RSQ1 prohibited via FRT

Ceiferiro

Ceiferiro

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
21   0   0
Location
yes
I doubt many of these are out there but they were the lukewarm eyebrow raising release a couple year back.
But yeah the RSQ1 was just made prohibited via FRT as of july 15th, I'd be rather peeved as these were sold for $4,000+ and NR

If this doesn't belong here uhhh janny can clean it up.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2024-08-13 121251.png
    Screenshot 2024-08-13 121251.png
    172 KB · Views: 102
Do we know if this rifle had a NR FRT entry before, or if they just never got an FRT for this gun before selling them?


Is there a way to search the FRT for historic entries? I tried the WayBack Machine but it only has the base Armalytics page, I can't search for specific guns or anything...
 
Ceiferiro said:
I remember at first they were just selling them via the EE but after a while some stores started carrying them, example below has it as "NR"
https://www.siwashsports.ca/eagle-rs-q1-non-restricted-rifle-223.html
Click to expand...
You can sell a gun without an FRT entry. The FRT is only a requirement for imports, if its domestically made they don't need to get an FRT. Crusader Arms is doing this right now with pre-orders for their Crypto rifle, and Wolverine did the same with the WK180 when that came out.

This is why I wonder if it ever had an NR FRT and was changed, or just never had an FRT to begin with.

A bit of searching on CGN brought me to this thread:
https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/threads/rs-q-series-legal-status.2261635/

And the OP is from the manufacturer, who states the following:
Their seems to be questions about our Rifles being Non-Restricted and the issue of it not being on the FRT list, we will address the first question;
The FRT list is only mandatory for Restricted and Prohibited Firearms manufactured in Canada, and all Firearms manufactured outside of Canada.
Click to expand...

Sounds to me like a NR FRT never existed for this gun, but I can't confirm this without being able to look at an older version of the FRT database...
 
Last edited:
From what little I can find it sounds like the rs-q1 used modified Maccabee SLR lowers. If they were that similar I'm surprised that it took 4 years to share the same fate as the SLR.
 
Bfranklin said:
FRT is not law.
Click to expand...
No, but when you get pulled over and a cop questions the legality of your AR-looking rifle, what are they going to reference before they charge you and take it? The FRT.

And then when a judge gets to decide, who are they going ask for expert testimony on the topic? The Firearms Lab.


So while it isn't the law per se, it will be used against you in a court of law.
 
The FRT isn't law. It is a catalogue. The classifications in the FRT entries may be based on actual law, on OIC or on "evergreen" interpretations and decisions.
Are the classifications legally valid? Is the opinion of the classification section of the SFSS legally valid? Without a court ruling how would one know?
 
Bfranklin said:
FRT is not law.
Click to expand...

the doc itself isn't. but the people that made and manage the list are "subject matter experts" who work in a "firearms lab" as "firearm technicians" and it's going to be your opinion against theirs in a courtroom. and I can you the judge is going to side with the "subject matter experts" over any citizen gun owner....
 
When the advertising for the gun includes the phrase "AR15 STYLE RIFLE", you have to know deep down that Prohibition due to it being an AR15 variant is inevitable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom