Why couldnt the FAL be saved?

I know im undigging one here:

a large concern with these rifles or so many claim is its ability to be converted, or that parts drop in etc,,, if a gun was built from a new reciever that could not accept readily available milsurp parts in a semi auto only configuration couldnt we petition to save these rifles from a historic or target shooting view? I do recognize these firearms were oic'd and prohibited by name but seriously is there anyway we can do something about this...? the fn is my favourite fiream of all time and bares a significant historical element in canadian military history and in history in general being renouned as the right arm of the free world kind of an irony :-/
we need to save this!!! if the reengineering of this rifle was done there would be absolutely zero reason to prohibit it at the very least make it restricted... politics blah blah what do you guys think can be done?
 
haha49 said:
The C2 was full auto ie fun switch installed heavyier barrel ect. You still couldn't hit jack squat with it on full auto but it sure was fun to shoot when they were legal to take outside. Now they're expensive door stoppers.

The big push was from the Liberals and they didn't want a war time type rifle out on the streets so ban them ban them now! That's the crap they do.

MY Grandfather had his from the Korean war they didn't want to give it to him since it was a sample to test but since he used it in combat he said I want my rifle they said no many times he said I want my rifle cost him 10,000 in legal fees to keep it and another 12,000 to buy it so he spent on 1 rifle 22,000. Now they offered him other Canadian issused rifles that would fall off the back of the truck hint, hint no paperwork he said no I want my rifle I don't care about the paperwork I want it and I want it legally. It ended up deactivated and destroyed but he got his rifle and when he was alive he could go out and shoot it then the laws changed and it was a door stopper that came with yearly inspections.

Now he willed it to me as his last will and testament and he told me how to screw with the CFO they made him fight to have it he was going to make them fight to get it from a child. I had a 12.2 for 1 day and they freaked out because I was only 10 at the time and they did it legally and I went haha not signing it out of my name they went O crap. They tried tricking me and they asked why I'm doing this I said it was my Grandfathers last request my FAC expires in a week I will renew it they didn't like that because they would have to renew it as well if they did give it to me. The idea was my Grandfahters neighbor wanted to give my grandfather all his rifles to give to his grandsons since he never had kids or a wife he had no one to pass them legally down to. I didn't get my 12.2 so he got really mad and said screw it want all my guns anyways I'm 92 F them. I just want to protect the history behind the rifles and I trust you so you take them. I said no because they would say I broke into his house and stole them after he passed away and that comes with a 25 year sentence heck no not going there. He gave them away at the local range handed out almost 100 machine guns. Were they went no one knows cops figured some collectors basement.
Click to expand...

If your grandfather really did spend $22,000 on a single gun in the 1950's (when a house in Vancouver cost probably half that), he is a complete retard.
If he handed out 100 machine guns to strangers, he is not only a complete retard, he is likely the source of a lot of bad gun legislation.
And your fable about how you had 12.2 is too stupid to respond to...

But hey, you are now using paragraphs!
 
Is it just me, or did almost every long gun of the time with a pistol grip get prohibited? Like the SPAS-12 or the M3 Super 90 for example. They are semi-auto/pump shotguns with a pistol grip. Prohib!
 
Last edited:
L42A1 said:
Is it just me, or did almost every long gun of the time with a pistol grip get prohibited? Like the SPAS-12 or the M3 Super 90 for example. They are semi-auto/pump shotguns with a pistol grip. Prohib!
Click to expand...

Pretty much. The story is that Wendy and Lieberals went through a Guns(magazine) Buyer's Guide and prohib'd anything that had a pistol grip and/or looked scary.

Whether that's true or not, I don't know, but it's as plausible as anything else.
 
NFA ATI request to the feds during DAT's tenure yielded the fabled annotated pages from Gun Digest. Totally believable.

Ironic part of that is the more obscure products that *didn't* appear in the specific edition of Gun Digest were omitted from the
Prohib or restricted list.
 
Grizzly Adams said:
After market receivers without the Auto sear slot. ;) Had a Canadian armourer tell me that would make the rifle unsafe to fire, since it prevents the gun firing out of battery as well.

Grizz
Click to expand...

The auto sear is not required to prevent out of battery firing on a FAL. If the hammer is not caught by the primary sear and there is no auto sear present, the hammer will ride the bolt carrier forward and not strike the firing pin hard enough to fire a round. The result is an uncocked rifle with a live round in the chamber. In the US, many FALs have been assembled on receivers with no sear cut, including some parts kits with the original three-position selector, yet we hear nothing of out of battery firing.

Similarly to the AR-15/M16, automatic fire requires three things:

1. Auto sear
2. Selector allowing enough trigger travel to keep the primary sear from catching the hammer
3. Bolt carrier capable of tripping the auto sear
 
tjhaile said:
The auto sear is not required to prevent out of battery firing on a FAL. If the hammer is not caught by the primary sear and there is no auto sear present, the hammer will ride the bolt carrier forward and not strike the firing pin hard enough to fire a round. The result is an uncocked rifle with a live round in the chamber. In the US, many FALs have been assembled on receivers with no sear cut, including some parts kits with the original three-position selector, yet we hear nothing of out of battery firing.

