ATRS MS with 18.25 Faxon barrel

[onetwentyish]

You guys need to realize FRT is not law. Just a observation (sometimes biased on lineage or ease of conversion to FA) of firearm actions which is provided as an opinion to the RCMP for filing charges. Just because an FRT or Child FRT do not exist doesn't mean its no bueno. It means they have yet to observe a sample in that configuration.

I was a strong supporter of ATRS and bought a 1/2 dozen MS sets before they even heard back from the lab.

Ask yourself this, how could the WK180 or ATRS MS be sold before they had FRT? Because it isn't law. And as long as your firearms conform to the standards and regulations set forth in the firearms act, you are safe.

 

[jiffx2781]

Then I was in to ATRS 2 weeks ago shaun told me we are back on for making a fixed stock rimfire or straight pull BA, as they had recieved a follow up email not long ago saying this was actually possible.

Hopefully this is correct. I'm not doubting you or the ATRS crew but I don't trust the guy writing the email to them one bit.

A copy of this communication to them from the "experts" would be VERY helpful (if ATRS was willing to provide a copy).

I agree the FRT does say SA. But the FRT is not law and while you could be charged by a confused cop and rifle confiscated, I would bet very strongly that it would be easy to prove your innocence the moment a verifier looks at the rifle. The law is the law, the FRT is an opinion taken into consideration during the charging, but if the FRT is incorrect or in-accurate, than its back to just the law.

I can't really disagree with any of that.

It may help to get the firearm verified, and fax in the paperwork, in my experiences that takes max 1 week from the date of submission, then you would have a child FRT for your odd ball which may or may not help if you been charged.

This is without a doubt the best route to take.



As long as you've done your due diligence and have some form of paperwork (verification) on hand I'd say that the risk factor would be pretty low, perhaps even nonexistent.

Without something in hand (other than the original FRT) showing proof of classification in the firearms current configuration I personally still would not chance it.

I agree the FRT is not the law BUT it's still one of the first things the enforcers of the law look at to determine whether or not your following the law.

As you said, the law is the law and the rest is just opinion. The onus would be on the individual to prove that they're playing within the law. It's much easier to put a little effort into proving that you are BEFORE you risk troubles than it is to prove yourself innocent afterwards.


I would like to do a short barreled rimfire build as well as put a can cannon on an upper but until I can get something in black and white saying I'm good to go I'm going to have to play it safe. As I said, I've been through the long and expensive process of our court system before and am not looking for a reason to go there again. Punishment through process regardless of how right you are.

 

[onetwentyish]

Hopefully this is correct. I'm not doubting you or the ATRS crew but I don't trust the guy writing the email to them one bit.

A copy of this communication to them from the "experts" would be VERY helpful (if ATRS was willing to provide a copy).



I can't really disagree with any of that.



This is without a doubt the best route to take.



As long as you've done your due diligence and have some form of paperwork (verification) on hand I'd say that the risk factor would be pretty low, perhaps even nonexistent.

Without something in hand (other than the original FRT) showing proof of classification in the firearms current configuration I personally still would not chance it.

I agree the FRT is not the law BUT it's still one of the first things the enforcers of the law look at to determine whether or not your following the law.

As you said, the law is the law and the rest is just opinion. The onus would be on the individual to prove that they're playing within the law. It's much easier to put a little effort into proving that you are BEFORE you risk troubles than it is to prove yourself innocent afterwards.


I would like to do a short barreled rimfire build as well as put a can cannon on an upper but until I can get something in black and white saying I'm good to go I'm going to have to play it safe. As I said, I've been through the long and expensive process of our court system before and am not looking for a reason to go there again. Punishment through process regardless of how right you are.

I understand the way you see things but I also recognize that the law tells you what is not permissible, not what is. I carry my CCFR legal insurance and hope they stand behind me if the time comes. In the mean time I enjoy all the legal configurations of firearms I can afford, and try not to think too hard about the over-zealous or confused officer I might happen upon at some point. Life is too short to worry excessivly about being charged for doing things that are completely within the law.

 

[SteelFlint]

I used to have a pretty cool sports car. Gangster even, if you wanted to go there. And I’d get pulled over everywhere I went, despite the car being in bone stock factory condition. Even at stop lights. And always for “random security check”. It happened so much that I complained to VPD with of course no response.

Point is, can’t assume COs have the same firearms expertise as you do. They are minions of the CFP machinery. Don’t risk it.

 

[no-one special]

I used to have a pretty cool sports car. Gangster even, if you wanted to go there. And I’d get pulled over everywhere I went, despite the car being in bone stock factory condition. Even at stop lights. And always for “random security check”. It happened so much that I complained to VPD with of course no response.

Point is, can’t assume COs have the same firearms expertise as you do. They are minions of the CFP machinery. Don’t risk it.

For the win!!!
99% of LE are simply doing a job. They are not paid to employ logic or fairness, simply to interpret the laws as best they can. When something is beyond their grasp they normally tend to lay the charge and let the crown , judge and YOUR lawyer sort it out in court. A very simple charge costs very close to the cost of a new car to defeat BUT can have lasting ramifications for the rest of your life if travel is in the plans at all. ALL firearms charges are looked at by immigration in about the same light as violent crime.

OP for the few hundred dollars to buy a new barrel that guarantees you no legal hassle, it is a much better investment than any lawyer will be.

 

[no-one special]

I understand the way you see things but I also recognize that the law tells you what is not permissible, not what is. I carry my CCFR legal insurance and hope they stand behind me if the time comes. In the mean time I enjoy all the legal configurations of firearms I can afford, and try not to think too hard about the over-zealous or confused officer I might happen upon at some point. Life is too short to worry excessivly about being charged for doing things that are completely within the law.

You might be well advised to find out EXACTLY what CCFR legal insurance covers and doesn't. You may be surprised to find how badly exposed you are in reality. Also what are the limits. 100K goes no where in court if the crown decides they want to make an example of you. It is very common practice in court for the government who has endless money as it is ours to bankrupt you in order to get you to cop to a deal. There are many precedents to back this up if you have been paying attention to any of the cases that have gone to court in the last 15 years.

 

[cr5]

I understand the way you see things but I also recognize that the law tells you what is not permissible, not what is. I carry my CCFR legal insurance and hope they stand behind me if the time comes. In the mean time I enjoy all the legal configurations of firearms I can afford, and try not to think too hard about the over-zealous or confused officer I might happen upon at some point. Life is too short to worry excessivly about being charged for doing things that are completely within the law.

Something to consider.

Just like your car insurance, your CCFR coverage is based on a few criteria that insurance companies will use to avoid paying you in the event of an incident.
If you drive your car onto a frozen lake and break through, your insurance company says that you willingly put your vehicle in that situation and your coverage is void.
If you modify your car to where it is no longer able to pass a safety inspection or no longer complies with the DOT requirements even with something as simple as installing non DOT approved headlights they can void your policy in the event of an accident.
Coverage is based on you following the laws and they assume that your vehicle is in the same condition it was in when the policy was taken out.

Your CCFR insurance will work the same way, they assume that YOU are doing your due diligence and following the laws and that your firearms have not been modified to now be out of compliance.
The FRT may not be law but it is what they police forces and courts use when determining if you are compliant with the laws. Doing whatever you want because in your interpretation of the law what you are doing is legal will not automatically make you innocent if you are charged with a firearms violation.
FRT's are issued based on the labs interpretation of the laws which means that when your case goes to court and the courts bring in their experts, guess what they're going to say, that's right, whatever the FRT says.

So, if you take your MS and configure it in a way that is questionable and get stopped, they will refer to the FRT, then since the cop in the field is probably not an expert he/she will confiscate the rifle, charge you, and eventually, you might get cleared of the charges and your rifle may be returned. If CCFR stands behind you things may go smoothly and fairly quickly but they may also say that your modified rifle is not worth the risk and use a loophole to get out of covering your court costs. Also consider that CCFR is not some multi-billion dollar insurance company, one or two cases like this would sink them and your coverage is worthless. Fighting the federal government in court would be a very bad idea financially.

Why is it that every time we win something (ARish rifles being classed non restricted) guys immediately have to try to push the boundaries and risk it all?
With the current government openly trying to make our lives difficult and trying to take away more and more I think it would be a much better idea to take our wins and enjoy them while we can rather than trying to push the limits. I think the laws are stupid the way they currently are but with the way the world is changing I think laying low and not drawing any more negative attention to ourselves would be a better course of action till after the next election.
If guys want to fight for things it should be done the right way, in the courts ahead of time, not on the defense after being charged with something dumb.

You are 100% correct though, life is too short to to worry excessively about being charged with doing something that is completely within the law. The problem is that you're only completely within the law based on your interpretation of it, not necessarily the interpretation of the police or courts who have the final word in the matter.

And your comment earlier about buying 6 of these before the FRT was released was a risk, not a risk that you would get what you paid for but a risk that the lab could have deemed them restricted. Then you would have owned $6000 worth of restricted ARish receiver sets that very few people would give you $600 for no matter how nice they are. They could have easily ended up on the AR variant list and you would have no recourse. FRT may not be law but if it says restricted you're screwed regardless of where it physically fits in the classifications. So do you still think the FRT meaningless?

If the FRT is not law then why haven't guys been sticking 20 inch barrels in their AR's for years and saying piss off to any cop that questioned them? Without the FRT there is nothing about an AR with an 18.5+ barrel that makes it restricted, yet no one has tried to argue that one and just gone ahead and taken it off range to play (no one that will admit to it on a public forum anyway).

 

[Uisge]

Plus just imagine the Liberal media headlines! Violent criminal turns normal rifle into bullet spewing instrument of destruction! More at 11

 

[Sqr]

So I measured my 18" Faxon Gunner barrel that's sitting on my AR. It actually measured to the bolt with a guide rod to 464mm or 18.25".

If I did want to use this as NR on my new ATRS MS as a hunting set up, I could just not install a gas block, and have in effect a bolt action having to rack the charging handle for every shot and keep it NR? I'm very worried about bumping into a CO, and having him crap his pants after seeing an AR15 look alike.

I ultimately want a 22" high end SS carbon wrapped barrel in 223 rem, but that requires some saving on my part.

I just want to get out in the wild and use this MS beauty legally with the barrel I currently have.

The FRT lists it as a semi auto which the arresting office will surely point out. Hell the office probably doesn’t know about the MS so are you willing to go through the hassle and try to convince him a bolt action MS with a short barrel is legal?