How to change the SCAR design so it is legal in Canada?

evolture

evolture

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
267   0   0
Location
Langley, BC
I don't know what the actual reasons are that the firearms lab decided the SCAR is prohibited. There are rumours of all kinds out there. One of them is the ability to use a F/A trigger pack or lower to make it go all naughty.

Would a custom made upper and lower that took all of the same parts off of a SCAR but could not mate (not even with duct tape) with an actual SCAR Upper/lower resolve the problem?

Or would an additional change preventing the F/A trigger pack from be used be needed?

Just grasping at straws; I have no idea what the offending features of the SCAR were...

Does anyone know the real story? That would be a starting point...
 
The official word was that the full auto trigger group dropped into the semi-auto lower and it ran full auto that way - this was from the individual (a movie guy of some kind I believe who was able to import a full auto version under his licence for the RCMP to test with) who got the classification process going again after the RCMP left it in limbo waiting for info from FNH.

Assuming all that is true, it would seem that a completely different lower would be needed that the trigger group can't fit in. This would also mean that the upper would likely need to be altered so that the original, theoretically full auto capable lower could not be mated (as the currently produced SCAR rifles are still available). I highly doubt that FNH would be willing to do this just for Canada, so the simpler solution would be to change the idiocy around the classification system and get it unprohibited by that means.

lonedrone
 
Thanks lonedrone. That is exactly what i wss leading up two. Not only does it need a new upper and lower, it might even need a new trigger group.

They are already making after market lowers in the states. The technology to do this is in Canada, it seems like a matter of money and time.

I am not sure how likely the firearms act could be changed to fix this issue.... at this point C42 is so very disappointing... not even a half measure in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
FNH has never submitted a semi auto SCAR to the RCMP, as reported by someone here who talked to an FN rep at SHOT. The 'movie guy' who submitted one didn't know what kind of rifle he had, but helped us all out by submitting it - and gave the Lab boys all the excuse they needed. The SCAR is sold to civillians in the US so we know one thing, the semi receiver is different to the FA receiver or the BATF would have squashed it like a bug. Sadly, at his point I think the Lab can sit back and say 'we've done that' and never look at it again. Feels good to have people help you when they weren't asked, doesn't it?

PS - what ever happened to that guy, it wasn't one of the regular movie guys on here, so where did he go?
 
The law is just retarded. They made a civilian legal firearm illegal, with illegal parts. If this is how things would be done in real world, they could make your Ford explorer ilegal, because they can mount a machine gun on top.
There's no way to have peace as Canadian firearms owners, as long firearms are classified based on what they could be changed into, instead of what they actually are.

Changing that is something I'd call common sense legislation.
 
canucklehead said:
It already WAS submitted as a semi-auto. The fact is that a full-auto trigger pack can drop right in - even though they aren't available to civilians anyway.
Click to expand...

I doubt it - the movie gun may have been a full auto gun converted to semi by dropping in a semi trigger group. The fact that a semi trigger group will drop into a full auto receiver does not mean that a full auto group will drop into a semi auto receiver. Take the AR for example - a full auto AR receiver will take a semi auto trigger group, but if you try to put a full auto trigger group in a semi auto receiver, you'll find yourself with a very important piece left over, and nowhere to put it.
 
Perhaps someone could submit the "Handl Defense SCAR25" which is a scar 17 aluminum lower (instead of the original polymer). Also takes sr-25 mags then. To be honest the whole thing is a screw over to begin with. The original civilian version probably would have passed.

The scar-17 is really the best of both worlds as far as accuracy yet robust/reliable. A piston battle rifle capable of MOA even out of the light chrome lined barrel.

We must have this gun in Canada in NR.
 
we should definitely try to make them look at a SCAR semi submitted directly from FNH for sure if that isn't what they were looking at the first time. Taking a decision based on a gun that didnt come straight from the manufacturer or importer at least is wrong, who knows what this guys submitted really...

I'd sell my ACR pretty cheap to fund a SCAR-H.

but most of all like Jaws said, we need to seriously reconsider some things in this country first; "innocent until proven guilty" my ass, they are banning some things because of what they say you could do with them... non sense, why the hell did you let everyone buy a car that goes over 100km/h than?
 
Last edited:
inthewoods said:
Perhaps someone could submit the "Handl Defense SCAR25" which is a scar 17 aluminum lower (instead of the original polymer). Also takes sr-25 mags then. To be honest the whole thing is a screw over to begin with. The original civilian version probably would have passed.

The scar-17 is really the best of both worlds as far as accuracy yet robust/reliable. A piston battle rifle capable of MOA even out of the light chrome lined barrel.

We must have this gun in Canada in NR.
Click to expand...

I don't know if the handl defense lower will make a difference, I think the upper is what is serialized.
 
Someone should start by FOI ing the lab reports on the SCAR, to see what the issue was with that one particular example. That would resolve a lot of issues, but generally speaking, the fact that BATFE approved it as a semi, and the Lab said it was easily convertible stinks. The standards aren't all that different.
 
There is a reason official distributor exists. They put up the investment and have the official factory support to deal with technical things like that and work with the lab.

Unfortunately, the scar thing is already "poisoned" and it will take a lot of effort to even attempt to fix it. The incentive is even less for a distributor to touch this mess when there are millions of independent importers doing FN stuff already, who will jump on it the second the FRT is out.

The scar is gone, and this is the result of not having an official Fn distributor in canada who can work as an agent for FN USA.
 
So it's easily convertible if you manage to buy the prohibited fun bits?

I thought that the spirit of that was that it should not be made to be FA by a hammer n chisel bubba in his garage with junk from his parts bins...

Then I woke up and remembered that I'm in Canada, where the law is a mules rectum
 
Does the scar17s also have a FRT? If it does, how could they issue one without having a sample?

If it does not, when the new firearms approval committee is formed, FN should be involved to do this thing correctly.

Maybe a better importer could make a deal with FN; wolverine supplies?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom