Let me open the wounds AR15

jobbass

jobbass

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Location
canada
Since the AR15 platform has been banned since May 2020 for many reasons (please keep the discussion on my question) and the government option is either sell us your gun or DeWalt.

I saw this the Kalikey, rendering your AR 15 a bolt action.

This way it's not ideal but it's best of both worlds, your AR 15 will not be any more dangerous than a Savage, Sako or Tikka bolt action, maybe it will look scarier but that's it.

What you guys think.

Why organizations that are supposed to defend us and that is my perspective, I don't see them coming to some sort of middle ground with the government (it sounds all in or nothing) from what I read they waste their energy on some small technicality, and they don't see the bigger picture.



https://kalikey.com/
 
The lower is a prohibited device.
The upper is a prohibited device.

"They cannot be used for sport shooting, either at a range or elsewhere".
 
AR15s are prohibited. There is no way around that in any way, shape, or form. You may design a gun that is NOT an AR15, and it may or may not be considered an AR15 (by the infinitely stupid/evil/heinous powers that be), and therefore may or may not be eligible for Non-Restricted status.
 
I think, when the finally start doing something,
The Government will say that the parts are prohibited
for an AR15 series of rifles
 
can14 said:
I think, when the finally start doing something,
The Government will say that the parts are prohibited
for an AR15 series of rifles
Click to expand...

They will not because the legal definition of a firearm is fixed. To do so, they would need to OIC each individual part and there are numerous other firearms that use many of those parts, which would create a legal quagmire.



calibrecarstairs said:
Didn't they already do that?
Click to expand...

No. They made the upper (receiver) a prohibited device. Everything else that makes up an AR15 is uncontrolled parts.
 
A similar issue arises with the Stag 10. A pre-ban version of the FRT has an even clearer statement in its Canadian Law Comments regarding the Stag 10: “The Stag Arms, Model STAG-10 firearm does not incorporate mechanical, aesthetic or other design features that can be traced directly to any particular firearm; it is therefore not considered a variant of any firearm found in the “Prohibited Firearms Regulations” or the “Restricted Firearms Regulations” appended to the Criminal Code.”


This pre-ban FRT entry for the Stag, made publicly available and current just days before the May 1 OIC, clearly states that the Stag 10 is explicitly not an AR variant.

A post-ban version of the same FRT entry, now reflecting the Stag’s current prohibited status, has no Canadian Law Comments.


This later version of the publicly available FRT, current as of last week, indicates that the Stag 10 is now prohibited as an AR variant.

In other words, evidence of the Stag’s justification for being non-restricted; that quite clear statement, “it is therefore not considered a variant of any firearm found in the “Prohibited Firearms Regulations” or the “Restricted Firearms Regulations,” has been removed, and the firearm reclassified… a move that, according to the previous FRT data and much like what we’re seeing with today’s prohibitions, seems to be beyond the scope of the OIC’s prohibition of explicitly AR variants.

We strongly recommend anyone with one of these rifles wait for further instruction. With such strong evidence of inappropriate tampering (with regards to the legal comments and other descriptors of formerly non-restricted firearms being summarily deleted from records) and prohibitions beyond the scope of the OIC’s regulatory amendments, it is highly likely that Judicial Reviews will be employed to address this overstepping.


Further to that point. The government authorizes those competitions by legislation that has not been repealed. It subsidizes those competitions by permitting them on Federal property and still does.

It sanctions the use of shooting ranges for those purposes, ranges whose range approvals still permit those competitions, knowing full well what equipment those competitions require.

If the government was genuinely of the belief that these firearms and those like them are not suitable for competition and such competitions are a danger to the public, then there are at least 20 other things that should have been banned along with the firearms themselves. The glaring inconsistencies definitely beg scrutiny.




FRT Part 1, entries 3 - 31,464 (10,420 PDF files, 3.23GB)
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1yH..._Mh2vP6bvJLOMh


FRT Part 2, entries 31,474 - 80,133 (8,490 PDF files, 1.78GB)
https://drive.google.com/open?id=11Y...Z1t5LiQ0yQ5bCP


FRT Part 3, entries 80,151 - 130, 013 (13,330 PDF files, 2.26GB)
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1w2...VDICGVQlvzI2sl


FRT Part 4, entries 130,014 - 179,482 (8,915 PDF files, 1.05GB)
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ih..._SlS6FU84EwuVq







 
The ATRS Modern Sporter is still legal..there is a few upper - lower trading in the EE once in a while.
They are not named in the IOC but The FRT have been pulled..ATRS cannot manufacture any, but tjise in circulation are legal. That matter is in court.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom