M16 receivers in Canada

cancer said:
What if you were to find a cleanly done deactivated M16, strip off all the junk and register it? Would that work? I assume that if the receiver wasn't damaged during the deactivation, and that the deactivation was done before the firearm was registered, then there would be no record of it existing in the CFC database and you could turn the receiver into a fully functional lower. Or would this receiver still be a converted auto? Have I overlooked some part of the deactivation process for M16s that would make the process irrelevant anyway?
Click to expand...
You cannot legally reactivate a firearm that is render inoperable IE DEWAT it would be considered a Prohibited Firearm
 
best bet is find a colt RO634 9mm it has the auto sear hole through i think there are ony 28 or so origional ones in canada

I got mine at ontario sporting a long time ago its restricted ONLY they are now way over priced but its supply and demand i know ive made a ton on mine IF I sold it.... I wont


If you insist on haveing a 'colt m16A2/A1"

your out of luck there is NO way to get one out of the U.S legally

even from another country customs will say its listed as prohib FA or CA and deney import i think

find one thats allready here I passed on one due to lack of funds about 5 years ago it was rectricted only.... be prepared tp pay WAY too much for one..
 
cancer said:
What if you were to find a cleanly done deactivated M16, strip off all the junk and register it? Would that work? I assume that if the receiver wasn't damaged during the deactivation, and that the deactivation was done before the firearm was registered, then there would be no record of it existing in the CFC database and you could turn the receiver into a fully functional lower. Or would this receiver still be a converted auto? Have I overlooked some part of the deactivation process for M16s that would make the process irrelevant anyway?
Click to expand...

Just join the army, they'll give you one to use, less hassle too! :dancingbanana:
 
koldt said:
There were some M16s, marked M16A2 that made it "into the system" as restricted only, not C/A.

Also the Criminal Code defines the M16 and variants, including AR15s etc as restricted. So there is an argument to be made that the definitive description of the named M16 should include ALL M16s as restricted only, including the C/A M16s. The definitive overrides the general (or however it is described in legal terms).
Click to expand...

Following the same logic, since the M-16 is a variant of the AR-15, not the other ay around, and the M-16 is the firearm deemed restricted in the OIC, shouldn't AR's be classified as non-restricted unless fitted with a barrel shorter than 470mm ?
 
Again, confusing logic with Canadian gun law... Silly man... You should not mix reality with our firearm legislation. The Gov't and CFC don't.

Because the AR and other variants are specifically named, they are restricted. The restricted definition does not deal with the overall description, rather than the naming.
 
koldt said:
Again, confusing logic with Canadian gun law... Silly man... You should not mix reality with our firearm legislation. The Gov't and CFC don't.

Because the AR and other variants are specifically named, they are restricted. The restricted definition does not deal with the overall description, rather than the naming.
Click to expand...

I wonder if a half-decent Charter challenge could potentially be mounted using this though ... Freedom of expression comes to mind ... I express an interest in firearm X, which predates restricted firearm Y and is unjustly restricted and therefore (challenges, trying to find the proper word here, damned limited English vocabulary!, "brime" would be the French word ) my freedom of expression.
 
Scarecrow said:
Canada is probably one of the few countries where having a sear hole doesnt get you a ride to club fed.
Click to expand...
Um... that's pretty messed... But FA fire control bits are prohib, right? So you can have an M16 receiver, ready to go FA with the proper parts and it's not prohib or Converted auto?? That's is so convoluted it boggles the mind.

Our government is idiotic.
RobSmith said:
I wonder if a half-decent Charter challenge could potentially be mounted using this though ... Freedom of expression comes to mind ... I express an interest in firearm X, which predates restricted firearm Y and is unjustly restricted and therefore (challenges, trying to find the proper word here, damned limited English vocabulary!, "brime" would be the French word ) my freedom of expression.
Click to expand...
That's pretty much all Lawyers do, isn't it? Interpret the law and fine holes in the logic. Twist it, mangle it, read it using inflection on different words and find examples in real life that apply to different interpretations.

I'm sure with enough money you could find a REALLY good lawyer and just keep challenging the law until you run across a judge that accepts what you're saying.

...maybe I'm too optimistic...
 
Last edited:
If you read the OIC carefully, it restricts variants of M16 - but we all know that M16 is a variant of AR15 as AR15 was around long before M16 - which is the full automatic version designated by the US army. AR15 is not a variant of M16, but it is only true that M16 is a variant of AR15 If anyone want to challegnes that clause, it is a sure win. All the ARs aother than the model names specificed in the OIC should be non-restricted if the barrel is 18", if you go by the OIC word by word.

All we need is a good lawyer. With the CPC in power, I think it is time to raise this issue.
 
Having M16 parts and an M16 lower do not create intent unless you don't have a reason for having such parts that doesnt involve making a machinegun. For example, if you own a M16 lower but sell M16 parts to people who need them, then you reasoning for owning such parts is resale and not personal use. Its all about what you can prove in court.
 
Fact of the day and dimmer of your joy:

Most Colt lowers in Canada that actually have a sear hole and block have :

1-An offset sear hole (drilled half a pin size aside...) , to prevent you from actually installing a sear or drilling a correctly placed hole...

as in this cgn ADD
132-3206_IMG.jpg


2- have a side that is not milled to spec... (Lump) so that you have no room to put a sear...

Ha !

How many people knew that one !
 
Last edited:
colt stoped the block non sens a long time ago but yes almost all ar sold as semi have the lump just look ar your lower and you will see it

also you need the upper cut most new upper have it but lots of older ones dont
searrelief_ar15_m16.jpg
 
ok here are some more pics of the lowers... (NO NOT MINE..grabbed from the net)

parts differences

ar15m16.gif


bolt carrier differences

boltCarrier.gif


colt blocked lower

coltsearblock02.jpg


us registered NFA (FA) pic stolen from net NOT MINE!!!

nfa-ar15rr-02.jpg
 
That's odd. Back in the old days when drop in auto kits were legal & a dime a dozen, the ad specifically said it was plug & play with no alteration required to the gun. Someone was lying?
 
Last edited:
sf said:
That's odd. Back in the old days when drop in auto kits were legal & a dime a dozen, the ad specifically said it was plug & play with no alteration required to the gun. Someone was lying?
Click to expand...

yes and no

you always had to chage all the internal lower parts but the dias are created so they fit lower with unmachined right side (the lump)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom