CanadianGunNutz.com logo, Firearms News and Classifieds in Canada

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 53

Thread: Modern Sporter dedicated rimfire upper UPDATE NOV 7

  1. #41
    HELP! I sold my soul to the internet Mark-II's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Wpg
    Posts
    5,194
    Quote Originally Posted by robab View Post
    So for now keep my 20” barrel and cmmg conversion kit.
    Lucky I fat-fingered my (grey market) order for the JP last night. I just put in for a 20" cmmg barrel/bolt instead
    Schrödinger's Gat - The logical paradox which posits that a firearm, stored safe in the home, is at the same time On The Streets

  2. #42
    Big Mouth Kratos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Estevan, SK
    Posts
    1,254
    Quote Originally Posted by alberta tactical rifle View Post
    The interpretation by the SFSS guys regarding short barrels in 22 LR on our MV and MS.

    We tried.



    Good afternoon Rick,

    Your question has been referred to me. I understand the specific question to be the classification of a rifle with a 22 Long Rifle (rimfire) barrel mounted on the receiver of a semiautomatic centre fire rifle (the Modern Sporter), temporarily replacing the centre fire barrel. You also mention that the overall length will never be less than 660 mm (26 inches) on folding of telescoping stock models.

    Given the above, the provisions which render a rifle a restricted firearm via a folding or telescoping stock, would not apply.

    Thus the determining factor, and the precise point of your question, would be whether the 470 mm barrel length provision applies. In this case, I believe it does.

    The description of the firearm clearly establishes that it is not a prohibited firearm, but also establishes the underlying firearm is capable of discharging centrefire ammunition in a semiautomatic manner, even though that is not what is intended when the 22LR barrel is installed.

    The remaining factor is the length of the barrel, which would result in a restricted firearm classification if the barrel length were less than 470 mm; and with a longer barrel, non-restricted.

    So if a non-restricted outcome is desired, the barrel length of the 22LR barrel must be over 470 mm (18.5 inches).

    Regards,


    Murray A. Smith
    Manager,
    Specialized Firearms Support Services
    Firearms Investigative and Enforcement Support Services Directorate
    Canadian Firearms Program
    Specialized Policing Services
    So they don’t understand he laws they enforce? Since we’d have 2 or more uppers and centerfire barrels would be 18.6” or longer and the other would be 22LR at a 26” OAL. I don’t want to go to court to find out what our justice system thinks but Murray Smith is wrong according to the law. His BS about it being temporary doesn’t makes sense since both options are NR by themselves, you can’t mix centerfire rifle barrel laws into rimfire rifles. I can’t see how but if any of you know why I could be wrong please let me know.

    Edit: I see a lot was posted as I typed this (or I missed posts looking at timestamps), but as someone pointed out, the 22LR Barrel isn’t capable of firing centerfire ammunition, no matter the markings of the lower or the intended design. If you mark the lowers Multi-Cal in the future would that appease them?
    Last edited by Kratos; 11-10-2018 at 05:42 PM.

  3. #43
    CGN Regular Shorerider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    152
    Quote Originally Posted by Kratos View Post
    So they don’t understand he laws they enforce? Since we’d have 2 or more uppers and centerfire barrels would be 18.6” or longer and the other would be 22LR at a 26” OAL. I don’t want to go to court to find out what our justice system thinks but Murray Smith is wrong according to the law. His BS about it being temporary doesn’t makes sense since both options are NR by themselves, you can’t mix centerfire rifle barrel laws into rimfire rifles. I can’t see how but if any of you know why I could be wrong please let me know.

    Edit: I see a lot was posted as I typed this (or I missed posts looking at timestamps), but as someone pointed out, the 22LR Barrel isn’t capable of firing centerfire ammunition, no matter the markings of the lower or the intended design. If you mark the lowers Multi-Cal in the future would that appease them?
    I think the problem is the classified portion was classified as centre fire multi caliber. Therefore whatever caliber even rimfire then falls under centrefire barrel laws. It doesn’t make sense but you aren’t going to win this argument on the side of a mountain and because our laws are written to be individually interpreted you may not win in court. I have an ar-22 that I was going to strip for my SS upper but now I’m just going to buy a conversion kit and use the 20” barrel I have on my SLR for a rimfire upper.

  4. #44
    Big Mouth Kratos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Estevan, SK
    Posts
    1,254
    Quote Originally Posted by Shorerider View Post
    I think the problem is the classified portion was classified as centre fire multi caliber. Therefore whatever caliber even rimfire then falls under centrefire barrel laws. It doesn’t make sense but you aren’t going to win this argument on the side of a mountain and because our laws are written to be individually interpreted you may not win in court. I have an ar-22 that I was going to strip for my SS upper but now I’m just going to buy a conversion kit and use the 20” barrel I have on my SLR for a rimfire upper.
    What I’m saying is when you read the laws the classes are; non-restricted, restricted, and prohibited. If the firearm is not restricted or prohibited by the parameters set out in the law then it’s non-restricted. In this case there is nothing about a short barrelled 22LR upper that would restrict this firearm if you have 26” OAL. I know we won’t win the argument, but they essentially made up the part you pointed out, since it’s not in the law. Unless I missed the part where non-restricted have sub classes for cartridge type, it’s BS.

    If I have a 22LR rifle and make it capable of firing 223 then I can have a barrel under 18.6”? Not a chance, then why would it work the other way?
    Last edited by Kratos; 11-10-2018 at 07:57 PM.

  5. #45
    CGN Regular
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Thunder Bay, ON
    Posts
    236
    The question would be then using their logic, would you be limited to 5 rd mags? If it is supposed to play by centrefire rules due to the receiver and the rimfire barrel must be a certain length, then would rimfire mags have to be limited as well? Maybe some questions are better left unasked, lol.

  6. #46
    Big Mouth Kratos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Estevan, SK
    Posts
    1,254
    Quote Originally Posted by XTGUN View Post
    The question would be then using their logic, would you be limited to 5 rd mags? If it is supposed to play by centrefire rules due to the receiver and the rimfire barrel must be a certain length, then would rimfire mags have to be limited as well? Maybe some questions are better left unasked, lol.
    Lol you’re not helping! But again, if that was their decision we could have full capacity centerfire mags if we made a 22LR frame fire 223 ammo, going by their logic. Right? And we all know they wouldn’t allow that.

  7. #47
    CGN Regular Shorerider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    152
    I think the big problem is we’re asking them to use logic. And that’s in real short supply these days.

  8. #48
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by Kratos View Post
    What I’m saying is when you read the laws the classes are; non-restricted, restricted, and prohibited. If the firearm is not restricted or prohibited by the parameters set out in the law then it’s non-restricted. In this case there is nothing about a short barrelled 22LR upper that would restrict this firearm if you have 26” OAL. I know we won’t win the argument, but they essentially made up the part you pointed out, since it’s not in the law. Unless I missed the part where non-restricted have sub classes for cartridge type, it’s BS.

    If I have a 22LR rifle and make it capable of firing 223 then I can have a barrel under 18.6”? Not a chance, then why would it work the other way?
    Yeah im going to put mine together anyway

    and what if i didnt have a centerfire barrel to "temporarily convert" it from... F that guy.

  9. #49
    CGN Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Southern Alberta
    Posts
    583
    Quote Originally Posted by jjuice View Post
    Yeah im going to put mine together anyway

    and what if i didnt have a centerfire barrel to "temporarily convert" it from... F that guy.
    Do it, do it, do it! :-) It's not even in the FRT. And the FRT isn't even law; if it was there would need to be public access to it.
    If somebody asks me, "Why do you need an AR15?" I will ask them, "Why did Rosa Parks need to sit at the front of the bus?"

  10. #50
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by rifleman762 View Post
    Do it, do it, do it! :-) It's not even in the FRT. And the FRT isn't even law; if it was there would need to be public access to it.
    well after reading the definitions of non restricted and asking around the community, theres really no reason why it is restricted... This guy (understandably) probably doesnt actually want to do the homework, so just goes with the easy answer "i believe" that wont get him into any trouble.

    Otherwise, couldnt i just take it to a gunsmith who can verify a firearm and have him check off all the non-restricted boxes for me? maybe the catch is that its permanent, and i wont convert it to centerfire... idk...

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •