I've said this elsewhere, but I'll repeat it for those who are reading this through some sort of rose coloured glasses. If they meant to ban chamberings, they would have. They didn't, they banned rifles. Nowhere do we see "the calibre known as 50 BMG" or "460 Weatherby" we see "the rifle known as ######x, and yyyyyyy, and zzzzzzz" they are banning rifles folks, not cartridges. It would make sense if you want to ban a certain energy level of cartridge, to list cartridges - not rifles that may have an ability, in some variants or with some very serious modifications, to chamber those cartridges. They show the intent of the regulation by listing the gun, not the cartridge. Contrary to what we see all over this site, they are NOT stupid, they just want to be able to deny the true intention and create plausible deniability until someone is standing in front of a judge. Like the 12 gauge choke issue, when they got called on it, they said it wasn't their intention, if that ever becomes an issue - guess what? What Bill Blair said will become "just one man's opinion, and he was wrong"
Brazilian Mauser uncrating videos
- Thread starter Paul L
- Start date
And to add to the above, they have still not defined variant. Nor have they defined what determines the muzzle energy. It is based on your actual gun with your actual ammo? Is it based on the manufacturer's data? What does capable of mean WRT a firearm and muzzle energy?
There are quite a few loose ends legally speaking that could end up catching people unaware in the future. It's hard to believe that legislation this flawed is allowed to be enacted.
There are quite a few loose ends legally speaking that could end up catching people unaware in the future. It's hard to believe that legislation this flawed is allowed to be enacted.
All of the above is quite obvious, as was the obvious bias at the EMA hearings.
Most Canadians could care less one way or another and that includes most firearms enthusiasts and fringe political parties.
This is the result of good people not getting involved in politics where and when needed in large visible numbers
The people making up and enabling C21 don't have a clue as to what they're enabling by closing another door on freedom.
2500$ if you look at the EE. Seriously though I'm not seeing any of these "listed" firearms drop much in price. I think they were running from about 800-3000$ depending on condition. Probably avg around 1000.....I guess.
Read the info at the link, it's regarding R. v Hasselwander and it shows how the interpretation will go:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/CSSA/PDF/2020-05-13-CSSA-Legal-Opinion-Capable-of-10K-Joules.pdf
It doesn't say they want to ban 1908 Brazilian Mausers in calibres that produce over 10Kj - it says they're banning the 1908 Brazilian Mauser which was only ever made in 7mm Mauser, and produces 3,500 J. The info at the link is why. Incidentally, take notice of how they classify cartridges over 10 Kj - the suggestion is that the proof load will be the standard, now, I know it doesn't specify oiled or un-oiled, but it's still the proof load, not the load that you or I could buy. Meaning 338 Lap and 375 H&H are on the table because their proof loads are over 10Kj. Maybe that's where the Ruger No 1 comes from?
https://s3.amazonaws.com/CSSA/PDF/2020-05-13-CSSA-Legal-Opinion-Capable-of-10K-Joules.pdf
It doesn't say they want to ban 1908 Brazilian Mausers in calibres that produce over 10Kj - it says they're banning the 1908 Brazilian Mauser which was only ever made in 7mm Mauser, and produces 3,500 J. The info at the link is why. Incidentally, take notice of how they classify cartridges over 10 Kj - the suggestion is that the proof load will be the standard, now, I know it doesn't specify oiled or un-oiled, but it's still the proof load, not the load that you or I could buy. Meaning 338 Lap and 375 H&H are on the table because their proof loads are over 10Kj. Maybe that's where the Ruger No 1 comes from?
Last edited:
If you scroll down through the calibers it lists them all as non-restricted except for the caliber of 460 WBY MAG
The individual items have not been changed, this amendment is not law, yet. The red text is a tag. They will change the FRT, overnight and without warning (as they usually do) when the amendment becomes part of a law. Again, show me where in the amendment - not the current regulations - that it says they are being calibre specific in their selection of rifles that they have banned by name. Also show me the flaw in logic in Mr. Burlew's legal analysis of how Hasselwander applies to this situation. I get that you don't want this to destroy your life, being in the trade and all, but as we saw with reclassifications of "not an AR" firearms post OIC, I can't believe you're still saying that "they wouldn't". They can, they will and it's a very supportable position that they are.
it is correct that the "variants" will make ALL mauser actions and especially all K98 actions prohibited regardless of caliber. This will happen in the RCMP FRT bans they love doing.
It is also possible that they can declare all bolt actions to be variants of banned bolt actions
stencollector
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- shilo MB, the armpit of Canada
It won't matter what cliber the 1908 Mauser is in, because someone modified one (or more) to accept a round (460 WBY) that produces over 10,000 joules of energy. The 1908 mauser in every caliber gets caught in this because of the wording "capable of". Since there is at least one out there now, then all 1908 mausers actions (and likely many more) are capable of firing a round over 10K.
This is likely to prevent someone from converting some of the big bore guns into guns that are just acceptable, as happened in other countries. Anyone for a Boys rifle in .338? Can't, because they listed it by name.
This is likely to prevent someone from converting some of the big bore guns into guns that are just acceptable, as happened in other countries. Anyone for a Boys rifle in .338? Can't, because they listed it by name.
