How much does classification affect your choices?

The Joe-Man

The Joe-Man

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
14   0   0
Location
BC Interior
Hey Guys,

I'm looking to get myself a semi-auto rifle to have some fun with. I'm having a hard time deciding what to get because, as much as I'd like to get an AR-15, the fact that it's restricted is really bothering me. Even though I probably do 95% of my shooting at the range, I know that not being able to shoot it in the bush will just drive me nuts. The transportation and storage headache is also something I'd rather not deal with if I don't have to. Because of this I find myself leaning heavily towards the non-restricted options like the T-97 or waiting for Wolverine's upcoming CZ958s to come out.

I'm interested in hearing how classification affects your decision? Does a semi-auto rifle become a "must have" for you if it's non-restricted? Are restricted rifles something you avoid unless it's EXACTLY what you want? Do you just base your decision on fit and function of the gun? Let's hear it.

Joe
 
It affects me significantly... I have my restricted license but so far don't own any restricted firearms because I prefer to shoot in the bush. I will likely purchase a automatic handgun this year because my wife is bugging me to get one and join a range, she is much more into hand guns than I
 
Get the t97 youll never touch a cz858 again they are leaps and bounds better. My cz would gremlin once every mag. The t97 can hold 15 rounds with .50 mags while the cz is stuck at 5. Classification doesnt bother me now 2015 it will
 
daniel_250r said:
Get the t97 youll never touch a cz858 again they are leaps and bounds better. My cz would gremlin once every mag. The t97 can hold 15 rounds with .50 mags while the cz is stuck at 5. Classification doesnt bother me now 2015 it will
Click to expand...

Yeah, well mag capactiy is obviously another issue that needs to be considered. It sucks that so many of the pros and cons of different rifles are based around arbitrary limitations of bad law instead of the function of the guns themselves.
 
I also would like to see "them" do away with the classifications and just have PAL for whatever firearm I want and where I want it. Not likely though.
 
How much does classification affect your choices?
Click to expand...

100%

I'm not a restricted license holder. I'm not a member of a range. All of my shooting is done in the proverbial "back 40".

I like restricted guns. I'd like to own them. With the way the system is set up, (atts, transportation regs, range fees, storage regs, registration etc.) I do not want to be a part of it. So I opt out. People will say I'm part of the problem. That's pretty myopic. I take my non restricted black and red rifles out and show them off whenever I can to whomever wants to try them. And I do it where people around here actually shoot. The bush. There are very few restricted owners around my parts. Probably a percentage of 1% of gun owners.

I'll keep writing letters to newspapers, talking about guns with anyone and introducing new people to the sport and I hope everyone does the same thing. Maybe we can actually change things for the better. But until then I just can't subject myself to the level of scrutiny and cost that comes with being a restricted owner. YMMV.
 
Last edited:
Classification is huge in affecting my choices. I shoot in the bush 99% of the time and wont risk bringing a restricted and getting caught up in something dumb with it or even being pulled over and caught with it on the way there or back. I only own 2 restricteds primarily because of the red tape, BS and everything that goes along with them. I love all guns and really wish the system would change but until it does most peoples choices are affected by classification whether they admit it or not. Like others have said its a choice your forced to make. I like looking at my beretta 92fs but have shot it once in 2 years because of the BS and only at a gun range non sense. My non restricteds on the other hand see as much use as I can give them, no hassle. Right or wrong it does affect my choices.
 
If only everybody got an rpal, even if not interested in restricted firearms. Strength in numbers. I also believe it would help a lot if everybody had an rpal and even a stripped ar15 lower. It's cheap enough and large ownership numbers wouldn't hurt.
I would give somebody my stripped Vulcan ar lower that I used for a dedicated .22 (it's plastic and slightly damaged at the trigger guard ear, doesn't affect usability) for nothing if they upgraded to an rpal
 
Not at all. If you shy away from restricted firearms it'll make it that much easier to take them with few people to speak out. Then they'll move onto reclassifying the nonrestricted firearms... Wash, rinse, repeat.

-S.
 
Classification does not effect my purchases at all. I only buy restricteds anyways, I don't approve of, nor condone the use, purchase, or ownership of any NR rifles/ shotguns, and as such have sold all of mine.
 
It only affects me if I'm thinking of hunting. Otherwise most of my shooting is at the range. And I believe in owning copious amounts of restricted's as that can only piss off the man.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom