So I found a bunch of 14" 590a1 in the states.

enefgee said:
To clarify - IRG is a Class 3 dealer in the US. The tax stamp is $5 per gun. IRG has a blanket US Export Cert which covers up to 50 BMG. Dealer to Dealer Class 3 transfers are taking longer than usual, certainly longer than 30 days. Easy peasy way to do this is to have the dealer transfer the guns to IRG in the US, then they can bring them over the border to our greedy little hands. (Info about IRG from their post regarding these items)

Oh yes, and I want one too.
Click to expand...

Yes they tell everyone that it's 3 month but believe me it is an average of 30 days for a dealer to dealer transfer, with the ATF "Eform" it's faster . Ask me why i know !;)

And no tax stamp.
.
 
Last edited:
Mossberg 590A1 14" - 51683 $479 at a US distributor knesekguns. I see them elsewhere as well. Not sure if it's the right pic, but this is the configuration they are in, pistol grip only.

2832389_01_mossberg_590a1_aow_12ga_640.jpg
 
Last edited:
Blastattack said:
Shouldn't much matter. The Mare's leg rifles are 23" and non-restricted. If it comes from the factory, it seems to be ok.
Click to expand...
Then I would rather have a Serbu Super Shorty (or two). Why can't we have those?

As others have said, Mare's Leg sounds like it would be a slam-dunk for reclassification.
 
gctkaz said:
Then I would rather have a Serbu Super Shorty (or two). Why can't we have those?

As others have said, Mare's Leg sounds like it would be a slam-dunk for reclassification.
Click to expand...

There are three main clauses in the criminal code that are used to define the classification of modern firearms in Canada.

Criminal Code of Canada said:
“handgun”
« arme de poing »
“handgun” means a firearm that is designed, altered or intended to be aimed and fired by the action of one hand, whether or not it has been redesigned or subsequently altered to be aimed and fired by the action of both hands;
Click to expand...

and;

Criminal Code of Canada said:
Non-restricted firearm: any rifle or shotgun that is neither restricted nor prohibited. Most common long guns are non-restricted, but there are exceptions.

Restricted firearm* means:

  1. a handgun that is not a prohibited firearm,
  2. a firearm that
    • is not a prohibited firearm,
    • has a barrel less than 470 mm in length, and
    • is capable of discharging centre-fire ammunition in a semi-automatic manner,
  3. a firearm that is designed or adapted to be fired when reduced to a length of less than 660 mm by folding, telescoping or otherwise, or
  4. a firearm of any other kind that is prescribed to be a restricted firearm in the Regulations Prescribing Certain Firearms and other Weapons, Components and Parts of Weapons, Accessories, Cartridge Magazines, Ammunition and Projectiles as Prohibited or Restricted.

Prohibited firearm* means:

  1. a handgun that
    • has a barrel equal to or less than 105 mm in length, or
    • is designed or adapted to discharge a 25 or 32 calibre cartridge, but does not include any such handgun that is prescribed, where the handgun is for use in international sporting competitions governed by the rules of the International Shooting Union,
  2. a firearm that is adapted from a rifle or shotgun, whether by sawing, cutting or any other alteration, and that, as so adapted,
    • is less than 660 mm in length, or
    • is 660 mm or greater in length and has a barrel less than 457 mm in length,
  3. an automatic firearm, whether or not it has been altered to discharge only one projectile with one pressure of the trigger, or
  4. any firearm that is prescribed to be a prohibited firearm in the Regulations Prescribing Certain Firearms and other Weapons, Components and Parts of Weapons, Accessories, Cartridge Magazines, Ammunition and Projectiles as Prohibited or Restricted.

*Criminal Code definitions
Click to expand...

There is no definition for what a Non-restricted firearm is, only what it is not.

In the case of the Serbu Super Shorty (SSS);

Our first question: does it meet the legal definition of a handgun? It it a firearm that is designed, altered or intended to be aimed and fired by the action of one hand, whether or not it has been redesigned or subsequently altered to be aimed and fired by the action of both hands.

It is not a clear cut argument to make on either side. Yes, it's handgun sized and sports a pistol grip, it visually and somewhat functionally imitates the features of a handgun. However, a pump shotgun is both designed and intended to be used with two hands, contrary the the one hand specified in the definiton. The mares leg is precedent for this, as it is still a rfile designed to be used with two hands, regardless of barrel or stock arrangement. If the SSS is a Handgun, it is automatically Restricted, however if it is not a handgun, we must go further.

Is it restricted by definition?

Well, the first point asks if it's a handgun , which we have decided it isn't or if it is a Prohibited firearm. So, to the Prohibited clauses.

We can immediately ignore point one because it is not a handgun.
Was it created by altering an existing firearm? No, as both the barrel and stock were purpose made for this shotgun, and were never at any point longer than they are now.
We can ignore point 3 because it is not an automatic, and we can ignore point 4 because (i assume) it is not prohibited by name.

So, it's not prohibited. Phew!

So, is it restricted then?

We move to point two and we have to answer two questions. Is it Prohibited? Is the barrel shorter than 470mm AND is it capable of discharging centre-fire ammunition in a semi-automatic manner?
The answer to both questions is a solid no. Point two does not apply.

Now for point 3; is the SSS a firearm that is designed or adapted to be fired when reduced to a length of less than 660 mm by folding, telescoping or otherwise
The answer again, is No. This clause specifically describes the length as being reduced through a mechanical action. The stock SSS has no provisions to be shorter. It does not shrink, nor does it get bigger. As it comes from the factory it is neither designed nor adapted to be fired when reduced to a length of less than 660 mm by folding, telescoping or otherwise

As for point 4, again I assume it is not restricted by name, and therefore we can safely ignore point 4.

So there you have it. If the RCMP does not define the Serbu Super Shorty as a handgun, then they cannot define as a Restricted or a Prohibited firearm because it does not meet any of the definitions of either. Therefore, if the SSS is not a handgun, not prohibited and not restricted, then the only remaining class is non-restricted.


Hopefully that all makes sense. That was a lot of typing and interpretation on my part.
 
Every one of those arguments was used when Dlask introduced the 8 1/2 inch 870. Basically the RCMP Lab's response was; "sell it with a pistol grip, it's restricted, sell it with a full stock, it's not" There may have been something said about that not being the way the rules are written, and the response may have been we don't care - or words to that effect.
 
Last edited:
Thanks so much for all your effort, Blastattack - I had the same interpretation of clauses 1 and 2, and now your interpretation of clause 3 is clear to me, and brought to my attention a key word that I missed in my own interpretation - red bolding by myself:
Blastattack said:
Now for point 3; is the SSS a firearm that is designed or adapted to be fired when reduced to a length of less than 660 mm by folding, telescoping or otherwise
The answer again, is No. This clause specifically describes the length as being reduced through a mechanical action. The stock SSS has no provisions to be shorter. It does not shrink, nor does it get bigger. As it comes from the factory it is neither designed nor adapted to be fired when reduced to a length of less than 660 mm by folding, telescoping or otherwise
Click to expand...
My previous interpretation is that the "otherwise" would be inclusive of "doing nothing". However, as you say, the firearm does not shrink nor does it get bigger, so there would be no "reduction" as a result of "doing nothing".
Sounds like we ought to be able to have SSS here, please let us have them RCMP!

Sucks about the RCMP response, though, if enefgee what you say is true.

Sorry for the big derail..
 
gctkaz said:
Thanks so much for all your effort, Blastattack - I had the same interpretation of clauses 1 and 2, and now your interpretation of clause 3 is clear to me, and brought to my attention a key word that I missed in my own interpretation - red bolding by myself:

My previous interpretation is that the "otherwise" would be inclusive of "doing nothing". However, as you say, the firearm does not shrink nor does it get bigger, so there would be no "reduction" as a result of "doing nothing".
Sounds like we ought to be able to have SSS here, please let us have them RCMP!

Sucks about the RCMP response, though, if enefgee what you say is true.

Sorry for the big derail..
Click to expand...

Exactly. You have to read each word and see how they relate to each other. Otherwise is used to expand upon the words folding and telescoping, and serves to prohibit any other mechanical reduction system that the authors couldn't think of. If the word otherwise was not there then some creative inventor could create a mechanical reduction system that is neither folding nor telescoping and could skirt the law.

But yes, as Enefgee has stated, the RCMP does as they damn well please. However, if logic were to prevail and they were limited to a simple yes/no feature list, the firearm would likely be considered NR.
 
We could always have a buttstock installed on these, before they are imported. I'm certain most want a full buttstock (fixed or collapsible) anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom