Why is the Mossberg Tactical 22LR Non-Restricted?

K

kiltmonkey

Member
EE Expired
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Location
Vancouver, BC, Canada, Eh?
Can someone explain to me why is the Mossberg Tactical 22LR Non-Restricted but S&W M&P 15-22 and Colt Semi-Auto M4 Carbine .22LR are classified as Restricted? I had thought that firearms, even rimfire ones, that look like an AR-15 would be classified as Restricted. Canadian gun laws make no sense when all three guns look "evil" but are classified differently based on their manufacturer.
 
Dunno about the other two, but the Mossberg is just a 702 Plinkster with some plastic bits stuck on it. They come with the identical Owner's Manual.


This is my plinkster:

8395524853_8f4444a6cb_z.jpg


THis is the tac version:


mossberg-22-ft-600.png



Pictures of both, on the same page in the Manual:


8502416655_1606e4fd2c.jpg



there's nothing functional in any of the tac 'add-ons', so nothing to make it restricted at all.

I expect that there are functional differences with the other makes that change their classification, but I'm sure that someone who owns them will be along & explain those two.

It's no different than if you stuck a spoiler and a hood scoop and some 'racing' stripes on your Ford Focus.......it's still just a Focus & it sure won't go any faster.......:)
 
Last edited:
The 15-22 has an AR15 trigger group (want a NM or Geissele trigger, drop it in). Aside from that, no idea why it should be restricted. It's very annoying though.
 
Given that the tactical variant version has an AR15-like appearance, I would expect the RCMP will eventually get around to classifying it as restricted.
The fact that the variants have the same receiver will give them fits. The one possible variant they might eventually adopt is to block importation
of the tactical version.

Are the parts to upgrade to the tactical version sold separately too?

As the late David A. Tomlinson would say, "It doesn't have to make sense, it's Government policy".

The current Canadian firearm category classification policy is the ultimate triumph of animism over rationality,
attributing evil to the appearance of a firearm versus it's technical functionality. The current system is a codification of
a group of antis reviewing the then-current edition of "The Shooters Bible" and circling firearm pictures that look "evil".
Some of the gaps in that classification were merely a result of a product not being listed in that edition.

ht tp://www.amazon.ca/Shooters-Bible-Bestselling-Firearms-Reference/dp/1616083670 - 2013 edition

OTOH, a classification system based on technical functionality would probably result in the antis banning
*all* box-magazine fed semi-autos. Something to *not* look forward to...
 
Doesn't the MP 15-22 magazine also fit a SW pistol ?
Thats a 10rd restriction right there.
The Mossy tact, mag will only fit the Moss. Plinkster rifle
 
It does, so the stock S&W mags that were advertised to also fit the 15-22P pistol all have to be pinned to 10.

Fortunately, Black Dog and Promag never advertised that their normal cap mags fit the 15-22P and therefore they aren't pinned!
 
kiltmonkey said:
Can someone explain to me why is the Mossberg Tactical 22LR Non-Restricted but S&W M&P 15-22 and Colt Semi-Auto M4 Carbine .22LR are classified as Restricted? I had thought that firearms, even rimfire ones, that look like an AR-15 would be classified as Restricted. Canadian gun laws make no sense when all three guns look "evil" but are classified differently based on their manufacturer.
Click to expand...

The Mossberg isn't considered an AR-15 variant. It's a plinkster in a stock.
 
rodregier said:
Given that the tactical variant version has an AR15-like appearance, I would expect the RCMP will eventually get around to classifying it as restricted.
The fact that the variants have the same receiver will give them fits. The one possible variant they might eventually adopt is to block importation
of the tactical version.

Are the parts to upgrade to the tactical version sold separately too?

As the late David A. Tomlinson would say, "It doesn't have to make sense, it's Government policy".

The current Canadian firearm category classification policy is the ultimate triumph of animism over rationality,
attributing evil to the appearance of a firearm versus it's technical functionality. The current system is a codification of
a group of antis reviewing the then-current edition of "The Shooters Bible" and circling firearm pictures that look "evil".
Some of the gaps in that classification were merely a result of a product not being listed in that edition.

ht tp://www.amazon.ca/Shooters-Bible-Bestselling-Firearms-Reference/dp/1616083670 - 2013 edition

OTOH, a classification system based on technical functionality would probably result in the antis banning
*all* box-magazine fed semi-autos. Something to *not* look forward to...
Click to expand...

And how would they do that?

Protip: They can't.
 
It must not be scary looking enough...that's all it takes! There is nothing in common with the Armi Jager(sp) and the ar15, and it's a no-no.

Squires Bingham model 20 is another example. In it's "m1600" form, no problems. In it's "AK" dressing it's a no-no. Nothing in common with the AK other than appearance.

No real rationale to the foolishness of the classifications.
 
Last edited:
Same deal as the Ruger SR-22. It's just a 10/22 (or 702) in a tactical stock. The internals are all the same as a stock 10/22 (or 702). It's essentially the same as dropping your stock rifle in a Tapco or ATI stock.
 
The S/W mp 15 -22 was inspected by the specialised firearms support services of the Rcmp Firearms lab to determine the classification of the firearm. The question at the time was whether or not the rifle was a variant of the AR15/ M16 rifle. A classification decision was issued in April 2010 which determined the mp 15-22 to be a restricted variant of the M16 AR15.
Click to expand...
The 25 rd mag also fits the Sw mp 15 pistol version and is considered a prohibited devise in Canada .
 
Yea back in 87 i bought an Armi Jager AP74 (still have it) and sadly it's considered an AR15 by bill c-17. Realy discouraging as not one single part is cross compatible.

Moe
 
It's funny how crazy our gun laws are. I took my 715 to the range last week and a few guys almost fainted when I walked into the indoor range. They couldn't believe it wasn't restricted. When I broke it down to clean it at home, I couldn't help laughing at what a tiny piece of hardware the actual rifle really is. The rest, much like AR's, is just a bunch of plastic.
But it sure looks bad-ass, don't it? I wouldn't be a bit surprised it some uninformed Anti makes it restricted, just cuz it's cool looking.
 
there is no logic in canadian (or any other countries) gun laws.

there was a semi shotgun can am tried to bring it that looked like an AR, therefore was restricted, even though it was the same as every other semi shotgun
 
Comes down to silly laws

- Mossberg are merely a chassis system, overlayed on top of a non-restricted firearm, much like the Ruger Sr-22
- The Colt is an actual AR15 system, thus restricted right away
- The S&W uses AR15 triggergroup, thus they can call it a variant haha as that makes up the essential part of the firearm to classify as a piece of the lower

Quite crazy eh
 
Hoakster said:
It's funny how crazy our gun laws are. I took my 715 to the range last week and a few guys almost fainted when I walked into the indoor range. They couldn't believe it wasn't restricted. When I broke it down to clean it at home, I couldn't help laughing at what a tiny piece of hardware the actual rifle really is. The rest, much like AR's, is just a bunch of plastic.
But it sure looks bad-ass, don't it? I wouldn't be a bit surprised it some uninformed Anti makes it restricted, just cuz it's cool looking.
Click to expand...

OH man if I had $1 for every time I heard at the indoor range "what kind of AR15 is that?" I'd easily have $100.

IMG_2201.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom