12.5" 870 Remington Express FRT#?

Buzzballer

Buzzballer

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
31   0   0
Location
Southern Ontario
I'm wondering if any one can provide me with a Non-Restricted FRT # for a Remington Express 870 12ga with a 12.5" barrel and pistol grip?

I'v been reading old forums all night and I still cannot find a solid answer on if the above is possible to do non restricted? I have a DA 12.5" barrel thahmm currently has a Mesa tactical m4 style stock, but I would like to put a pachmayr pistol grip on it. Since every part of this configuration is from a manufacture this can be made non-restricted right??

Sorry if I missed some thing but I have been searching for hours and could not find a solid answer.

Buzz
 
you need a 14" barrel with birds head style grip to stay non restricted. The combo you have listed will be restricted. Just get a tape measure. You need 26" overall
 
Before tonight I would agree with you, but after reading this post from Questar im very confused

"CFC and RCMP interpret the phrase "adapted from" as meaning that the individual cuts, saws, etc. the firearm himself, not that he installs or has a gunsmith install commercially available components. This legislation does NOT include modifications made by a proper gunsmith, nor does it affect models that were either "commercially" made or those resulting from installation of commercially available barrels, pistol grips, etc..

If you take a standard non-restricted 870 shotgun... if you then purchase a commercially manufactured 8" barrel and pistol grip... if you then install those 2 items on your 870 shotgun... you will have a short shotgun as shown above and you will have done nothing that would cause any legislation to trigger a change in legal classification of the firearm. That was how/why CFC decided these were non-restricted.

If, however, you take your 870, cut the stock and/or cut the barrel then you will have created a Prohibited Firearm.

Don't know if this helps to understand the situation but that is how CFC explained it to us.

Mark

Questar"

Now this was in reference to there 8.5" barrels. But wouldn't it be the same for the 12.5?
 
I'm thinking there is no non restricted FRT # yet for what your proposing.You may have to call the CFC and tell them what you have and get them to make a decision on it,restricted or not.If they do class it as restricted you can always put the longer stock back on and get it reclassed back to non restricted again.
 
Forgive my ignorance, Iv only delt with CFC transferring firearms, will they be able to look up FRT numbers like that on the phone? And get them to make a decision on it over the phone?? Or is there more of a process to all this?

Thanks!
 
caperaway said:
I'm thinking there is no non restricted FRT # yet for what your proposing.You may have to call the CFC and tell them what you have and get them to make a decision on it,restricted or not.If they do class it as restricted you can always put the longer stock back on and get it reclassed back to non restricted again.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that you can re-classify from non-restricted to restricted but cannot go the other way from restricted to non-restricted. I believe the premise is preventing handguns from being made into long guns and then shortened again to make a non-res handgun. If what was posted by questar is true, then this would be possible without preventing class changes from res to non-res.
 
Isn't Dlask still in court over this very issue? Dlask made 8.5" barreled shotguns with pistol grips and got them classified as non-restricted (under 26"). Then the mounties changed their minds and reclassified some of them, but not all, as restricted. Or am I remembering incorrectly?

Everybody and their dog was jumping on the Dlask bandwagon, then when people questioned how they could be non-restricted they got jumped on by the fan boys. Once the reclassification happened everyone kind of shut up to await the outcome, haven't heard anything since.
 
Buzzballer said:
Before tonight I would agree with you, but after reading this post from Questar im very confused

"CFC and RCMP interpret the phrase "adapted from" as meaning that the individual cuts, saws, etc. the firearm himself, not that he installs or has a gunsmith install commercially available components. This legislation does NOT include modifications made by a proper gunsmith, nor does it affect models that were either "commercially" made or those resulting from installation of commercially available barrels, pistol grips, etc..

If you take a standard non-restricted 870 shotgun... if you then purchase a commercially manufactured 8" barrel and pistol grip... if you then install those 2 items on your 870 shotgun... you will have a short shotgun as shown above and you will have done nothing that would cause any legislation to trigger a change in legal classification of the firearm. That was how/why CFC decided these were non-restricted.

If, however, you take your 870, cut the stock and/or cut the barrel then you will have created a Prohibited Firearm.

Don't know if this helps to understand the situation but that is how CFC explained it to us.

Mark

Questar"

Now this was in reference to there 8.5" barrels. But wouldn't it be the same for the 12.5?
Click to expand...

This isn't debate club. Pistol grip plus 12.5" barrel is less than 26". We're giving the advice needed to keep you out of jail.
 
locke it said:
Two words. Mares legs. All of them are under 26"... How's that work. Huh?[/QUOTE
A mares leg is a rifle. The ruling was for the classsification of a SHOTGUN. They aren't the same. You can de restrict a rifle, but a shotgun has been put in the same category as a pistol and once it is restricted cannot be de restricted. I talked to them about this and the way it was explained to me, (by the rcmp) is that for an 870 TYPE shotgun, that if you combine a barrel length less than 16 inches and an over all length of less than 26 inches that it was deemed to be a pistol and therefore restricted, wheather it comes from the factory like that or not. There was a section about that in the last frt disc if I recall. It was posted here at one time but is probably buried somewhere.
Click to expand...
 
Lol.... This place is funny.

Shotgun, rifle, it doesn't matter as they are both non restricted.

You are correct in that the RCMP ruled dlask's short 870s a "handgun" but it makes no sense as they are not designed to be used with 1 hand... The grizzlys frt says "may be restricted" that tells me that even the RCMP doesn't know the answer to this debate.

