WHY WOULD THEY NOT? TAke a lookthe sig 522, yeah I know it is a sig 55x variant. This is still freddy kruger lookin it self.
This rifle isn't a variant of any named prohib. It is not capable of full automatic fire. So what other basis is there to classify it as prohib? I know the FRT lists the SCAR as prohib but that is because it is capable of full auto not because it is a named prohib.
THe RCMP classification can be made for any reason they like as they just stretch it to fit like a fat chick wearing spandex, hmmmmm seems to fit so go for it. Lok at the Armi Yager AP 80 and AP74 bud, they have a history of saying too dangerous looking for public consumption.
Protect our freedoms and fight for our new found rights and the ones we still do not have.
Because the SCAR is not on the prohibited list, so there's nothing to 'variant' this rifle to. If they wanted it to be on the list, new legislation would have to be drafted (and passed) to put it on the list. RCMP has the authority to determine what is a variant of a prohibited rifle, but not to put a pattern rifle on the prohibited list. Same thing goes with restricted rifles, which is why things like SAN, CZ 858, and RobArms aren't restricted (except by barrel length), or prohibited...
its a variant of the scar if anything, and the scar isnt a prohib (if the states would export them we could have them). things like the ak-22 and gsg mp5-22 and sig .22 get called prohib because they look like a prohib gun (whether they work like one is generally ignored, much to our disappointment) so with this they cant go "well its prohib because it looks like/imitated a prohib gun" their only option to make it a prohib is "its prohib because we feel like it" which would open them up HUGE to a court case making it even easier for us to set a precedent and use it to get all the other ones i mentioned de-prohib.
do you get it now? (please lord)
Protect yourself because no one else here will save you