Similarly to the AR-15/M16, automatic fire requires three things:

1. Auto sear
2. Selector allowing enough trigger travel to keep the primary sear from catching the hammer
3. Bolt carrier capable of tripping the auto sear
Click to expand...

- Mostly bang-on. What we in Canada called a 'safety sear' was in fact an auto sear. The FAL would have made a great selective fire rifle - in 7mm NATO (7 x 43mm, or .280 British), but the NATO conferences were 'Studler'd' and we got the T65E3 case (7.62 x 51) instead. FAL not controllable on auto that well with 7.62 x 51. So Canada left out the auto option (other than in the C2 and FN C1A1D). How? by changing two parts: Going to a longer trigger plunger (in the pistol grip) and a change lever with an extention that won't let it rotate to expose the deeper auto cut in it's shaft, which in any case was left uncut. Two parts. That's it.
 
nntw said:
...and from the UK and from Australia, also countries with a proud tradition of carrying it in military applications. shrug.
Click to expand...

Im pretty sure they are allowed to have "Straight Pull" L1A1/FALs in Britain. Meaning they have to chamber each round like a Ross rifle. And no magazine capacity limits. I'm not 100% though.
 
TCBF said:
- Mostly bang-on. What we in Canada called a 'safety sear' was in fact an auto sear. The FAL would have made a great selective fire rifle - in 7mm NATO (7 x 43mm, or .280 British), but the NATO conferences were 'Studler'd' and we got the T65E3 case (7.62 x 51) instead. FAL not controllable on auto that well with 7.62 x 51. So Canada left out the auto option (other than in the C2 and FN C1A1D). How? by changing two parts: Going to a longer trigger plunger (in the pistol grip) and a change lever with an extention that won't let it rotate to expose the deeper auto cut in it's shaft, which in any case was left uncut. Two parts. That's it.
Click to expand...

The failure to adopt the .280/30 as NATO standard was definitely one of the great wrong turns in the history of small arms development. It shouldn't be a surprise that the cause was the US Army Ordnance Corps, given their track record with such gems as the M60 and the M73 machine guns. Apart from the M1 Garand, practically every successful American small arm was developed privately, rather than by the arsenal system.
 
You are lucky you got to shoot an FN this side of the border, I really love them.
The last time my friend and I went to the range we unloaded some rounds from FN L1s, FN FALs in 308, 1927 Thompsons in 45, and a few 9mms. The CPFO let us submit the dates for the following year that we wanted to shoot our 12-5's before the cut-off date. He let us have the ATT's for the range dates and didn't cancel them after it came into effect, (that you couldn't shoot 12-5s at the range). We got to shoot a few times (7) for a year after the cut-off date until our ATT's ran out and they wouldn't renew them again.

I would like to get enough funds together to purchase the heavy barrel squad automatic. I put a down payment on a one a few years back but health, and my daughters financial problems put it on hold for years, and I didn't get around to finishing the deal which I regret. Now I am trying to avoid buying or trading for any 12-3 CA FNs because of the horror stories with Ottawa and the CFC. I made the mistake of buying an FN FAL from Elwood Epps which I was certain it was listed as 12-5. Turns out its a 12-3, I don't expect to see it for quite some time if ever.
I like 12-5s and I am not as keen on 12-3s and would trade some items restricted or non restricted guns for them if there wasn't any problems with the CFC. Trading works for me, cash is really hard to come by and pensions really suck.
 
Last edited:
TCBF said:
- Mostly bang-on. What we in Canada called a 'safety sear' was in fact an auto sear. The FAL would have made a great selective fire rifle - in 7mm NATO (7 x 43mm, or .280 British), but the NATO conferences were 'Studler'd' and we got the T65E3 case (7.62 x 51) instead. FAL not controllable on auto that well with 7.62 x 51. So Canada left out the auto option (other than in the C2 and FN C1A1D). How? by changing two parts: Going to a longer trigger plunger (in the pistol grip) and a change lever with an extention that won't let it rotate to expose the deeper auto cut in it's shaft, which in any case was left uncut. Two parts. That's it.
Click to expand...

It's also called the safety sear in my FAL armorers handbook. Mine is removed and the slot welded shut. I believe it would be easier to convert an inch pattern FN than mine.
 
A Theory:

I wonder if anybody in Ottawa actually had the foresight and considered the idea that it might be unwise in the current political climate, to have a large amount of surplus FNC1A1 rifles available to the hundreds of thousands of current or ex-service people who were trained to fire 8" groupings at 100 meters (okay, 6" groupings for the Combat Arms people out there!) during the 30 years this AWESOME rifle was in service with the Canadian Forces?

Nahhhhhh! Sorry, I forgot I was talking about Ottawa!! Didn't really think that through-----

While not suggesting this could happen or should happen, I'd certainly be a lot more conscious in my political decision making if I was running the country, and there were a substantial number of constituents armed with battle rifles!!!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom