Converting 1873 to antique status possible?

[tiriaq]

Was there a conviction? As I mentioned before charges and prosecution under the right circumstances can occur to anyone for just about anything, does it make it right or should I think of every gun part in my possesion as worrisome, I don't think so, just play safe kids

Yes, he was convicted of importation of prohibited devices. It was his intent to bring in components (mag. shells, followers, springs, baseplates) for 30 round AR magazines, and block and assemble them as 5/30s. CBSA flagged the shipment, it was released and he was arrested when the package reached him. Didn't matter that the magazines were in pieces. Didn't matter that he had not assembled any magazines. Didn't matter that his intent was to assemble legal magazines. He was convicted of a criminal offence. Is there any difference in principle between this and possession of a SAA with a .45ACP cylinder installed and the original cylinder in .45 Colt as well?

 

[swampdog]

I also would like a 1st gen Colt SAA rechambered to a modern calibre that does not require registration. But "end runs," as someone called them, around the legislation certainly could result in future modifications to the legislation governing registration of antique firearms. The most common method appears to involve rechambering antiques from obsolete calibres to modern calibres. I suspect that it may only be a matter of time until government closes that loophole.

It appears self-evident that government intended the 1998 antique legislation and regulations to exempt true antiques, those guns chambered in obsolete calibres, from registration. The rules that we have played since 1998 designated as "antiques" those guns that were 100 years or more old as of 1998. At the same time, government added the calibre guidelines, requiring registration of guns made before 1898 in calibres that remained readily available as of 1998. At least that appears to have been the logic used by government in 1998. Obviously, government only intended to ease restrictions on guns in obsolete calibres.

Back in 1998, government officials must have realized that people could reload in the various obsolete calibres. But the lack of commercially available ammo in the obsolete calibres provided justification for not requiring registration of guns chambered for those calibres. Still today, one cannot readily buy ammo in .455 Webley, .44 Russian, and various other obsolete calibres. To allow unrestricted ownership of guns in those obsolete calibres still makes as much sense today as in 1998.

If, as someone suggested, the new legislation will require periodic reviews of the regulations, those regulations may well change in the future. If government's intention truly was and still is to register guns that can fire ammunition chambered in modern calibres, what do you think may happen in the future? It would be great if we could keep on using .45 ACP, .44 Special, and .38 Special in unregistered guns. But I would not count on it.

 

[tiriaq]

Personally, I think it would be worthwhile to try to move the government to adopt a broader definition of antique. Let's say anything pre 1899, as an example. Nothing magical about 1899, that's just an example.
Personally I get nervous every time someone proudly posts photos of an antique and announces that he is carrying it loaded for defensive purposes (in the bush, of course). These pistols could become restricted or prohibited by a simple regulatory change, without any need for legislation.

 

[dingus]

I also would like a 1st gen Colt SAA rechambered to a modern calibre that does not require registration. But "end runs," as someone called them, around the legislation certainly could result in future modifications to the legislation governing registration of antique firearms. The most common method appears to involve rechambering antiques from obsolete calibres to modern calibres. I suspect that it may only be a matter of time until government closes that loophole.

It appears self-evident that government intended the 1998 antique legislation and regulations to exempt true antiques, those guns chambered in obsolete calibres, from registration. The rules that we have played since 1998 designated as "antiques" those guns that were 100 years or more old as of 1998. At the same time, government added the calibre guidelines, requiring registration of guns made before 1898 in calibres that remained readily available as of 1998. At least that appears to have been the logic used by government in 1998. Obviously, government only intended to ease restrictions on guns in obsolete calibres.

Back in 1998, government officials must have realized that people could reload in the various obsolete calibres. But the lack of commercially available ammo in the obsolete calibres provided justification for not requiring registration of guns chambered for those calibres. Still today, one cannot readily buy ammo in .455 Webley, .44 Russian, and various other obsolete calibres. To allow unrestricted ownership of guns in those obsolete calibres still makes as much sense today as in 1998.

If, as someone suggested, the new legislation will require periodic reviews of the regulations, those regulations may well change in the future. If government's intention truly was and still is to register guns that can fire ammunition chambered in modern calibres, what do you think may happen in the future? It would be great if we could keep on using .45 ACP, .44 Special, and .38 Special in unregistered guns. But I would not count on it.

If a fellow has a 44 Sp or 38 Sp or 45 acp and is told you must register that gun frist off how do they know he has it?
Second if he decides to go with your new law with a 44 sp SAA all he needs to do is have a 44 russian (Pre 1898 caliber) cylinder installed and he is now fine it wont chamber a 44 sp anymore.
45 acp can be made in 45 schofield (Pre 1898 Caliber)
38 Sp well that need a barrel and cylinder replaced but this can all be done to.

As far as haveing the 45 Colt cylinder with a gun in 45 acp lets just say i would not be carrying it around with the gun when i was useing it in 45 acp.
So what im saying is you can worry about what "they" might do. meenwhile other people are enjoying there guns haveing fun and not getting all caught up in speculation.
They dont care about this as much as some of you guys think.

Now a guy importing hi capicty mags in pieces to build into 30 rd mags i can see "they" be concerned about that.
The OP asked about Deregistering a SAA once a caliber change was done so that has 0 to do with importing! if hes asking about deregistering a gun, its in Canada.

The laws could very well be expanded to be more like the USA system. Thats more my thinking not ass backwards.
We have the CPC in power now not them bloody liberals eh.

 

[burnt_servo]

Yes, he was convicted of importation of prohibited devices. It was his intent to bring in components (mag. shells, followers, springs, baseplates) for 30 round AR magazines, and block and assemble them as 5/30s. CBSA flagged the shipment, it was released and he was arrested when the package reached him. Didn't matter that the magazines were in pieces. Didn't matter that he had not assembled any magazines. Didn't matter that his intent was to assemble legal magazines. He was convicted of a criminal offence. Is there any difference in principle between this and possession of a SAA with a .45ACP cylinder installed and the original cylinder in .45 Colt as well?

the diffeence here being , it would take a fairly skilled person ( ie gunsmith ) to swap out the cylinder and have every thing work properly .

it wouldn't be a direct drop in and bolt it up .

also in the case of the cylinders , are any of them marked in anyway as to what cartridge they are chambered in ?

 

[Southlander]

Yes, he was convicted of importation of prohibited devices. It was his intent to bring in components (mag. shells, followers, springs, baseplates) for 30 round AR magazines, and block and assemble them as 5/30s. CBSA flagged the shipment, it was released and he was arrested when the package reached him. Didn't matter that the magazines were in pieces. Didn't matter that he had not assembled any magazines. Didn't matter that his intent was to assemble legal magazines. He was convicted of a criminal offence. Is there any difference in principle between this and possession of a SAA with a .45ACP cylinder installed and the original cylinder in .45 Colt as well?

IMO I would say yes there is a difference.

A pinned mag is not considered "constructive posession" of a prohibited device, yet anyone in possession of one has the materials. One pin is all that stands between it and a 30 round mag? Yet they are legal because once complete no construction is required to use. In pieces they might constitute "constructive possession" because they could be assembled into a prohibitive device. Pop the pin and it is a prohibited device.

 

[tiriaq]

the diffeence here being , it would take a fairly skilled person ( ie gunsmith ) to swap out the cylinder and have every thing work properly .

it wouldn't be a direct drop in and bolt it up .

also in the case of the cylinders , are any of them marked in anyway as to what cartridge they are chambered in ?

Take a SAA. Have a .45ACP cylinder installed. The original .45 cylinder will still fit. It is serial numbered to the gun. If you have the revolver, and the .45 Colt cylinder, are you in possession of an unregistered restricted pistol if the cylinder is not installed?
If you have a .45 Colt revolver, and store the cylinder separately, do you still possess a restricted firearm?

 

[tiriaq]

IMO I would say yes there is a difference.

A pinned mag is not considered "constructive posession" of a prohibited device, yet anyone in possession of one has the materials. One pin is all that stands between it and a 30 round mag? Yet they are legal because once complete no construction is required to use. In pieces they might constitute "constructive possession" because they could be assembled into a prohibitive device. Pop the pin and it is a prohibited device.
To apply that to the antique, if it were stored with no cylinder and the no go cylinder sitting next to it, it could constitute "constructive possession", however if complete and rechambered, no more construction is required to use and the completed product is an antique. To rechamber the gun to a no go caliber would require registration.

If you possess a SAA and two interchangeable cylinders, is it antique or restricted?

 

[swampdog]

So what im saying is you can worry about what "they" might do. meenwhile other people are enjoying there guns haveing fun and not getting all caught up in speculation.
They dont care about this as much as some of you guys think.

I'm not worried. Why would anyone worry about this, unless they own a pile of converted SAA's?

You might be right that "they" don't care about this.

 

[dingus]

Take a SAA. Have a .45ACP cylinder installed. The original .45 cylinder will still fit. It is serial numbered to the gun. If you have the revolver, and the .45 Colt cylinder, are you in possession of an unregistered restricted pistol if the cylinder is not installed?
If you have a .45 Colt revolver, and store the cylinder separately, do you still possess a restricted firearm?

Most Colt cylinders are not serial numbered to there gun tho some old orignal ones are like early anisworth inspected cavalry colts if there not worn off or been replaced.
Also colt cylinders all the ones ive seen are not marked for caliber whos to say a 45 colt one outa a gun (a part) is not 476 caliber Elley the only diffrence is how its headspaced once in the gun.

I understand your playing the devils advocate with questions like that but really its like saying if you have a drill and a pinned riveted mag are you in posesion of a prohibed device.

Bob Christy in the USA did lots of SAA Conversions in the 50s and 60s ive sold 2 or 3 of his guns all AOKed by CFC all lettered antique sold in the calibers i bought them in.
now if the guy that buys the gun has another cylinder somewhere in a parts drawer thats on the no list its a strech to say he now has a restricted firearm.

If it were not for theses conversions only very few Canadians would enjoy shooting a perscribed antique SAA Colt as theres very few in OK calibers that you see for sale almost all are restricted.
all there used to be up here to buy was 41 long colts unless you had + $6000 for and orignal one in 455.
I sure love my 44 Sp SAA and id have it changed back to 44 russian if they ever go back to the available ammo thing again.

 

[tiriaq]

There has been a lot of indignation recently about the reclassification of a .22 rifle as prohibited. It would not take very much for the antique regulations to be changed by the Government, or re-interpreted by the RCMP. Let's hope it doesn't happen.

 

[Southlander]

...

 

[tiriaq]

Being in possession of a 5/30 magazine and a drill is not at all the same as being in possession of an unregistered firearm that would be restricted if the cylinder were dropped in.

 

[swampdog]

I like that fruit salad analogy.

Here's another one. It is perfectly legal to own a Grizzly 12 gauge shotgun with an 8" or 12" barrel with a full stock installed, which gives it an overall legal length of 26". One can also own a pistol grip for that shotgun, which one can install in thirty seconds with a slotted screwdriver. One does not commit a crime until one installs that pistol grip.

 

[tiriaq]

I like that fruit salad analogy.

Here's another one. It is perfectly legal to own a Grizzly 12 gauge shotgun with an 8" or 12" barrel with a full stock installed, which gives it an overall legal length of 26". One can also own a pistol grip for that shotgun, which one can install in thirty seconds with a slotted screwdriver. One does not commit a crime until one installs that pistol grip.

You are absolutely correct. This is no different than having a M-1 carbine, and a complete M-2 parts kit. Unless assembled, no problem.