New! Remington R15 VTR Semi

That is correct. The established interpretation, though, makes all ARs and AR variants to be restricted. Could this be successfully challenged? I don't know.
 
Firearms Prescribed as Restricted
This list of restricted firearms specified in the December 1, 1998 Criminal Code regulations includes all firearms that have been restricted by a former Order in Council.

• The firearms of the designs commonly known as the High Standard Model 10, Series A shotgun and the High Standard Model 10, Series B shotgun, and any variants or modified versions of them.

• The firearm of the design commonly known as the M-16 rifle, and any variant or modified version of it, including the:

Colt AR-15;
Colt AR-15 SPI;
Colt AR-15 Sporter;
Colt AR-15 Collapsible Stock Model;
Colt AR-15 A2;
Colt AR-15 A2 Carbine;
Colt AR-15 A2 Government Model Rifle;
Colt AR-15 A2 Government Model Target Rifle;
Colt AR-15 A2 Government Model Carbine;
Colt AR-15 A2 Sporter II;
Colt AR-15 A2 H-BAR;
Colt AR-15 A2 Delta H-BAR;
Colt AR-15 A2 Delta H-BAR Match;
Colt AR-15 9mm Carbine;
Armalite AR-15;
AAI M15;
AP74;
EAC J-15;
PWA Commando;
SGW XM15A;
SGW CAR-AR;
SWD AR-15; and,
Any 22 calibre rimfire variant, including the:
Mitchell M-16A-1/22,
Mitchell M-16/22,
Mitchell CAR-15/22, and
AP74 Auto Rifle.
 
AR15 came way before it was classified by the US army as M16. A m16 is a fullautomatic variant of AR15 that is type classified by the US army afer it was adopted. There is SOLID documentation and fact to back this up.
 
tiriaq said:
That is correct. The established interpretation, though, makes all ARs and AR variants to be restricted. Could this be successfully challenged? I don't know.
Click to expand...

The established interpretation is wrong and whoever did that could not read the reg properly. The reg was not written correctly that's their problem.

By fact and by the words of the reg, there is no interpretation in this matter - the OIC was written clearly - M16

And M16 is NOT a variant of AR15. It is a fact. M16 is just a military designation of a variant of AR 15 type classified by the US ARmy. You can argue that the M4 carbine is not a variant of M16 either, as M16 is a very specific variant of AR15 type classified and purchased by the US army. Colt did not buy the right of M16, they bought the right of AR15.

It is time for Remington Canada to point it out that - the VT 15 is a variant of AR15- but the reg specifically restrict M16. Since AR15 is not a variant of M16, VT15 should not be restrict. So should all AR Clone manufactured by Stag, LWRC, Colt Match Target....etc

This is like the bullpup thing, people keep on taking the same assumption per status quo, instead of questioning what it is handed down by the chain of elders....
 
Last edited:
Could this be successfully challenged? If it is not challenged, the status quo will continue.
If a challenge were successful, would all AR type rifles - except for selective fire ARs or M-16s - become nonrestricted? Or would a housekeeping OIC be imediately rushed through? 250 CGNs @ $300 each would yield $75000. That should be enough to mount a challenge that would rattle a cage or two.
 
greentips said:
I urge you to dig out the actual OIC and read it yourself. Are you so sure the OIC actually said AR-15 variants? My last read of the OIC it refers only to M16, not AR15
Click to expand...

Thansk... I was just going with what I had head over and over again, I read it once, but honestly can't remember.
Interesting though... as most of the Variants are based on the 15 not the 16, am I right? Or is the Ar15 based on the M-16?
 
In the beginning was the AR-15. Some were selective fire, and purchased by the US Gov't. Other selective fire AR-15s were purchased by civilians. The US Gov't. eventually officially adopted and standardized the rifle as the M-16. A number of M-16 variants have been developed since. None of these are AR-15s. The M-16 is a variant of the AR-15, not the other way around.
The OIC refers to the AR-15 as being a variant or modified version of the M-16. This is incorrect. The OIC is based on a demonstrably incorrect foundation. It is bad law. As such, it should be set aside, voided. The selective fire rifles would remain as prohibs, but as generic 12(3) prohibs.
 
i think we are all missing the point here, someone at WSS is saying it will be non-restricted
probably about 30 seconds after telling a customer to buy a Mini 14 before the government restricts them...
 
tiriaq said:
The OIC refers to the AR-15 as being a variant or modified version of the M-16. This is incorrect. The OIC is based on a demonstrably incorrect foundation. It is bad law. As such, it should be set aside, voided. The selective fire rifles would remain as prohibs, but as generic 12(3) prohibs.
Click to expand...

If you read the OIC even more carefully, the OIC did not refer the AR15 as being a variant of M16. It merely included in a catch all phrase that certain models are included -which are certain Colt made AR15 Sporter models.

All the Colt rifles are actually labeled as "AR15 sporter" on the receiver. In the correct context of reading the OIC, the examples listed NEVER EVER refers to the orginal Armalite AR 15 model as the basis of their inclusion. For some very stupid reason, the orginal armalite AR15 got lumped into the "including" list.

The clause is written in linear sequence - it cannot be read backward. It is like saying if all black must be bad, but it doesn't mean all bad must be black. This is how regulations are read.

If I tell you to put all green apples in my basket to the "bad basket", it doesn't mean you are allowed to put apples in the "bad" basket into my basket where the green applies are.
 
Last edited:
250 CGNs @ $300 each would yield $75000. That should be enough to mount a challenge that would rattle a cage or two.
Click to expand...

There are more than 250 CGN's with AR's I am sure. I'd be in for a donation if this were a viable challenge. Is this something that can be reviewed and a professional opinion given on?
 
I think this is a viable option to look into. I would donate money to this. I think the CSSA would be a helpful organization here, as the OIC is sure to be re-written very shortly thereafter and it would need some solid legal backing to keep it in our favor.
 
Something to think about - IF the regulation were to be reinterpreted as written, there would likely be a new OIC drafted to make sure all ARs were restricted. The Gov't. is on record as supporting the existing restricted and prohibited system. There is no way the Gov't. would want to be accused of putting "assault rifles" on the street. And that is exactly how the media and opposition parties would react.
 
AR-15, M16

Chicken , egg

When did common sense or logic have anything to do with firearm legislation in Canada. Sure the battle could be fought and perhaps won in court. Only then to have a swing in government and new legislation created...
 
Is it not possible that the R15 VTR could be entered into the system as non-restricted specifically ala Valmet's being named, non-restricted AK47 variants?

...so, the "hunting" R15 VTR is Non-Restricted (AR15 Variant) just like the "hunting" Valmet (AK47 Variant).

I don't see the problem, but then again I've nothing to do with making these types of decisions.
I will remain optimistic. If these rifles are indeed Non-Restricted... "Whoa Baby!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom