that is capable of discharging only rim-fire cartridges, other than 22 Calibre Short, 22 Calibre Long or 22 Calibre Long Rifle cartridges.
4. A rifle manufactured before 1898 that is capable of discharging centre-fire cartridges greater than 8.3 mm or .323 calibre, with the exception of a repeating firearm fed by a magazine.

HANDGUNS

7. A handgun manufactured before 1898 that is capable of discharging only rim-fire cartridges, other than 22 Calibre Short, 22 Calibre Long or 22 Calibre Long Rifle cartridges.
8. A handgun manufactured before 1898 that is capable of discharging centre-fire cartridges, other than a handgun designed or adapted to discharge 32 Short Colt, 32 Long Colt, 32 Smith and Wesson, 32 Smith and Wesson Long, 32-20 Winchester, 38 Smith and Wesson, 38 Short Colt, 38 Long Colt, 38-40 Winchester, 44-40 Winchester, or 45 Colt cartridges.
9. A handgun manufactured before 1898 that is a muzzle loader.
Click to expand...

But how do they define antique rifles vs. handguns to begin with? The barrel length and OAL are what's used, same as for firearms that require a license.

I think that what is really happening is that the CFC "techs" are interpreting the law as they see fit instead of applying it to the letter. It is a matter where internal procedures are superseding the actual law... which is something that is contrary to administrative law (which indicates that all administrations should operate as per: constitution, law, regulations, internal procedures -- in that order!).

Anywho... thanks everyone for your replies. I still believe that, legally speaking, it is very feasible (if the law is applied to the letter). Some of us have guns with very short barrels that would be considered 'prohibs' had they been made after 1898, including 4" barreled revolvers and pretty much ALL the pocket pistols out there. Same would be the case with an 71/84... even if it would become a prohib due to shortening, it would also become an antique at the same time due to length, production date and caliber. Behold a legal paradox!

:eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom