Non-Restricted M4?

Correct. It's the Armi Jaeger AP-74 that's restricted. If this baffles people they should go to the nearest Liberal Party Hack and ask them why this is so.

Since I had one I can confirm that they are very much like an AR. Bolt comes out the same, the action is very similar.

You can't say the same about the SB, it's totally different.
 
Correct. It's the Armi Jaeger AP-74 that's restricted. If this baffles people they should go to the nearest Liberal Party Hack and ask them why this is so.

It's my understanding that they made a version in .25 ACP and that is why.
 
Holy f**k, what a bunch of defeatist pussies we now have here at CGN.

"I hope it wont be, but it will probably be restricted"

Hey, heres an idea......why not try:

"Those f**kers better not try and make this restricted. They do NOT have the legal grounds, and by god it is my JOB as a responsible legal firearms owner to fight them on it if they try!"

Food for thought.....
Its sad alright. Canadian gun owners always do this. Just as some hunters attack the rights of restricted gun owners. :mad:


Umm, actually they do have the legal grounds. They do not have to justify to you or any other gun owner their rationelle in assigning its classification here in Canada.
Oh really? What legal grounds exactly? Are you a lawyer?


The last silly argument I heard from the FRT clowns is; "If the original gun had not existed, would this new gun exist? No... Then it is a variant" These guys have been cooped up in their government offices for too long.
And by that same logic... if a murderer is hanged shouldn't his kids also? They are just variants after all... :eek:


A friend had the opportunity to shoot one in the US...

"Basically ALL plastic...fake forward assist, fake bolt hold open, plastic barrel w/liner, plastic rail(s), PLASTIC EVERYTHING!!!!!"
"STAY AWAY FROM THIS......why Colt/Walther would even put their name on such junk is beyond me."
Wow! Hard to believe a company would put out such crap. Guess I won't be on the "first to buy" list!

And here I thought if it has the Colt name on it and made by Walther and it says "Full metal construction" on the box it must be OK. Very surprised!


Fudd
 

Oh really? What legal grounds exactly? Are you a lawyer?



No, i am not a lawyer. And this is not a legal issue, so i shouldnt have said "they do have the legal grounds"

What they have is the authority to classify each firearm. The FA is a very convoluted piece of legislation, which is interpreted many different ways. Us CGN'ers, the CFO, the anti's, and even the police interpret it differently -

however all that matters is how the CFO / RCMP perceives it when they assign a firearm its classification, regardless of how ascew their rationelle seems to be. There are far too many frustrating examples, but thats just the way it is.

We can lobby against decisions they have made or are planning to make ie) the GSG-5 / colt m4 22, but you cant argue that they didnt have "legal grounds" to assign that rifle its classification in the first place.
 

Oh really? What legal grounds exactly? Are you a lawyer?



No, i am not a lawyer. And this is not a legal issue, so i shouldnt have said "they do have the legal grounds"

What they have is the authority to classify each firearm. The FA is a very convoluted piece of legislation, which is interpreted many different ways. Us CGN'ers, the CFO, the anti's, and even the police interpret it differently -

however all that matters is how the CFO / RCMP perceives it when they assign a firearm its classification, regardless of how ascew their rationelle seems to be. There are far too many frustrating examples, but thats just the way it is.

We can lobby against decisions they have made or are planning to make ie) the GSG-5 / colt m4 22, but you cant argue that they didnt have "legal grounds" to assign that rifle its classification in the first place.



An RCMP tech's opinion should not constitute what forms a law.
 
An RCMP tech's opinion should not constitute what forms a law.

It doesn't. The guy is talking out of his ass. Policies are based on written regulations that are formed on the basis of law. Not someone's arbitrary decision making.

Leave "interpretation" where it's suppose to belong - the court system.
 
AFAIK, I have read that the Squires Bingham M16 is not restricted or prohibited.


I have one and it's not restricted

IMG_2260.jpg
 
I have one and it's not restricted

IMG_2260.jpg

What. The F*CK. is that thing!? Jesus. Even a parent couldn't possibly love that thing...

I mean, did they just assemble random pieces together and called it a day? I can't even fathom how any business-minded person would've given this thing the green light for mass production.


What the f*ck.
 
What. The F*CK. is that thing!? Jesus. Even a parent couldn't possibly love that thing...

I mean, did they just assemble random pieces together and called it a day? I can't even fathom how any business-minded person would've given this thing the green light for mass production.


What the f*ck.



LMFAO!!!!

It looks like a prop I made for my G.I. Joe costume when I was 10!
 
What. The F*CK. is that thing!? Jesus. Even a parent couldn't possibly love that thing...

I mean, did they just assemble random pieces together and called it a day? I can't even fathom how any business-minded person would've given this thing the green light for mass production.


What the f*ck.

Squires Bingham m16r made in Phillipines LOL.
 
There's only one reason that gun wasn't added to the list
It would have made a laughing stock of the RCMP if they included it

ROFL.

They were probably too busy laughing to properly classify it. Either that or they figured nobody in their right mind would buy that monstrocity...

They sure have a sense of humor, let me tell ya.
 
Back
Top Bottom