Dispute over SMD-12 classification

If the 8.5" gun came as a set with the pistol-grip, a full length butt and a 28" barrel (with choke tubes) it'd be a near-perfect all-round set-up.
Click to expand...

Well it's three quarters there, i believe it comes with the full lenght stock as well as the pistol grip.

But I BELIEVE the idea of the mag extension would be to allow for 'standard' barrels to fit the gun. Put the extension on and now regular remmy barrels fit, that's the idea i think.

Considering you can by mossberg-manufactured barrels for the 870 for around 150 + each, it'd be pretty easy to get a range of standard length barrels to suit your needs.
 
Here's a thought...

If the argument that this shotgun needs two hands to operate, does that mean that there is a way to make bolt-action "very short barreled rifles" currently classed as handguns non-restriected?
 
maybe but, bolt action handguns can be fired one handed. i've fired a SMD-12 one handed unsupported and off a bag. hurts like hell, and not very advisable.

besides, those bolt action guns are marketed as handguns, no?
 
Here's a thought...

If the argument that this shotgun needs two hands to operate, does that mean that there is a way to make bolt-action "very short barreled rifles" currently classed as handguns non-restriected?
Click to expand...

Yes, within the laws. It's not specific to shotguns. But - you cannot do it by cutting down the stock. you'd have to have a custom made pistol grip stock I guess, and of course a barrel manufactured by a licensed manufacturer like dlask.

Interestingly enough - lever and pump rifles would also be fair game. Because the remmy 7600 will accept some pistol grips made for the 870 (such as the knox) you could do it with that if you could get a barrel made.

However - you'd really want a licensed manufacturer to produce it i think.
If the argument that this shotgun needs two hands to operate, does that mean that there is a way to make bolt-action "very short barreled rifles" currently classed as handguns non-restriected?
Click to expand...

That was 'MY' argument, not 'THE' argument. My argument was that it's not a pistol, because it takes two hands to OPERATE.

My thinking was this - a pistol, once loaded, requires only one hand to fire and operate until the firearm is empty and needs to be reloaded. A pump action requires two hands - you COULD fire the first one one handed (heck you can with a full sized rifle i guess.) but to continue to fire you would need to use two hands to rack the next round in. And really it requires two hands to aim and control.

A bolt action rifle would be the same. Bang.. now what? you have to use two hands to cycle the action to continue. Same with a lever.

This was what I put forward as a reasonable answer to 'It's a pistol'. No - it's a small rifle. Why? It cannot be properly operated with one hand. A pistol is a 'hand' gun.

It would also apply to other actions that require more than one hand, such as levers. I guess singles would be out, but lets face it.. a single shot rifle with a pistol grip and an 8 inch barrel is a pistol. It can be entirely operated until it needs to be reloaded with one hand.
 
With respect to the bolt action pistol (XP100, etc.) scenario - if the firearm was put into the system as a handgun, it remains restricted, no matter what you do to it.
Following the "logic" used in the non-restricted classification of the Dlask shortgun, a non-restricted rifle should be able to be similarly configured.
But keep in mind that there is often a lack of consistancy in CFC interpretations.
 
I was at a local gun shop today and they told me that the Remington marked 8.5" Dlask was now classified as restricted (since last week). They have sold two and have one on the shelf and are wondering how the hell they will sell it...

Has anyone else heard this?

Troutseeker
 
I was at a local gun shop today and they told me that the Remington marked 8.5" Dlask was now classified as restricted (since last week). They have sold two and have one on the shelf and are wondering how the hell they will sell it...

Has anyone else heard this?
Click to expand...

There's a note to that effect a ways back, and it was more than a week.

Dlask was accepting those back and returning ones without that marking, which are still non-restricted. You should let the store know.
 
Ok, so no new rules are in effect at CFC... I told the guy that if they were marked SMD-12 they were reestricted and if marked Remington they were not. I guess he does not know what he's got in stock, I'll go check for him tomorrow.

Troutseeker
 
ok - hold on a sec... i may have misread that then..

Are you saying it's a 'remington' that's marked 'dlask' - or you saying is a dlask shotty that's marked 'remmington'...
 
I could have really used one of these last week. I was up north, I was on fabarm duty, the boy had the .22 on squirrel/grouse duty.

I got the short end of the stick.


A small .22 (like my ruger!) being carried, and a SMD in the pack would have been the shiznit. I did see a lot of bear sign in the area though, so I don't regret a thing.

n647466120_278807_2589.jpg
 
I've been following the threads concerning shorty shotties carefully, as I would dearly love to have one of them for bushwhacking usage. Unfortunately, in the real world let's face it any CFO sees this thing they are going to freak out, regardless of what paperwork you are carrying. One look at the pistol grip and resulting overall length and they will never believe that the gun is legit.

Also, God forbid but if the case in court is lost it will mean that the gun is only able to be taken to a range as a restricted weapon, right? Which would pretty well make it useful only for show'n'tell from that point on.

Is there any way to follow the status of the court proceedings, or is this just going to drag out for a LONG time? I understand the logic behind getting as many of these 'legal' guns out in the meantime, but why would they care how many are out there if they decide it is a restricted weapon?
 
KaiBosh said:
I've been following the threads concerning shorty shotties carefully, as I would dearly love to have one of them for bushwhacking usage. Unfortunately, in the real world let's face it any CFO sees this thing they are going to freak out, regardless of what paperwork you are carrying. One look at the pistol grip and resulting overall length and they will never believe that the gun is legit.

Also, God forbid but if the case in court is lost it will mean that the gun is only able to be taken to a range as a restricted weapon, right? Which would pretty well make it useful only for show'n'tell from that point on.

Is there any way to follow the status of the court proceedings, or is this just going to drag out for a LONG time? I understand the logic behind getting as many of these 'legal' guns out in the meantime, but why would they care how many are out there if they decide it is a restricted weapon?
Click to expand...
CO's in BC have been formally alerted to the non-restricted status of these guns.
 
Also, God forbid but if the case in court is lost it will mean that the gun is only able to be taken to a range as a restricted weapon, right? Which would pretty well make it useful only for show'n'tell from that point on.
Click to expand...

If that were to happen, you could slap a 'regular' stock on 'em and be back in business as an unrestricted. And that would definately still be a pretty cool gun :D
 
I measured mine it's overall length is approximately 29.5" with the butt stock on.

That is a nice looking pair there Sendero... :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom