New Semi-Auto Shotgun

Status
Not open for further replies.
i thought they couldnt restrict a rifle based on looks. wasnt that the result of the guy who tried to register his .22 rifle but the government said it was a AK47 variant and therefore phrohib? dosnt that have some bareing on this?
 
Ebola said:
i thought they couldnt restrict a rifle based on looks. wasnt that the result of the guy who tried to register his .22 rifle but the government said it was a AK47 variant and therefore phrohib? dosnt that have some bareing on this?
Click to expand...

This decision is apparently based on the "similar gas piston system", which is complete and utter bull####!

Really it is about looks, but this is their excuse, for the record.
 
I am going to try and keep this thread up to date on this process so the community has some understanding of the way things work.

Here is the latest:

Good afternoon:

There exists no formal appeal process at Specialized Firearms Support Services (SFSS), FIESD, RCMP Canadian Firearms Program for legal class determinations made by SFSS. However Specialized Firearms Support Services is always open to logical and rational debate about such decisions.

Should you wish to present discussion about the assignment of legal class to any firearm you have submitted for examination for determine of the legal classification we (SFSS) are open to discussion.

It is requested that you present technical material and specifications to lay the foundation of your discussion and present a logical, reasoned and rational case in support of your argument. SFSS is prepared to examine your discussion points and if based upon new material or factors we have overlooked we are open to change.

Hope this helps
Click to expand...
 
mlehtovaara said:
This decision is apparently based on the "similar gas piston system", which is complete and utter bulls**t!

Really it is about looks, but this is their excuse, for the record.
Click to expand...

In my opinion.. this is as a result of the lack of an effective definition for the term "variant"

nailing down that definition so that the Variant box actually has sides on it should be a significant focus of lobbying


Another aspect is the classification protocol which seems to start from "this is a prohibited firearm" and only grudgingly considers other classifications with a preponderance of evidence.
 
why do they have to use all the legal jargon and completely distort what they are trying to say ? it's like they say "how can we make this letter as ambiguous as possible to confuse the #### out of whoever reads it ? " like the second paragraph lol
 
How many parts does that shotgun share with an AR? Also, will an AR upper fit on that lower (that was the reasoning used to differentiate the AR180B from the AR15 - it wasn't an AR18 (prohib by name), because it used a different lower, and it wasn't an AR15 because, even though the trigger mechanism was the same, and the magwell was the same, it wouldn't accept an AR upper. I'm guessing this won't take an AR upper. These findings would appear to directly conflict with the opinion on the AR180B - which could also be described (much more accurately) as a piston operated variant of the M16.
 
I do not believe a single part will swap, but I have yet to confirm. It is very different.

They basically took their sporting shotgun and added the ar-type look-alike parts.
 
There exists no formal appeal process at Specialized Firearms Support Services (SFSS), FIESD, RCMP Canadian Firearms Program for legal class determinations made by SFSS. However Specialized Firearms Support Services is always open to logical and rational debate about such decisions.
Click to expand...

Contact the CPC and suggest they make a process in the upcoming bill. (Thanks for the reminder! Scoring their own goal)
"Always open to logical and rational debate" suggests they possess logic and reason and nobody else does. It's about as condescending a statement as can be found.

Anybody think the 'lords' are open to discussion?
 
I'm sad, however depeding on the price i still want one. are the bbls threaded for chokes? and can you use 2 3/4 with them or 3 inch only?
 
From reading their reply, I think they are worried believe it or not.
That is an interesting response.

Basically it sounds like if one could present all the reasons it is not an AR15 variant they are going to reverse the decision and make it non-restricted.
That's my gut feeling :)

It is getting rediculous that things are getting "AR15-Restricted" status for simply looking like one. What's next?
I know, let's arrest everyone who wears sunglasses into a bank because they look like they are going to rob it??

It almost sounds like the technician just wanted to "score" and get an (or another) Restricted ruling under their belt.
Rest assured, these guys are bragging about how many Restricted's or Prohibited's they are deeming throughout their careers... where's the glory in allowing another new firearm to be Non-Restricted?

Like it or not my friends, this is what it all boils down to.
 
My cigarette lighter is in the shape of a nuclear bomb. I guess I'm in possession of a controlled device!
This ruling sucks.
 
These clowns are under a lot of pressure to classify everything as restricted or prohibited, the result of having an entrenched Cretin-era Liberal bureaucrat in the drivers seat. If my SSD-BD38 becomes prohib my MP, Toews and these bozos know there will be a court case following.
 
CanAm said:
No details on sales, if any, as yet. Pretty tough to sell as a range-only gun
Click to expand...


Tougher than a non-restricted, but certainly a market still. This would likely do well at 3 gun competions as the set up and handling would be similar to your rifle. Is there an option for a top rail for mounting optics?

I am definitely interested in it still, and curious as to likely price and availablility of extra mags.

lonedrone
 
I wonder if doing a FOI request would show any additional reasoning (or lack thereof). At worst it may give timeframes as to why it took so long to get such a simple, and flawed report.
 
I have always been choked about the AR platform restriction. Is it possible to legally repeal the ruling? Now would be the time to start since i foresee us having a Conservative government for the next while.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom