Is now the time to get rid of classifications?

Wrong ... as stated THERE is no law stating restricting firearms can only be fired at an approved range , its the ATT that says it , without an ATT you would be free to use your restricted wherever you can shoot NRs .

I think its doable , same with normal capacity magazines .
 
Yes i agree.... that is the way i understand it anyhow...i could be wrong, but...if i don't need a ATT to a specific place...then that means that i should be able to transport it anywhere then.
 
I agree that getting rid of the ATT's would be both the easiest change to make, and the most beneficial to the community. I don't care at this point if I need to get an RPal and register an AR in order to have one, but I want to be able to take it out to get the coyotes and gophers. Likewise with having a revolver on the hip in backcountry. I think this would definitely be our best use of energy at this point, other things can come later.

Red
 
SYKEKO said:
AGREED ... We have to kill the ATT's. Once people can take handguns in the woods and such people will lose the fear of them... and with less hoops to jump threw, many new shooters will join us in the fight...
Click to expand...

With the amount of spent 9mm and .45 apc cartriges i found while hunting this year
It might as well save some money on the paperwork
I was thinking about listing them on the ee:D I picked them up
Besides i would love to be able to buy a handgun and shoot it where i shoot my sks;)


Oh and incase anyones thinking about asking where....no i will not tell you where i hunt
 
trekstor said:
we need to push back in stages just like they pushed gun control in stages. LGR gone, next mag restrictions. Next Clasications. And CCW. First of all we must focus on adding the second amedment to the charter of rights, and constitution just like americans. Right to bear arms.
Click to expand...

Agreed! Canadian equivalent would be somewhere along the lines of the gauranteed right to personal property including the defense of such property and person(s) within it... or some legal mumbo-jumbo like that ;)

Regards,
 
Claven2 said:
Whatever you're smoking, I want a double. The AK will NEVER come off the list.

the AR15 with 18.5"+ barrel - MAYBE. The argument you would have to use is that it is a prolific sporting rifle in the USA. It would help if aboriginal groups started clamouring for it up north.
Click to expand...

Actually, I wouldn't write off the AK. We could use the Valmet as a foothold to push for their reclassification...
 
getting ATT's built into licenses and mag caps are the next hanging fruit, and they will benefit the shooting sports like 3 gun the most.
 
I too would like to see the ATT eliminated. If you possess a restricted PAL then that should be all you need to take your pistol or AR to a competition or gunsmith. The whole ATT thing was just setup to provide another means of charging and inconveniencing gun owners. Once the ATT is eliminated, then the justification for having the CFO and their questionable interpretations of the Firearms Act around ceases to exist, they can be turfed as well.
 
All of these ideas can happen, and there's a good chance we'll get quite a ways. But things have to happen slowly and incrementally. There's no way we'll get more than one at a time, and nothing flashy is going to happen right away.

First should be removing CFO jurisdiction of ATTs, just include them with the licences.
Next should be bumping up or cutting magazine restrictions.
Then De-restrict short rifles and the AR15.
Then De-prohibit (if there's any prohibs left by then anyhow).
 
has anyone considered something that the antigun people won't even notice? Try the bullpup stock prohibition. It makes no sense as the rifles are available but a fancy looking stock itself is not. No one would notice that going away, only people with G22s.
 
Once the LGR is finally gone the next most important step is getting rid of the ATT. I dont live close to a gun range and it is a 1 hour drive either way to go shoot my restricted guns. It just does not make sense that i can take any 1000 yard rifle to my land and shoot and also my SR22 but not my Sig 22 or my JR 9mm carbine but not my Glock 17...this is just total b**l S**t on the part of CFO rules for transportaion and designation of shooting places for restricted firearms.
 
Koenig Tiger said:
Actually, I wouldn't write off the AK. We could use the Valmet as a foothold to push for their reclassification...
Click to expand...

Reclassification of the Valmet seems the more likely result of that logic. Remember classification is in the hands of bureaucrats, not the gov't of the day. Far better to change the act and regulations than to try to work within them in the current order. IE remove the whole OIC aspect of classification, so it's strictly based on characteristics of the firearm. Remove ATT requirements, that sort of thing.
 
I reax this hole tread and all of what was saide its true, and personally the one i would really lime to see is removing the mag cap. BUT rationnaly if getting rif of the att would allowd the use of restricted for hunting and shooting ouside ranges, it should be the easyest by far to get true!

Politics is all about money and it could be push as X amount of money save per year by not printing the att and the amount use for the hired personnel, plus x projected anual income for the increse in restricted license.
 
rally guy said:
I reax this hole tread and all of what was saide its true, and personally the one i would really lime to see is removing the mag cap. BUT rationnaly if getting rif of the att would allowd the use of restricted for hunting and shooting ouside ranges, it should be the easyest by far to get true!

Politics is all about money and it could be push as X amount of money save per year by not printing the att and the amount use for the hired personnel, plus x projected anual income for the increse in restricted license.
Click to expand...

Also that would get people use to pistols and ARs in the bush, which would make de-restricting them an easier pill for the public to swallow later on. Then other "bad, scary guns" and then automatics in the bush.
:50cal::ar15:
 
I reax this hole tread and all of what was saide its true, and personally the one i would really lime to see is removing the mag cap. BUT rationnaly if getting rif of the att would allowd the use of restricted for hunting and shooting ouside ranges, it should be the easyest by far to get true!

Politics is all about money and it could be push as X amount of money save per year by not printing the att and the amount use for the hired personnel, plus x projected anual income for the increse in restricted license.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom