Hi-Point 9mm Carbine in Canada?
- Thread starter ranger_dave
- Start date
I've asked Kodiak Outpost about that same thing. Apparently it is a prohibited device because it is classed as a bullpup and able to fire without the stock. Kind of a kick in the nads, but yey for the Canadian Government keeping us safe from stockless rifles @.@
There is no listing in the FRT for the Hi-Point carbine... in fact there are only 4 FRT#s for Hi-Point firearms and they are all handguns (no rifles at all listed).
The carbine is not a Bull-Pup...
There's no reason for it to be classified as Prohibited... it should be classified as a "Restricted" based on barrel length (at 16.5").
Just my $0.02 cents worth
Mark
The carbine is not a Bull-Pup...
There's no reason for it to be classified as Prohibited... it should be classified as a "Restricted" based on barrel length (at 16.5").
Just my $0.02 cents worth
Mark
I believe they were classed as bullpups (the bad kind with a barrelled action that will function without the stock) - the logic being that the magazine is behind the trigger. There was a long thread about these a while back, and there was certainly interest in them, particularly with the aftermarket replacement stocks, which make them look not unlike a Beretta.
If they have in fact been classified, there should be a FRT entry for them.
If they have in fact been classified, there should be a FRT entry for them.
Magazine behind the trigger is NOT the definition of a Bullpup nor is it the Canadian Definition of a "Prohibited Bullpup" which really is an issue of the stock.
The TP9 has a magazine "behind the trigger", in the pistol grip and it's not prohibited... the MP7 has a magazine in the pistol grip (behind the trigger) and it's not Prohibited.
Once again I will state that as of this morning, the online FRT (which is current to within 24 hours) does NOT list any Hi-Point Carbines or rifles of any kind with any classification at all... just not there. Only 4 FRT #'s for handgunds are in the FRT at this time.
Mark
I hate to argue but the FRT was posted last time around. By CanAm IIRC. It is indeed entered as a prohibited bullpup.
Last edited:
Then most semiauto pistols are bullpups. The stock the is prohib thing not the firearm. All firearms function without the stock.
But legal classification defies logic.
Yes, it is is the FRT as the hi-point 995 . The stock is classed as a prohib device, giving the gun the same.
A bullpup is defined in Can Law as a long gun with the magazine behind the trigger. An UZI, TP9 etc are all bullups under our law.
A bullpup is defined in Can Law as a long gun with the magazine behind the trigger. An UZI, TP9 etc are all bullups under our law.
So them why is the Beretta Storm allowed in the country it is a simular design as the Hi Point Carbine
I stand corrected... humble and apologetic 
I searched the FRT for "Hi-Point" under Manufacturer (not thinking that it was in fact made for Hi-Point by someone else. My bad.
It is interesting to note that the gun itself is Classified as a Restricted and that there is in fact a Child Entry for the gun with a different stock that is classified as Restricted and not prohibited.
But CanAm is quite correct (and I was quite WRONG)... the factory gun is Prohibited as a Bullpup according to the FRT.
Mark
I searched the FRT for "Hi-Point" under Manufacturer (not thinking that it was in fact made for Hi-Point by someone else. My bad.
It is interesting to note that the gun itself is Classified as a Restricted and that there is in fact a Child Entry for the gun with a different stock that is classified as Restricted and not prohibited.
But CanAm is quite correct (and I was quite WRONG)... the factory gun is Prohibited as a Bullpup according to the FRT.
Mark