Further more if the RCMP think the short 870s are a "handgun" how is the mares leg that is marketed as a "pistol" not?
 
Buzzballer said:
Before tonight I would agree with you, but after reading this post from Questar im very confused
Click to expand...

To add more mystery, have a look at this shotgun from Blue Line:

http://www.blueline-activities.com/shop/product_info.php?cPath=39&products_id=308

and then read the product description. Non-restricted with the full stock, restricted with the pistol grip installed.

My understanding on the mare's leg rifles being non-restricted comes down to the fact that they were manufactured that way, while OP is talking about swapping parts to get his to the short length. Rifles and shotguns are both classified the same by the CFC, the legislation makes no distinction between rifles and shotguns, only rimfire/centerfire and manual action/semi-auto.

Since no one has posted the relevant portion of the CC, here it is:

“restricted firearm” means
  • (a) a handgun that is not a prohibited firearm,
  • (b) a firearm that
    • (i) is not a prohibited firearm,
    • (ii) has a barrel less than 470 mm in length, and
    • (iii) is capable of discharging centre-fire ammunition in a semi-automatic manner,
  • (c) a firearm that is designed or adapted to be fired when reduced to a length of less than 660 mm by folding, telescoping or otherwise, or
  • (d) a firearm of any other kind that is prescribed to be a restricted firearm
Click to expand...

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-39.html#h-37

Section (c) would seem to nicely cover OP's situation, IMO.


Mark
 
“restricted firearm” means
(a) a handgun that is not a prohibited firearm,
(b) a firearm that
(i) is not a prohibited firearm,
(ii) has a barrel less than 470 mm in length, and
(iii) is capable of discharging centre-fire ammunition in a semi-automatic manner,
(c) a firearm that is designed or adapted to be fired when reduced to a length of less than 660 mm BY folding, telescoping or otherwise, or
(d) a firearm of any other kind that is prescribed to be a restricted firearm
Click to expand...


Interesting. Would that mean that a firearm that is designed or adapted to be shorter than 660m WITHOUT THE NEED for folding, telescoping, etc, like a pistol grip shotgun, does not fall under the restricted category??

Meaning that if the firearm does not have any folding or telescoping feature, and that it is always shorter than 660m, its non-restricted?

Seems to me like the law can be interpretted that way. Even more so if you take the mares leg example into account. Otherwise, why wouldn't the law just say "All firearms under 660mm overall length."?? With the specification that "for measurement, firearms that can be reduced by telescoping or folding need to be measured while at they're shortest possible configuration"?
 
sewktbk said:
Seems to me like the law can be interpretted that way. Even more so if you take the mares leg example into account. Otherwise, why wouldn't the law just say "All firearms under 660mm overall length."?? With the specification that "for measurement, firearms that can be reduced by telescoping or folding need to be measured while at they're shortest possible configuration"?
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting this Sewktbk, here in lies the problem. We all know that this law is a giant grey zone and every one has a different interpretation of what it means. Since pistol grips and short barrels are Designed from the factory to be on a short shot gun that would not be modifying the firearm by cutting down the barrel or the stock, or any other telescoping alteration that allows it to be folded or collapsed under 26"

What may be the real catch is the "or otherwise" portion of the act.. Since its not clear if that could include modification with designed parts. What does or otherwise really mean?

"(c)*a firearm that is designed or adapted to be fired when reduced to a length of less than 660 mm by folding, telescoping or otherwise, or"

I guess the only real way to figure this all out is to make a call to the CFC. But since this law is very unclear on some details. This could easily go ether way.
 
Buzzballer said:
Thanks for posting this Sewktbk, here in lies the problem. We all know that this law is a giant grey zone and every one has a different interpretation of what it means. Since pistol grips and short barrels are Designed from the factory to be on a short shot gun that would not be modifying the firearm by cutting down the barrel or the stock, or any other telescoping alteration that allows it to be folded or collapsed under 26"

What may be the real catch is the "or otherwise" portion of the act.. Since its not clear if that could include modification with designed parts. What does or otherwise really mean?

"(c)*a firearm that is designed or adapted to be fired when reduced to a length of less than 660 mm by folding, telescoping or otherwise, or"

I guess the only real way to figure this all out is to make a call to the CFC. But since this law is very unclear on some details. This could easily go ether way.
Click to expand...

You make a very valid point!

indeed, the word "otherwise" is open to even more interpretation.
I think it would be worth writing a letter to the CFC about it.
I'll try doing so when i get a chance.
 
I will as well, I would love, as I'm sure many on here would. To have a shot gun under 26" as non-restricted. As an ideal bear defense gun.

Does any one know a good email at the CFC to send questions to?

Also I think I will end all of my future legal transactions with "or otherwise"... It pretty much covers every thing ;)
 
Buzzballer said:
I will as well, I would love, as I'm sure many on here would. To have a shot gun under 26" as non-restricted. As an ideal bear defense gun.

Does any one know a good email at the CFC to send questions to?

Also I think I will end all of my future legal transactions with "or otherwise"... It pretty much covers every thing ;)
Click to expand...

Emails are easily ignored. I've found out that by sending a written letter through registered mail with signature required, you always get an answer from the right person. I've personnally decided to use only that method of communication when dealing with the CFC, especially for a legal question like this one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom