Dlask's pump .223 up on the website

This is just one man's poinion, but if I were an LEO and my PD wanted to issue a patrol carbine and they stuck me with a craptacular pump action plastic fantastic piece of PC ####e, I would be outraged. I'd rather even have a SEMI AUTOMATIC Ruger than a restricted pump taking proprietary mags (shudder...). Why must our police forces be sent in harms way with less effective quipment than what our armed forces isses on a daily basis?

Don't make a crappy AR wanna be to do an AR's job. Just issue the AR. Go look at Europe. Police carry MP5's and G36's in the streets and no-one is calling France or modern day Germany "police states" as far as I know. If you don't want to issue "assault rifles" (whatever that means :roll: ) then don't issue select fire M16's. Issue semi-auto AR15's. :wink: It's not like Police are bound by the 15 round mag rule anyhow.

I admire Dlask for trying to make a gun available TO THE PUBLIC that would theoretically be non-restricted and not subject to mag limitations, but if they can't deliver just that, don't take risk the lives of front line law enforcement by circle jerking PD's into buying anything less than the best carbine available and an untried Pump Action ain't it :evil:

EDIT: I'm not bashing DLASK here. I do hope their new gun works out for civies. But they already make a more suitable patrol carbine. Try to sell the cops the DAR701, not the Pac5.
 
Claven2, I TOTALLY agree with ya!!!

I shudder when I see Brinks guards with revolvers... Talk about being outgunned...

Cheers
Jay
 
acrashb said:
craptacular pump action plastic fantastic piece of PC ####e
Click to expand...
So, you've fired it and determined for this for yourself? Or you're just unable to express yourself in a sensible way?
Click to expand...

And you have fired it extensively and field tried it for breakage? I don;t need to try a new gun in controlled range conditions to know it isn't a tried and tested solution with 4 decades of continuous development liek the AR. :roll:

Maybe think before you type?
 
And for the record, I rather think Police would be better served by hanging up the glocks and carrying JUST patrol carbines and shotguns. I know the unions would ##### about the extra weight, but nothing forces polite like a black rifle over the shoulder of the cop writing you your speeding ticket. :twisted:

And certainly, cops responding the B&E's and liquor store roberies would feel ALOT more adequate with a CQB style long arm than with a .40 cal against armed and determined criminals.
 
Claven2 said:
acrashb said:
craptacular pump action plastic fantastic piece of PC ####e
Click to expand...
So, you've fired it and determined for this for yourself? Or you're just unable to express yourself in a sensible way?
Click to expand...

And you have fired it extensively and field tried it for breakage?
[...]Maybe think before you type?
Click to expand...

Someone will, and then we'll know. Until then you're bad-mouthing something with absolutely no basis. Why are you so angry?
 
Have you ever seen the video of the two guys in California that showed up with vests and AK's to rob a bank and then had their way with the police for about a half hour until the SWAT time arrived with AR's?

What about Roszco out west who killed four RCMPs with his select-fire HK91 (ie, G3 battle rifle).

Imagine yourself in the shoes of one of thsoe officers. What patrol carbine do you want? Ar15A2 or later iteration of the AR15, or the brandy-new untested pump action rifle from Dlask that doesn't share mags with what every other responding agency is issued??? :shock:

Think about it ;)

Like I said, I hope DLASK has alot of success selling these rifles to interested persons, but for the love of god! Give the LEO's something PROVEN up to the task, not some new gun with a slower rate of fire and who knows WHAT level of reliability???
 
Being a manual pump action, I would think the system would have some sort of locking block or slide assembly included. This tells me that there would have to be additional components installed in the receiver. What would the availability of these parts be like 5, 10 years from now. Is that dependant on the amount of PAC5's on the market? Were there any market feasability studies conducted or was this gun produced on a whim?

If you wanted to extract a chambered round, how would you do so? Is there some kind of action bar lock I'm not seeing in the photo shown on Dlasks' website? ... or does the action even lock up when a round is chambered?

Could internal photos be taken and posted to CGN?

Is the upper compatible with an AR15 platform if one wanted to replace the upper receiver at some point?

How do the PAC5 'proprieatry' magazines differ from conventional AR mags?

Is Mr Dlask himself available to answer some of my questions in detail on this forum? Like what were the exact reasons given by the forensic team for the PAC5 not being passed as non-restricetd class.

Regards.
 
Realistically, speaking to some friends with a history of getting things classed non-restricted, Dlask probably could have gone about getting approvals differently.

If you are really serious about getting a back rifle classed non restricted, you need to hedge your bets. If the rifle they submitted looked at all "tactical" then they were already behind on the game.

The regs allow some leeway. Were I tring to get that thing approved, I would have submitted the same receiver done ALOT differently.

Think:
- Silver annodized receiver with bright red lettering for the model number.
- "PAC-5" would instead have been "Dlask Light Sporter/Varminter" or something similar.
- It would have shipped with a 5 round "hunting" or "guide" magazine made of zytel or similar material, not aluminum AR mag lookalikes.
- The fixed buttstock (or even thumbhole stock) furniture would have been made of nicely burled walnut.
- The barrel would have been 22" long without compensator or threads for same.
- Caliber would have NOT been .223, maybe .22-250 or .222 Rem.
- Would have been sent to the RCMP lab with a Leupold hunting scope on it in non-QD rings.

Once the design got approved you could then pull a fast one and sell the "Black Tactical" model :shock:

But don;t, for the love of god, send the evil-looking black gun model as your test piece! :shock: The morons at the RCMp lab will ban it based just on looks and perceived AR-edness. :evil:
 
No the upper cannot be swapped out with an AR upper, that was done so it wouldn't be classed as restricted. As for parts if a LEO agency picks on up, I am sure parts would be part of the contract.
As for your comments Claven2, you are forgetting a ton of things. Lets see, ever heard of police boards and community councils? Try flying AR15's by them and see where it gets you. Most will not allow the issue of combat rifles to daily cops, no matter what the reason. A pump action rifle has far more in common with a shotgun, something that a lot of police forces have experience with, so training time will be reduced. Public perception is unfortunately a very big part of policing, and a nice pump rifle will not raise the publics hackles as much as an "combat" rifle.
As for submitting the gun, if you submit something and then change it radically you are going to have submit it again. Joe isn't about to play such games and submitted it exactly as how he intends to release it.
 
Slavex said:
No the upper cannot be swapped out with an AR upper, that was done so it wouldn't be classed as restricted. As for parts if a LEO agency picks on up, I am sure parts would be part of the contract.
As for your comments Claven2, you are forgetting a ton of things. Lets see, ever heard of police boards and community councils? Try flying AR15's by them and see where it gets you. Most will not allow the issue of combat rifles to daily cops, no matter what the reason. A pump action rifle has far more in common with a shotgun, something that a lot of police forces have experience with, so training time will be reduced. Public perception is unfortunately a very big part of policing, and a nice pump rifle will not raise the publics hackles as much as an "combat" rifle.
As for submitting the gun, if you submit something and then change it radically you are going to have submit it again. Joe isn't about to play such games and submitted it exactly as how he intends to release it.
Click to expand...

Changing the color, furniture and caliber are NOT susbstantial changes under the regulations. They do not materially affect the operation of the rifle anymore than putting synth furniture on a 700 BDL changes anything.
 
Guys,
I have to step in again here and just state for the record that my source was misinformed about what is happening with this rifle.Therefore some of my previous statement was wrong.Apparently the rifle is staying restricted.I hope I didn't get anyones hopes up more than mine,for a non-restricted version.It's NOT being looked at again in Ottawa however there is supposed to be someone there who knows more about firearms so maybe this won't happen again in the future.
 
DARKSTANG said:
I hope they change their mind or something!!!this would sell like mad if they were Non.Every camper would own one!
Click to expand...

I highly doubt that "every camper" would own one. Most campers have Win94's or something less tectical than a PAC5. For right or wrong, it's true.
 
I am probably way out of my depth here, but why wouldn't anyone wanting a non-restricted pump .223 just go out and buy a Remington 7615? http://www.remingtonle.com/rifles/7615.htm I don't want to open a can of worms, but I read elsewhere on this site that it is legal with non-pinned 30 round mags. I realize that point is being debated - especially if you show up with an AR at the same time. But even with five rounders I think it would make a good non-restricted camp gun. Or does it just not have the "coolness factor" of a black gun?
 
GetaGrip said:
I am probably way out of my depth here, but why wouldn't anyone wanting a non-restricted pump .223 just go out and buy a Remington 7615? http://www.remingtonle.com/rifles/7615.htm I don't want to open a can of worms, but I read elsewhere on this site that it is legal with non-pinned 30 round mags. I realize that point is being debated - especially if you show up with an AR at the same time. But even with five rounders I think it would make a good non-restricted camp gun. Or does it just not have the "coolness factor" of a black gun?
Click to expand...

Fromw what I understand there are some reliability and durability questions surrounding the Remington model, but bear in mind that is anecdotal as I've not used one personally.
 
I really wish Dlask would fight to get this classified as NON RESTRICTED.
There is no justification for the restricted ruling. Great rifle, but I won't buy
anything I can't take into the great outdoors and go plinking.
 
This rifle was a great idea, and likely would have enjoyed high-demand as a non-restricted, but when classified as restricted there just doesn't seem to be any point to it.

I'll hold on to my AR for shooting at the range.
 
Joe is in my opinion an excellent gunsmith/buissness man that I have had very good dealings with since 1987 and I find it hard to believe he would have spent the time and money to design this rifle if he thought for a second that it wouldn't fly.

He unlike the rest of us is at least trying.......

This for me is an answer to a want/need that I have for a high capacity rifle but only if it was non-restricted.

I would want it available in different chamberings or be able to switch to different chamberings as well. Something with a little larger caliber and then what about a conversion chambered to 10mm or other pistol rounds?

I don't own a AR style rifle due to all of the restrictions on them.

Joe's PAC-5 if non-restricted would be a dream come true for me.

Cam Cooke
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom