Need gunsmith to Dewat

[asphalt599]

First off yes I know it is a horrible crime to destroy a perfectly good firearm but for my purposes it is better to be dewated. Does anyone know of a gunsmith preferably in the Durham Region/GTA who does a nice job of Dewating. I would like to have as many moving parts as allowable and minimal welds showing. It is a Lee Enfield No 4 Mk1/2. Any info would be greatly appreciated.
If it makes you feel any better I will still have 3 working Lee Enfields.

 

[guntech]

Info... To start with it does not have to be altered to the extremes the authorities suggest. (as in handguns) The barrel does not have to be plugged at the muzzle. Legally it is the action that requires permanent alteration so that it is not capable of firing a cartridge. The bolt is not part of this equation as it is easily replaced. If the chamber itself is welded shut and the barrel is welded into the receiver ... it no longer is capable of discharging a cartridge and any licensed gunsmith can certify it has been permanently deactivated.

The bolt and trigger and safety will function, but it will not chamber a round.

 

[alberta tactical rifle]

Off of the CFC site, new guidelines for deactivation of firearms.

Deactivation Guidelines
In order for the firearm to be considered deactivated by the Canada Firearms Centre, the firearm must first be confirmed by a gunsmith, to no longer be considered a firearm as per the definition of a "firearm" in S. 2 of the Criminal Code. (LISTED BELOW)

Criminal Code S.2 "firearm"
"firearm" means a barrelled weapon from which any shot, bullet or other projectile can be discharged and that is capable of causing serious bodily injury or death to a person, and includes any frame or receiver of such a barrelled weapon and any that can be adapted for use as a firearm;

1. Deactivation of Small Arms of Calibre 20mm or Less
a. Semi-automatic, Full Automatic, Selective Fire, and Converted Firearms.

1. A hardened steel blind pin of bore diameter or larger must be force fit through the barrel at the chamber, and where practical, simultaneously through the frame or receiver, to permanently prevent chambering of ammunition. Furthermore, the blind pin must be permanently welded in place so that the exposed end of the pin is completely covered by weld. The strength and hardness of the weld must be that of the metal used in the construction of the firearm. In the case of firearms having calibres greater than 12.7 mm (.5 inch), the pin need not be larger in diameter than 12.7 mm. In the case of multi-barrelled firearms, all barrels must be pinned, using as many pins as necessary to block all chambers.

2. The barrel must be permanently welded to the frame or receiver to prevent replacement.

3. The breech face or portion of the breech bolt which supports the cartridge must be removed or drilled out to a diameter at least as large as the base of the cartridge, so that the bolt can no longer support the cartridge.

4. The receiver must be completely and permanently welded closed to prevent replacement of the breech bolt.

5. In the case of firearms designed to support full-automatic fire, the trigger mechanism must be rendered unusable. Any trigger mechanism part or component, which is necessary for full-automatic fire, must be destroyed by cutting or grinding and permanently welded in place to prevent replacement.

b. Rifles, Shotguns and Handguns other than Revolvers

1. The barrel, bolt and frame or receiver must be modified as in 1.a.

2. The bolt, if present as a separate piece, must be permanently welded to the frame or receiver to prevent replacement.

c. Revolvers, Revolving Rifles and Shotguns, and Cap and Ball Revolver

1. The barrel and cylinder must be permanently blocked by a hardened steel pin of bore diameter which traverses the entire length of the barrel and cylinder. The pin must be permanently welded in place at the muzzle, barrel/cylinder gap and except for muzzle-loading firearms, at the breech end of the frame. The strength and hardness of the welds must be that of the metal used in the construction of the firearm.

d. Black Powder Rifles and Shotguns

1. The barrel must be blocked immediately forward of the flash hole using a blind pin in the manner described in paragraph 1.c.1.

2. The flash hole must be permanently welded closed. In the case of percussion guns, the nipple must be welded closed and then permanently welded to the barrel to prevent replacement.

e. Magazines

1. The magazine follower must be permanently welded to the interior of the magazine to prevent loading of ammunition.

2. The body of the magazine must be permanently welded to the frame or receiver to prevent removal or replacement.

2. Firearms of Unusual Design or Construction
a. Allowances may be made for variations of the procedures outlined in 1.a. to e. if the firearm is made of unusual substances or is of an unusual design. However, any variation in the procedure must accomplish the same goals as the original procedures. The firearm must be made to be permanently inoperable and incapable of chambering or firing ammunition.

Form CAFC 1023
USE THIS FORM if you are an individual or a business (including museums), to notify the Registrar of Firearms that your firearm has been modified and can no longer discharge a projectile, nor can it be adapted or re-modified to do so.

Information
For more information about the Firearms Act, contact the CFP.

This fact sheet is intended to provide general information only. For legal references, please refer to the Firearms Act and its regulations.

Provincial, territorial and municipal laws, regulations and policies may also apply

 

[Smokepole]

ATR - that is indeed the guidelines, but they are false.
Guntech is closer to the facts on this.
Think about it, a firearm's receiver is the only part defined as a firearm. Why would you ruin a perfectly good barrel or magazine by welding, jamming rods etc?
I know this is fact, as I worked with CFC and RCMP to destroy an IRF 1A1.
One cut with a hacksaw was all that was required. To weld the gun back together would be against the law.

 

[buckbrush]

This fact sheet is intended to provide general information only. For legal references, please refer to the Firearms Act and its regulations

what they are requiring is not in the firearms act.

 

[alberta tactical rifle]

ATR - that is indeed the guidelines, but they are false.
Guntech is closer to the facts on this.
Think about it, a firearm's receiver is the only part defined as a firearm. Why would you ruin a perfectly good barrel or magazine by welding, jamming rods etc?
I know this is fact, as I worked with CFC and RCMP to destroy an IRF 1A1.
One cut with a hacksaw was all that was required. To weld the gun back together would be against the law.

I only know that I had a couple of dewatts that were requested to be sent to the RCMP lab. I used to do alot of dewatts so figure they wanted to see how they were done, given the volume I did for a while.

The 2 dewatts in question were S&W revolvers. The RCMP lab guy would not allow #### and click, depite the pin through the frame and barrel, removal of firing pin and cutting off the hammer nose so a new firing pin could not be installed. Welding the screws that held on the side plate and welding a plug in each chamber of the cylinder. He still insisted that the cylinder be welded to the frame.

I am not saying you don't know what you know, just my experiences have had different results.

 

[Smokepole]

I only know that I had a couple of dewatts that were requested to be sent to the RCMP lab. I used to do alot of dewatts so figure they wanted to see how they were done, given the volume I did for a while.

The 2 dewatts in question were S&W revolvers. The RCMP lab guy would not allow #### and click, depite the pin through the frame and barrel, removal of firing pin and cutting off the hammer nose so a new firing pin could not be installed. Welding the screws that held on the side plate and welding a plug in each chamber of the cylinder. He still insisted that the cylinder be welded to the frame.

I am not saying you don't know what you know, just my experiences have had different results.

I don't doubt you had that experience, but I would say the officer who did the inspection relied on the guidelines above to screw it to you.
The guidelines are not the law. If the frame is destroyed and the remaining parts will not chamber and fire a cartridge, the item no longer meets the description of a firearm.
When I did it, they tried to feed me that guideline too, at first. A few carefully worded questions later and I had a written copy of the letter from CFC saying the receiver was all that needed to be destroyed.
Questions like this:
Is the barrel considered a firearm? - No
Is the bolt considered a firearm? - No
Is there a law preventing me from possesing any of the parts? - No (they asked what I planned to do with the parts) I replied that I wanted to retain my property, and I may wish to sell the parts later.
Ten minutes later a fax with CFC letterhead arrived explaining that I could cut the receiver in two and I could retain all parts. A RCMP officer had to sign off the destruction. Before I made the cut I confered with an RCMP member about my plan, showed them the letter from CFC and they assured me they would sign it off. I made the cut and the RCMP signed it off. A few months later I received another letter confiming the gun was removed from the registry and that the gun could not be restored to function. I retained copies of all the paperwork and sold the parts and the paperwork with it.

 

[CanAm]

More lovely vagueness in our laws. Always enough wiggle room to drive a Paddy Wagon through.

 

[asphalt599]

Does anyone know of a good person to have it done by?

 

[CJacob]

Ummmm sounds like you are arguing over two different things here.

Smokepole it sounds like you just had the firearm cut.... the parts removed from the receiver and then the receiver made dysfunctional. You had the receive destroyed so that you could take the firearm off the registery.

What the other guys are talking about is a dewat. The gun still looks like a gun and all the parts are still in the proper places it just can't load or fire ammunition. That is done so you can do stuff like hang the now dysfunctional lump of wood and metal on your living room wall or take it to a re-enactment or anything like that.

For some reason it sounds like the CFO figures a receiver with pins and welds in it is still dangerous if you don’t also pin the barrel and weld the mag and bolt.

Two different kettles of fish...... at least that's what the argument looks like to me. I could be wrong.

 

[Smokepole]

Ummmm sounds like you are arguing over two different things here.

Smokepole it sounds like you just had the firearm cut.... the parts removed from the receiver and then the receiver made dysfunctional. You had the receive destroyed so that you could take the firearm off the registery.

What the other guys are talking about is a dewat. The gun still looks like a gun and all the parts are still in the proper places it just can't load or fire ammunition. That is done so you can do stuff like hang the now dysfunctional lump of wood and metal on your living room wall or take it to a re-enactment or anything like that.

For some reason it sounds like the CFO figures a receiver with pins and welds in it is still dangerous if you don’t also pin the barrel and weld the mag and bolt.

Two different kettles of fish...... at least that's what the argument looks like to me. I could be wrong.

That may be, but my paperwork says deactivated. The nature of the rifle allows it to be re-assembled into one piece. The cut receiver is held together with the top cover and other parts. Cocks, clicks everything, but who cares, 'cause its not a firearm? It would chamber and fire a cartridge too, but the receiver would blow apart on recoil. I thought about that one for a while, thinking someone made a mistake, then I reasoned that even a detatched barrel could chamber a round and you could fire it with a blow to the primer, but catastophic failure would be the price.
With the receiver cut in half its only a pile of parts, according to law, not a dewat and not a firearm. My point is you could cut the receiver, have it declared as a non gun and then re-assemble the parts in a fashion that will not function, but its your choice what you do with your barrel, upper receiver etc, not CFO, RCMP or CFC.
Only the receiver is considered as a firearm, why ruin everything?
I considered this course of action for a long time. It was the loss of a Sten over a decade ago that got me thinking about it. Especialy after finding people are building 'new' semi-auto Stens. The Sten parts that the local police department demanded that I turn in then, would sell now for more than what I paid for the Sten. I was determined not to loose again.
The argument hinges on the receiver being cut in half is not a firearm. As long as you don't assemble it into something that can fire a projectile, its still not a firearm.
Or.... you could re-assemble the parts in a fashion that is legal to own, like building a semi-Sten and have it approved and registered. It crossed my mind to mount a semi-auto .22 into the cut receiver of the FN, like a dress up kit and end up with a full sized 1A1 that was registered as a .22 Coey, or what have you.

 

[tiriaq]

If the firearm is registered, and if you want it deleted from the registry, the powers that be will have to agree with your course of action.
Smokepole was able to get a firearm deleted using the method he described. Others have had to go with the guidelines.
There is only one way to find out.

 

[trevj]

I suppose it would depend a bit on the route chosen, would it not?

If you were to strip the receiver down bare, keeping all your legally owned parts, then take the receiver and have it cut, that would meet the letter of the law, no?

It would seem to me, that with some careful work, the remains of the receiver and bolt could be very well modified to prevent their future use (say, weld beads in the raceways, locking lugs hacked to clear same, bolt face either welded/filled/shortened/all of above, a suitable chunk (like the front section of the bolt) welded into the fwd end of the action to prevent ammo feed, etc., but all done in a manner allowing those parts to be installed to be a #### and click "non-firearm".

Once the receiver is no longer a "firearm", are there actually rules in place that would affect this sort of a build? Would it be considered a "replica"?

Not trying to weasel around anything, just curious.

Way back before things got all tight-arsed, I helped do some #### and click conversions of AK's, among others, so that the guys that had bought them, could bring them into Canada.
In truth, I still believe that it would take less effort to build one from scratch than to re-activate those jobs, but they sure as heck would not have met the current "guidelines". We welded the chambers, and the bores, the bolt face, and the firing pin hole at the back end, gobbed some weld onto the hammer face, welded the trigger mech pins inside the action (not visible from the outside) welded the barrels to the actions, etc. etc.
Gross overkill for anyone but the burecrat.

Cheers
Trev

 

[sunray]

"...Does anyone know..." Epp's smithy does it to semi-auto's, revolvers and MG's. They want $100 to deactivate a semi-auto and get it de-registered. No mention of how long it takes or about a bolt action.

 

[dingus]

That may be, but my paperwork says deactivated. The nature of the rifle allows it to be re-assembled into one piece. The cut receiver is held together with the top cover and other parts. Cocks, clicks everything, but who cares, 'cause its not a firearm? It would chamber and fire a cartridge too, but the receiver would blow apart on recoil. I thought about that one for a while, thinking someone made a mistake, then I reasoned that even a detatched barrel could chamber a round and you could fire it with a blow to the primer, but catastophic failure would be the price.
With the receiver cut in half its only a pile of parts, according to law, not a dewat and not a firearm. My point is you could cut the receiver, have it declared as a non gun and then re-assemble the parts in a fashion that will not function, but its your choice what you do with your barrel, upper receiver etc, not CFO, RCMP or CFC.
Only the receiver is considered as a firearm, why ruin everything?
I considered this course of action for a long time. It was the loss of a Sten over a decade ago that got me thinking about it. Especialy after finding people are building 'new' semi-auto Stens. The Sten parts that the local police department demanded that I turn in then, would sell now for more than what I paid for the Sten. I was determined not to loose again.
The argument hinges on the receiver being cut in half is not a firearm. As long as you don't assemble it into something that can fire a projectile, its still not a firearm.
Or.... you could re-assemble the parts in a fashion that is legal to own, like building a semi-Sten and have it approved and registered. It crossed my mind to mount a semi-auto .22 into the cut receiver of the FN, like a dress up kit and end up with a full sized 1A1 that was registered as a .22 Coey, or what have you.

I agree with everything Smokepole is saying.
If you take a big 308 semi prohib and strip the Receiver of all its parts then take the Receiver have the Bolt carrier Rails milled off.
Thats a Deacted Receiver.
This is what the RCMP said had to be done to Deact the Receiver so its now a Deacted Receiver.
If you had the gun all asembled then ya have to go the other route which wrecks the good usefull parts.
So strip them off frist.
I have my Receiver with a Letter Stateing its Deacted.
Now if i screw the barrel back on and put everything back on the gun its still a deacted Receiver with some parts screwed onto it BUT the gun cant fire a Round as the bolt Carrier and Bolt now cant function.
No Rails = no firearm
I just Figgered why wreck all them good parts! its a compleat Waste.

Now i DONT have my parts installed back on the Receiver but im sure i could.
The Receiver is a Deacted paper weight! useless as a firearm.
the Rest is good useable parts.
Thats compleatly Legal!

 

[buckbrush]

again, "guidelines" are not laws. If the RCMP tech's are telling you they are, they are either being dishonest or conspiring to subvert the firearms act. If you are complying to their "guidelines" or requests you are enabling them.

Ask a tech for chapter and verse of the firearms act that states that their "guidelines" are requirements under the firearms act. I believe the RCMP "guidelines" are just the same "guidelines" that Canada Customs uses for the import of dewats.

 

[asphalt599]

"...Does anyone know..." Epp's smithy does it to semi-auto's, revolvers and MG's. They want $100 to deactivate a semi-auto and get it de-registered. No mention of how long it takes or about a bolt action.

Just called Epps and they said $125 to dewat it. There would be no moving parts left and the mag would not be removable.

 

[guntech]

Just called Epps and they said $125 to dewat it. There would be no moving parts left and the mag would not be removable.

It appears they are doing all of the suggestions of the guidelines for the simplicity of the paperwork... more than is legally required I believe.

 

[asphalt599]

It appears they are doing all of the suggestions of the guidelines for the simplicity of the paperwork... more than is legally required I believe.

So far most people I have talked to seem to do everything possible to meet the guidelines. I'm sure it makes their life easier but doesn't help me much.

 

[shootemup]

This is is typical Firearms Act interpretation by the CFC...the Libs designed it deliberately vague so the CFOs could interpret it any way they see fit to make your life miserable. If you want answers, read the Act, don't ask the CFC or the RCMP...then do what you want to do with the firearm according to the provisions of the Act, then take it to them for the reclassification.