Unfair to Revolvers : barrel length

[Detective_Special]

revolver length

The revolvers are measured right as they are…that’s not a problem. The problem is the 105mm law, I think it should be less for revolvers to compensate for the cylinder. The real question is; what can we do to change it to from 105mm to 102mmm (for revolvers)! :wink:

I started a thread about this a few moth ago, it didn't get far for some reason :|

Agree 100%

 

[ENERGYBOSS]

it would take 70% of the revolvers off the prohib list.

 

[t-star]

it's just a long headed plot to get rid of all handguns- when they drafted the legislation, they knew well that the "most popular /handiest" handguns were 4 inch-probably got the information from the old "green card rcmp lists) revolvers or automatics- hence, the prohib of anything less or equal than 4 inch- most of us have at least one little "cutesy" that's under 4 being revolver or auto( mine's a 22 for god sakes) and you watch the next thing they'll do if re-elected is to move on the longer handguns- as far as the long guns go, it's all been about looks- anything that looks the least "tactical" got resticted or prohib- what's the difference between a c/a m14 and a norc 305 or an m1a- there isn't any- it's really a 20 year plot to rid us of all guns

 

[ENERGYBOSS]

it's really a 20 year plot to rid us of all guns

....and no rioting in the streets. And the gun people are still going "Well, if we are realy, realy nice, maybe we can win."

MORE PEOPLE WROTE LETTERS ABOUT THE HOCKEY LOCKOUT THAN ABOUT 2,000,000,000 OVER SPENDING ON THE CFC.

WE are doomed.

:twisted: WELCOME TO KANADA :twisted:

 

[NAA]

"They" don't want "us" to own "short" barreled handguns, period. Don't try & make common sense out of it. The law was enacted to grandfather out 70% of handgun ownership within a generation without having to pay compensation to the owners. :twisted:

 

[JohnC]

the intent always was to move as many handguns into the prohib class for eventual confiscation as possible. this was even spelled out in a discussion paper they published at the time public reviews of the legislation were being carried out. 4 inches was the number which would move half the then registered handguns into the prohib class, that's why they will never change the law to allow more guns to move from prohib to restricted -it would defeat the intent of the law. if half the revolvers had been 8 3/8" or less (however measured) they would have made the cutoff 8.5 nches.

this kind of discussion is like arguing whether you want your throat cut with a 5" or 4" blade - the end result is the same . the only way is to get the whole concept of prohibited weapons thrown out- either by court action of by electing a government sympathetic to our needs.

 

[ENERGYBOSS]

either by court action of by electing a government sympathetic to our needs.

The court is picked by the govenment, both Lie-Brals ans Con-servitives screw'd Us,

>>>>>>>time to change tactics. <<<<<<<<<<

Any Govenment member that proposees Gun-control should be targeted and removed next election, no mater what the cost.

If the bastards know screwing with us will cost then their job they may think twice.


BUT THIS WILL NEVER HAPPEN WE STILL HAVE HUNTERS GOING ON ABOUT IF THEY ONLY TAKE THE HANDGUNS WE CAN STILL HUNT.




....and that is why we are loosing, WE can't form a wall against the govenment.

 

[NAA]

the intent always was to move as many handguns into the prohib class for eventual confiscation as possible. this was even spelled out in a discussion paper they published at the time public reviews of the legislation were being carried out. 4 inches was the number.. the only way is to get the whole concept of prohibited weapons thrown out- either by court action of by electing a government sympathetic to our needs.

And what's the likelihood of that ever happening?? :shock:

 

[Greenhorse six]

What about just having an over all lenght ,like they have for rifles and shotguns?

 

[peckerwood]

Actually guys...it is a ridiculous prejudice. The definition of firearm includes any barreled weapon from which shot can be fired...I dare you to take off the barrel to your revolvers and then load and fire them...know what?...they will fire still, and lethally.

Ever see the old pepper boxes that don't have a barrel but instead have only a cylinder?...I guess that isn't a barreled weapon eh?

The cylinder IMO is also part of the whole barrel. The only problem comes down to wording it into law so that it can be easily understood without making new loopholes for the making of new weapons outside the Law's application.

I bet one could produce a Cylinder-Only revolver and get it classified as a non-gun :wink: