A Little Clarification

[DrawBlood]

I keep hearing things about new firearms being restricted when they come in. Here are some clarifications.

A new firearm will be classified as Non-restricted, Restricted or Prohibited.

A new Non-restricted firearm will be one within all guidelines such as overall length, etc. and not a variant of a firearm already issued a Restricted or Prohibited FRT#.

A new Prohibited firearm will be one that is deemed a variant of a Prohibited firearm or can easily and readily be converted to full auto. Nowadays, it seems to be based on what mood the RCMP is in.

And the most confusion is surrounding new rifles coming in classed as restricted. For example, the Keltec SU22. The Keltec, as long as it has an overall length of over 26", will be Non-restricted, assuming the RCMP doesn't make up some bull#### report.

The confusion arised when two rifles came across the border- the S&W M&P 15-22, and the COLT M4-22. These rifles were deemed Restricted thanks to their similarities to an M4-type rifle, not because of the RCMP's mystical powers to take fun guns away from us.

Rest assured, my friends, that only one of two things will happen to any new (non M4-type) rifles- they will be able to come out with us to the camp, or there will be NO FU*KING WAY TO BUY THEM!

 

[fnrob]

IMO, the Black Rifles forum could use a similar post, maybe even made into a sticky. I couldn't tell you how often the "it's gonna be restricted because it looks scary" reasoning gets posted.

 

[DrawBlood]

IMO, the Black Rifles forum could use a similar post, maybe even made into a sticky. I couldn't tell you how often the "it's gonna be restricted because it looks scary" reasoning gets posted.

Haha. I know what you mean. I think it might be a "I heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend, so it must be true." type thing.

 

[Wrong Way]

I keep hearing things about new firearms being restricted when they come in. Here are some clarifications.

A new firearm will be classified as Non-restricted, Restricted or Prohibited.

A new Non-restricted firearm will be one within all guidelines such as overall length, etc. and not a variant of a firearm already issued a Restricted or Prohibited FRT#.

A new Prohibited firearm will be one that is deemed a variant of a Prohibited firearm or can easily and readily be converted to full auto. Nowadays, it seems to be based on what mood the RCMP is in.

And the most confusion is surrounding new rifles coming in classed as restricted. For example, the Keltec SU22. The Keltec, as long as it has an overall length of over 26", will be Non-restricted, assuming the RCMP doesn't make up some bulls**t report.

The confusion arised when two rifles came across the border- the S&W M&P 15-22, and the COLT M4-22. These rifles were deemed Restricted thanks to their similarities to an M4-type rifle, not because of the RCMP's mystical powers to take fun guns away from us.

Rest assured, my friends, that only one of two things will happen to any new (non M4-type) rifles- they will be able to come out with us to the camp, or there will be NO FU*KING WAY TO BUY THEM!

Lets see.....same cartridge? Nope.
Same Action? Nope.
Same parts? Nope.
Same Reciever? Nope.
Look similar? Yup.

THOSE are the mystical powers the RCMP can and do use to "take fun guns away from us". Calling these .22's a "variant" of the M4 is laughable at best, a complete abuse of authority at worst. Just like the GSG-5....there is NO BASIS IN LAW for these to be classified as a variant.

The RCMP can/will/and DO classify #### as they see fit....the "rules" you talk about don't even enter into the equation.

 

[DrawBlood]

Lets see.....same cartridge? Nope.
Same Action? Nope.
Same parts? Nope.
Same Reciever? Nope.
Look similar? Yup.

THOSE are the mystical powers the RCMP can and do use to "take fun guns away from us". Calling these .22's a "variant" of the M4 is laughable at best, a complete abuse of authority at worst. Just like the GSG-5....there is NO BASIS IN LAW for these to be classified as a variant.

The RCMP can/will/and DO classify s**t as they see fit....the "rules" you talk about don't even enter into the equation.

I know what you mean, but I don't they would blatantly classify something. I think they go by the "if we tell the average Joe the rules, would they be able to call us out?" method. That way, they can trick the judge into thinking they are right easily. Otherwise, the SR22 and 597 VTR would be restricted as the evil baby killers they are.

 

[Wrong Way]

I know what you mean, but I don't they would blatantly classify something. I think they go by the "if we tell the average Joe the rules, would they be able to call us out?" method. That way, they can trick the judge into thinking they are right easily. Otherwise, the SR22 and 597 VTR would be restricted as the evil baby killers they are.

You give them too much credit. They get away with exactly as MUCH AS THEY CAN. Period.

Here...I'll prove it: As an "average joe", give me ONE way that one of these .22 blowback AR lookalikes can reasonably technically be compared to an actual AR. "Looks" do NOT count, neither in this discussion or legally.

 

[mlehtovaara]

There is more similarity between a Ruger Mini 14 and an AR, than a MP 15-22 and an AR.

I think the issue comes down to the naming of the gun, as a MP 15-22, or Colt M4-22, the RCMP takes this to be admitting it is based on the gun, and uses that to call it a variant, same goes for the GSG-5 and MP-5 thing.

 

[Wrong Way]

There is more similarity between a Ruger Mini 14 and an AR, than a MP 15-22 and an AR.

I think the issue comes down to the naming of the gun, as a MP 15-22, or Colt M4-22, the RCMP takes this to be admitting it is based on the gun, and uses that to call it a variant, same goes for the GSG-5 and MP-5 thing.

There is no basis in LAW for this. If I make a clone of a cooey 39 and call it "Baby killing rod of death", does that mean it's OK to restrict it? What If I call it a KA-47?

At the end of the day, it's still a bolt action .22 with no lineage to to the AK.

The fact is that there is NO legal reasoin why the GSG5 is prohib...NONE.

 

[mlehtovaara]

There is no basis in LAW for this. If I make a clone of a cooey 39 and call it "Baby killing rod of death", does that mean it's OK to restrict it? What If I call it a KA-47?

At the end of the day, it's still a bolt action .22 with no lineage to to the AK.

The fact is that there is NO legal reasoin why the GSG5 is prohib...NONE.

Im not disagreeing as I said a mini 14 has more common with an AR than a MP 15-22!

I am just saying that is what the RCMP use to justify their classification. We all know that their is no parts interchangeable so non of it makes any sense.

 

[DrawBlood]

The only thing that is interchangeable is the trigger, I believe, but they might have twisted the whole thing about the grips, handguards etc. being the same.