Is there ANY chance of AR's becoming Non Restricted?
- Thread starter Jeff000
- Start date
JohnC said:
Yeah I can see it - same dumbass logic that makes a 3.5in barrel more "dangerous"
than a gun with a 4.15in barrel. pitdogboy has it right and I said it before - lets get the Conservatives to a majority and then we can push for meaningful change. Right now, the Conservatives have enough trouble fending off the retards from the NDP and the Liberal party; why should we stir up stuff that could lead to the minority Conservatives take a tumble in the eyes of the uneducated public ?
I always thought it would be cool to own a pink Casull, if anyone said it looked ### you could let them shoot it - and when the front sight embedded itself in their forehead you could question why they were bitten by a '###' gun. But people say I'm a bit sick. The AR is cool in pink, but I doubt it'll ever be non-restricted.
Unless the law is amended, there is no provision for grandfathering any firearms prohibited in the future. If the AR were prohibited by a future government, using an OIC, confiscation would be the only option.
The CPC is not a shooters' rights party. While there is always the possibility that they might de-restrict the ARs - perhaps ones with a barrel over 18 1/2", I doubt that this is anything on their agenda. When Joe Clark was PM, he removed restrictions on the AR. If the CPC were to de-restrict the AR, there would be great wailing about them putting assault rifles on the streets, Bambi being blasted by a machine gun, etc. Don't know that de-restricting would ever be important enough to them to offset the press that would result.
The CPC is not a shooters' rights party. While there is always the possibility that they might de-restrict the ARs - perhaps ones with a barrel over 18 1/2", I doubt that this is anything on their agenda. When Joe Clark was PM, he removed restrictions on the AR. If the CPC were to de-restrict the AR, there would be great wailing about them putting assault rifles on the streets, Bambi being blasted by a machine gun, etc. Don't know that de-restricting would ever be important enough to them to offset the press that would result.
So if it went prohib and I owned one they would take it away from me?
Thats ###, would they at least give me money for it?
I still cant wrap my head around how how making it non restricted would put more on the streets though. Criminals dont register their damn guns.
and is it true that the AR can be made full auto, and thats why they are restricted?
Thats ###, would they at least give me money for it?
I still cant wrap my head around how how making it non restricted would put more on the streets though. Criminals dont register their damn guns.
and is it true that the AR can be made full auto, and thats why they are restricted?
Last edited:
PerversPépère
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Shawinigan (Quebec)
Uh?!!
PP.
PP.
Jeff000 said:
Yes, "they" would take it away.
No, it's doubtfull you would get any money for it. (Hey! Ithink I just saw Jesus on a bicycle...)
Making it non-restricted would allow legit AR owners more freedom and opportunity to use their AR's...which would mean more opportunity for them to be stored "less" securely, stolen, used in a fit of rage, etc. Pretty weak if you ask me...but I can see that being part of the other sides argument.
Salvo said:
Wow, thats ###, would be one hell of a logistical nightmare to take them all too, so at least I dont think that will happen.
Whats funny is the guy a few doors down has an uncanny resemblance of jesus (the long hair/beard, built) and I see him ride his bike to his office every day, lol.
See to me that "argument" is stupid, if I was in a rage enough to use a gun do they really think that I wouldnt be able and willing to unlock the case and the trigger and use it in the same manner?
Not to mention the fact that there are far more hunting rifles that would do alot more damage then an AR, and can be stored under a blanket unlocked.
Jeff000 said:
I think you mean transported...Storage regs are different. (locks,safes,bolts removed, gun room,locked cases, etc). Even for none-restricted...The class system is far beyond my understanding. Punishing for deeds not yet done by honest folks while condoning those that have been by criminals... IMHO
pitdogboy said:
yes transported, but at home a locked case can be stolen just as easy as a loose rifle under the bed, maybe even easier as now he can run away without having a firearm directly visable.
"Punishing for deeds not yet done by honest folks while condoning those that have been by criminals"
thats exactly it, isnt it.
Going by where other nations have gone the odds are against it. That said the Tories could do us a favour, and do away with Restricted ARs, unless they barrel was under 18.5 etc. Basically treating it like a normal rifle. I would hope they would be open to the idea of streamlining the firearms system, and using one rule for all, rather than the arbitrary system now in place.Jeff000 said:
With Harper in and doing good, we can keep hoping!
