Anyone know why the FN FAL was outlawed??

animalamidon said:
many non-restricted and restricted firearms can be converted to "clear the room" in 10 minutes. Some firearms you do something very simple like change firing pin spring, or make slight modifications. I'll go with the "no rhyme or reason" just like most prohibs. kind of like how shotguns that can switch from pump to semi like franchi SPAS and some benellis are prohibs. no rhyme or reason. well i guess you could scare someone to death with an SPAS!
Click to expand...

This ease of conversion trash is just a red herring. "Change the firing pin spring"? Really? Do some serious design research. Some firearms can be converted without a major rework. Some are just about impossible to convert without remanufacture.
The whole thing was based on appearance and social engineering.
 
I carried one for years in the CF and bought one from SIR in montreal for 180 bucks around 1986 or so....1000 rounds for another $140 or so ...the good ol days...lol....had it worked on by an armouer on base and it worked like a charm..... really miss the rifle as I sold it before all the reg,s changed ...but to have one and just look at it would drive me nuts .
Doesn,t make sense to me why it is prohibited either...but I cant see it changing.
I recently bought a Poly M-305 and find it brings back some fond memories...well except for tracers..lol
 
its cause the government's stupid. plain and simple. trying to get rid of gun while saying that the "scary" ones can be converted to baby killing fully automatic within minutes gets them more public support from people that're too naive or retarded to think for themselves.
 
I have fond memories shooting the FN C1A1 in Army Cadets on Base Borden( a long long time ago). Good times.
 
BattleRife said:
I'm sorry, but every answer above is nonsense, plain and simple (with the possible exception of "because it's a hot little rifle").

This comment is especially off the mark:


The prohibited list never had anything with "easily convertible to full auto" guns. It was ALWAYS 100% about guns that looked scary. That is why, officially, guns were graded on a point scale. Any gun receiving 50 points was prohibited, and the presence of a pistol grip earned 49.

The FAL (and all variants) became prohibited on January 1, 1995, the same day as the AK-47, HK 91, Galil, Sig PE57, Beretta BM-59, AR-18, Daewoo K1, FN-FNC and a bunch of other rifles. The FAL was not singled out in any way, not for its capabilities, not for any eccentricities of its trigger system, not for its availability. Essentially, every centrefire semi-auto rifle with a pistol grip, except the AR-15. became prohibited. The Liberal government was trying to remove non-sporting "assault rifles" from civilian hands, and the FN-FAL fell into that category.
Click to expand...

so basically i cant get anything with a G3 style receiver?
 
i remember that the uzis, stens, and the fns were the only things restricted in that container we got from isreal- the rest were unrestricted, including the g3s- i got the 14 b/c i knew i could always get parts for it including mags from our american friends- it also 'SHOT" better- in those days you could try out the gun before you bought it- the gun store had a range "out back?
also, i think it was about 75 that the CANADIAN fnc1 was added to the firearms act of 69 making it RESTRCTED-i remember 2 rsms "borrowing" a couple of fns to go hunting and getting charged with something- i was in basic and had to sit through a court so we could see how "military justice" worked- as to whether the it was a show for our benefit( they just loved to scare the you know what out of recruits) i can't say- i do remember the boots had their laces removed
 
Last edited:
Not much new to add, except I remember when it suddenly went from "nothing" to "restricted", back around 1981-82 and I recall that Trudeau was still at the helm.

Coincided with influx of surplus rifles into Canada. I was going to grab one as I thought it would be an awesome deer rifle, parliament cancelled that plan in the stroke of a pen by making it restricted...you know, to prevent that river of blood from running down Yonge Street when every miscreant in the nation would immediately run out and buy one!

The points analysis, continued hysteria, attempts to legislate sanity, etc. eventually sent it off into prohib pergatory...and the rest is history.

Gonna be interesting to see what tsunami of anti-gun legislation the Tucson shootings last week will give rise to. I'd be willing to bet our US neighbours will see the mag limitation of Clinton's time resurface, or perhaps worse. You can bet Wendy and company will be ready to start howling here as well.

Not to minimize the tragedy, but isn't it amazing how mass shootings have been almost a fact of life in the US...and now that a politician has become a victim, the rhetoric is shifted into overdrive.
 
The story I heard, in the Army in the late 80's, was that in the late 70's, some nutcase went on a shooting rampage down the street in Vancouver. The police responded, not sure if ANYONE was even hurt (maybe he was just shooting at parked cars and lamp posts?!?), but they determined it was an FN. The police chief at the time, looked into this rifle, and was appalled anyone could buy one...so he made it his mission to push the system to ban it. Years later, the Restricted classification. I thought it odd at the time, since AR-15's, AK's, CA MG-34's and everything else was still non-restricted.

Now, the shooting incident might have been pure BS rumor, but the Vancouver Chief of police being the one that pushed the Restricted on the FN pattern, that I've heard from many different places in the 1980's.
 
Everyone that served in the CF prior to the C7/8/9 introduction knows what an FN C1+1 is.

All the rifles that are on the prohib list is because someone went through the Gun Digest with a highlighter and circled pictures of 'bad' rifles.

If prior 'shootings' were grounds for banning guns, I would think a remington 700 .243 would be banned, I think that is what that d'bag used in the tower at that Texas school.
 
# Automatic weapons were added to the category of firearms that had to be registered in 1951. The registry system was centralized under the Commissioner of the RCMP.
# In 1969, Bill C-150 created categories of “non-restricted,” “restricted” and “prohibited” weapons. Police were also given preventive powers of search and seizure by judicial warrant if they had grounds to believe that weapons that belonged to an individual endangered the safety of society.
# In 1977, Bill C-51 required Firearms Acquisition Certificates (FACs) for the acquisition (but not possession) of all firearms and introduced controls on the selling of ammunition. FAC applicants were required to pass a basic criminal record check before being issued an FAC.
# In 1991, Bill C-17 tightened up restrictions and established controls on any firearms that had a military or paramilitary appearance. Legislation also made changes to the FAC system. FAC applicants were now required to pass a firearms safety course, pass a more thorough background check, and wait a minimum of 28 days after applying for an FAC before being issued one

I think that Marc Lapine's killing of 14 women in Montreal in 1989 with a Ruger mini-14 had a lot to do with the 1991 (and subsequent) changes. It wouldn't surprise me if even more restrictions come about due to the Meyerthorpe incident.
 
So much fail in this thread.

All ABC,NZ Fals were the same due to the rifle steerage committee. All were semi auto in the end except for the C1A1D and they all used the exact same parts dimensionally except for the rear sights and the receivers.

It was a stipulation that regardless of national preference, that the rifles be able to interchange parts and ammunition.

The Aussie L1A1, Brit L1A1 and Cdn C1A1 have the exact same fire control parts except ours didn't have a cotter pins so our troops could fully strip the trigger mech.[/B]

To think that the Aussie ones were auto and ours were not shows that you never held one in your hands.

Before you ask, I was trained on the C1 and own one as well as an L1a1, 1A1 and an Israeli FN.
 
X2 on the Australians not being full auto....I carried one of there FN,s when I went to Australia for a month and a half with 3ppcli in 1978 we went down to go through the jungle warfare course and then trained with their mech infantry after .

We had 2 m16,s per section..... the pointmen carried them and used the full auto to extract themselves or win the firefight and the rest of us carried the FN
 
Last edited:
Jungle warfare with the FN, now there's a nightmare - must be like endlessly untieing a knot with chopsticks. I guess your rifle is pretty well camoflaged after the first half hour though, bet it weighs thirty pounds too.
 
I thought I heard a rumour that Colt (?) sent a lawyer to plead thier case in front of a Canadian judge. New AR-15s sell right off the factory floor to civilian owners.
The FN-FALs and such were all surplus. Hence the manufacturer already made thier cash from government sales and licensing agreements. Therefore less motivation to protect civilian markets.
 
Brutus said:
I thought I heard a rumour that Colt (?) sent a lawyer to plead thier case in front of a Canadian judge. New AR-15s sell right off the factory floor to civilian owners.
The FN-FALs and such were all surplus. Hence the manufacturer already made thier cash from government sales and licensing agreements. Therefore less motivation to protect civilian markets.
Click to expand...

that sounds like something from the annals of an anti to me

they have a drive on to make manufacturers out as the bad guy
 
I still recall marveling at the much vaunted Aussie breech block carrier sand grooves.

Anyhow. Nice to see I'm not the only old enough to have lived and worked through SARP.


+1 for fails in thread
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom