NR Stag 15???
- Thread starter 45C
- Start date
Im not sure what this means.
OK I will bite as I am not a "AR" guy. I will ask the dumb question with a lot of guessing/assuming.
The modern Sporter is NR. Its only a receiver but isint the Stag -10 designed along the same intent? I assumed they changed the internals (and barrel length) on restricted AR10 to make it NR. You can take a restricted AR15 with a long enough barrel and throw everything onto a modern sporter and you now have a NR AR15. Why cant a NR Stag 15 be made?
the Dakota kid
CGN Regular
- Location
- London, ON
Stag 10 is AR102 derived not AR10.
You can slap a 556 barrel on a stag10 receiver. Not so sure how mags would work. It would be NR but it wouldn't be an AR.
And btw you got it wrong. Nobody changed the internals of an AR10 to make it NR. Anyone who did that would just create a variant of an AR10, which is itself a variant of an AR15, which is restricted by name. So it would be restricted.
What STAG, BCL and now Troy did, is copy the AR102 design, which precedes the AR15, so it's NR. What ATRS did is a completely new design that doesn't match with an AR15, so it's NR.
MountedMadness
Regular
- Location
- Currently BC
All of the previous and for the benefit of 45C's original question...
That's what happens when a Liberal lawmaker changes good rules into bad rules. If you look at the history of the Liberal (self-proclaimed natural governing) Party of Canada, they have been slowly eating away at firearms ownership in this country. After the shooting at L'Ecole Polytechnique, the Conservative government chose a new approach with Bill C-17 which implemented firearms safety training coupled with 2 phase licensing (PAL/RPAL) in 1992. C-17 was a pragmatic and thoughtful piece of legislation, but the Liberal government that followed jumped into a major "boondoggle" with Bill C-68 and their 2+ Billion Dollar long gun registry...AND...reclassification of many various firearms from Non-Restricted to Restricted, from Restricted to Prohibited.
The Liberal intent - well voiced by PM TatterTot and his Sycophants - is to disarm Canadians, as if the 2.3 million licensed gun owners were the problem. The Liberal mindset is simple - disarmament by absolute decree will garner a major backlash from law abiding Canadian firearms owners...so the alternative is to do such things as "grandfather" one generation, eventually requiring disposal of the firearm(s) when the owner dies.
Disarmament by attrition legislation. No money provided to compensate for the property you lawfully paid for. No option to pass any firearms that are "grandfathered" onto grandkids or other family members.
As has been pointed out previously - When a government doesn't trust it's law abiding citizens with firearms, those very citizens should no longer trust the government.
Sorry for the rant...but the Liberal party has to be defeated in October...otherwise there'll be no recovery from their ideology on many levels.
That's what happens when a Liberal lawmaker changes good rules into bad rules. If you look at the history of the Liberal (self-proclaimed natural governing) Party of Canada, they have been slowly eating away at firearms ownership in this country. After the shooting at L'Ecole Polytechnique, the Conservative government chose a new approach with Bill C-17 which implemented firearms safety training coupled with 2 phase licensing (PAL/RPAL) in 1992. C-17 was a pragmatic and thoughtful piece of legislation, but the Liberal government that followed jumped into a major "boondoggle" with Bill C-68 and their 2+ Billion Dollar long gun registry...AND...reclassification of many various firearms from Non-Restricted to Restricted, from Restricted to Prohibited.
The Liberal intent - well voiced by PM TatterTot and his Sycophants - is to disarm Canadians, as if the 2.3 million licensed gun owners were the problem. The Liberal mindset is simple - disarmament by absolute decree will garner a major backlash from law abiding Canadian firearms owners...so the alternative is to do such things as "grandfather" one generation, eventually requiring disposal of the firearm(s) when the owner dies.
Disarmament by attrition legislation. No money provided to compensate for the property you lawfully paid for. No option to pass any firearms that are "grandfathered" onto grandkids or other family members.
As has been pointed out previously - When a government doesn't trust it's law abiding citizens with firearms, those very citizens should no longer trust the government.
Sorry for the rant...but the Liberal party has to be defeated in October...otherwise there'll be no recovery from their ideology on many levels.
The truth right there. You think the government is concerned about criminals having guns? Nah, they're more concerned about the millions of armed citizens who don't agree with what that government is doing.
