Why is it non restricted

D

delta1

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
259   0   0
Location
just a litle past that speck on the horizon
What exactly makes the AR180b a non restricted and the rest of the ar's restricted. I can understand the barrel length issue, and overall if it has a stock that makes it less than 26" OAL. I think I'm right there, new to this so bear with me. If it is in 308 cal has a 24" barrel only goes semi auto, and even if it had a folding stock would still be over the minimum length required. why is it a restricted.
 
Because it does not share the lower receiver characteristics of the more common AR-15. Which means it is not is the same class as that particular "assault rifle"

That, and it's not on the list of guns that look scarey enough to be restricted.


NO. I am not joking on point 2.
 
i don't care how many FAQ's we have about the canadian gun laws. They really don't make any sense at all. Who made these laws anyway? A bureacrat that has never shot a gun?
 
The laws are actually fairly easy to understand. Sure, the reasoning behind them are stupid but they do make sense. Things aren't just prohib for no reason.

Well, sort of.
 
I shouldn't have said easy to understand.

Once you know how they classify firearms, it's not the difficult to follow how this gun is restricted and this one isn't.

For the most part, it all comes down to action type, barrel length, and over-all length.
 
from what I know the ar180 was never a miltary issue firearm.some they go after some they don't it's hard to understand but if you like one and can purchase one go for it! most of the people that make up the laws have never owned a firearm or had a good friend take them to a range and explained safe gun handleing they just know what they see on tv and that scare's them and not knowing about the positive side and the right way causes fear.
 
If the guns were in the copy of Gun Digest used as a reference when the current lists were drawn up, the guns are restricted or prohibited. Many newer designs are non-restricted because they didn't exist at the time.
The Gun Digest story may be urban legend, but it makes as much sense as any other explanation.
 
Gun banners are "smart"

The rules themselves may be silly, and appear arbitrary. Especially when you consider Mark Lapine's Ruger is still available, but the banners are DAMN SMART.

They introduce grandfathering so existing owners do not raise a stink but eventually one lucky and old Canadian will have all the guns as they slowly transfer themselves or get destroyed. Though I do not agree with it, but it is an "excellent" well thought out long term strategy to rid the country of guns long term.

And guess what? They don't care if the rules make sense as long as they get to take away our guns! Not only don't they care if the rules make sense but the average non gun owning Canadian does not care either. When Harper and the CPC talk about scrapping the registry, the average Canadian thinks that all gun control will be gone.

Dr.Chris
 
Holy s%$t, guys, it's not that hard to understand.

In 1994, the government prohibited every semi-auto rifle that had a pistol grip, except the AR-15. There were so many AR-15s in use that even a Liberal government had to admit they had a sporting use, and could not be banned under the "no-sporting-purposes" legislation.

The people who wrote the laws did not have a crystal ball, they could not ban guns that did not yet exist. Every semi-auto with pistol grip you see on the market today is not banned because it came out after the legislation was introduced, therefore the legislation does not mention it.

Was that so hard?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom