Non-restricted 8.5" Dlask guns

Well I wouldn't phone them and ask that it be denied. That gets you nowhere fast.

First thing, you need to speak to a supervisor in an instance like this. You need to be polite but firm. You need to state your position. Its a non-restricted shotgun and you want it transfered right away like any other non-restricted. Its their problem if its classification is under review, not yours. If you have an RPAL, they have even less ammo not to transfer it to you. Worst case, its going to become restricted.

If they continue to tow the line, you're going to write your MP, you're going to write Stockwell Day, in short, you're going to make their life more difficult than it has to be. You're going to be calling about this again in a few days. And again, and again...

If they do issue a refusal they have no choice but to have the matter decided before a provincial judge. Sure this is a hassle - people here have done this and represented themselves. CFC has to send representation and that costs them money from their budget that they don't have thanks to Mr Harper. It could take quite a while which is why you'd rather just have them cave in.

Did I say, be nice but firm? ;) Take names. Write notes right after. Read up on the 12(6) fiasco. A CFC employee actually admitted in court to delay tactics like this and a judge slammed them hard.
 
Last edited:
Ok I'll phone again and speak to a supervisor. I do have a RPAL but I really don't want to own it if it is restricted because I actually want to use it. I'll let everyone know how it goes
 
They said they've sent a notice to the registry info for more info off the registration certificate and are now waiting to hear back from them
 
woah, what the hell? Surely this must refer to the time when Dlask was shipping these things with a pistol grip already installed. If not, the Dominion Arms Grizzly would surely fall under the same issues.

This has to be an OAL concern.
 
The law states you have 30 days to notify the CFO of any modifications to change classification. So on day 30 you put the regular stock back on for a few minuets, and the clock starts back at ZERO!

Get it?

Just don't lose your regular stock, and .....shhhh.
 
DOOK said:
The law states you have 30 days to notify the CFO of any modifications to change classification. So on day 30 you put the regular stock back on for a few minuets, and the clock starts back at ZERO!

Get it?

Just don't lose your regular stock, and .....shhhh.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I want the DivX of the police officer's face when you explain this to him, please. Everyone talks tough about carrying their 22" 12G out the door, to me you are risking losing your license for a LONG time and it would be foolish.
 
You can think whatever you want. The fact is they are currently non restricted, and what I said is in the law. You need to use a tool to change the stock over, so it isn't 'collapseable'.
If it were confiscated, a quick trip to the detachment will clear the matter up. The CFO's , and detachments have been made aware of these things, so there really shouldn't be a problem if you use common sense.
 
DOOK said:
You can think whatever you want. The fact is they are currently non restricted, and what I said is in the law. You need to use a tool to change the stock over, so it isn't 'collapseable'.
If it were confiscated, a quick trip to the detachment will clear the matter up. The CFO's , and detachments have been made aware of these things, so there really shouldn't be a problem if you use common sense.
Click to expand...

The only single somewhat legal letter that has ever been provided from the CFC regarding this matter, states clearly that "putting a pistol grip stock on a non restricted shotgun is perfectly legal and does not make it restricted"
To me, that is full of holes. Pistol grip and pistol grip stock are 2 entirely different things. OAL was not mentioned at all in the letter.
Other then that, this is all just moronic speculation that a shotgun less then 26" is non restricted. Like CANAM stated, the CFC regards these as pistols PRESENTLY.....and his word is pretty good as he is selling something similar to Dlask.
Dlask is challenging the law, which is great for us, and I wish more dealers would do the same. But until there is a ruling in his favor, the law is pretty clear.
Go ahead and purchase one straight from Dlask and let us know what his answer is.
 
OK can someone help me out here. I am in the process of purchasing an 8.5 inch Dlask from a fellow CGNer. From what I understand a transfer is a two stage process. First the seller contacts the registry to indicate that the gun is being sold and to provide the registry with the buyers PAL info. The registry then gives the seller a reference number for the transaction. Then the buyer phones the registry with the reference number and the registry completes the transfer. So my question is this.... at what point does the transfer get refused (if it does get refused):

1. When the person selling the gun contacts the registry (and before I have paid him) or:
2. When I as the buyer phone the registry to complete the transfer (which is after I have paid the seller)

My point is, I don't want to be out of pocket $$$ and then not legally own the gun.

This brings me to my next question. If the transfer is approved and somewhere down the road the gun is deemed to be restricted yet I own it with a non-restricted PAL...what happens then? Do these normally get grandfathered or do I have to upgrade to a restricted PAL?

Help!!!!
 
When you buy something from the dealer it is as painless as it could be. He does the transfer, which is usually immediate on a non-restricted, and then he sends it to you with the paperwork already there. You will then receive the official papers in the mail as well. You shouldn't have to phone them yourself.

Between 2 people is a different story, very easily done if you are both in one place where one person can do all the talking (either) and they just need to verify the info of the other in one minute.
 
You would have to upgrade to RPAL if the classification changes.

Do yourself a favour - download the restricted manual in the legal section here, read it and challenge the RPAL test. I found an instructor that gave me the test for $20. The application to CFC to upgrade is currently $0 - so it will cost you $20 (or whatever you can find) + a stamp total. Most of the material is a rehash of PAL, the remainder is common sense.
 
I think I'm gonna go get one. this is the near perfect answer for wanting a handgun while in the bush. To bad that they're not semi-auto though...
 
Understood, I'm just bitter that we CAN'T carry restricteds while in the bush. This Dlask Special is a 'reasonable' alternative but, is still a runner up when compared to the efficiency of a revolver.

Better than nothing, I guess, if you happen to be underneath a bear...
 
Nine said:
The ones marked SMD-12 are restricted. The ones without this marking are non-restricted. Makes sense, no?

The "sling" is a loop on the forend you place your hand through to give you a good hold of the shotgun... and to prevent the possibility of smacking the gun into your face while firing. This also makes you use two hands while using this shotgun, because it's not a pistol. Get it? :D
Click to expand...

Does anyone know if I remove the strap on my non-restricted 8.5"dlask/870Remy would it raise some eyebrows? I'm seriously considering removing the strap because it's causing intermittent racking problems.
 
johNTO said:
Does anyone know if I remove the strap on my non-restricted 8.5"dlask/870Remy would it raise some eyebrows? I'm seriously considering removing the strap because it's causing intermittent racking problems.
Click to expand...

Go for it.. the strap has nothing to do with the classification.
If you are using the buttstock the strap is not really needed anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom