measuring barrel lengths

This quote is from the CFC form below, I have also heard that the measurement is from the muzzle to the front of the cylinder, which would give you a fraction of an inch more beyond the forcing cone I guess.

http://www.cfc-cafc.gc.ca/online-en_ligne/form-assistance/pdfs/678_e.pdf

m) Barrel length
For firearms other than revolvers, the barrel length is the
distance from the muzzle of the barrel to and including the
chamber, but does not include the length of any attachments.
The barrel length of a revolver does not include the cylinder.
Click to expand...
 
That's an area where a simple administrative change could result in a whole lot of happiness for many people, if we could get them to include the cylinder we'd see 3 inch barrels legal again.
 
ian_in_vic said:
That's an area where a simple administrative change could result in a whole lot of happiness for many people, if we could get them to include the cylinder we'd see 3 inch barrels legal again.
Click to expand...


hell 4" barrels are 3mm too short. If they measuers revlovers like they measuer autos there would of been thousands of revolvers that would not be 12(6) now.
 
woodchopper said:
hell 4" barrels are 3mm too short. If they measuers revlovers like they measuer autos there would of been thousands of revolvers that would not be 12(6) now.
Click to expand...
I assume that is why they made the minimum length 106mm rather than 100mm. I was checking out the Australian gun laws and was surprised to find that 100mm is the minimum length for revolvers making 4" barrels legal there (per 2006 legislation). I was checking into their gun laws to get a sense where we may be heading.
 
The current government could make themselves a whole lot of brownie points in my house by making small regulation changes like this, if you look at the way the rules are laid out there are lots of places where small changes like this could serve to make things better without having to put anything to a vote. Another example would be making long term ATT's good for all prohib classes instead of just 12.6 - since it's a regulatory change it doesn't require the consent of parliament (sort of like orders in council)
 
ian_in_vic said:
Another example would be making long term ATT's good for all prohib classes instead of just 12.6 - since it's a regulatory change it doesn't require the consent of parliament (sort of like orders in council)
Click to expand...

I only have 12(6) but I couldn't agree with you more on that statement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom