Will AR's Ever Be Non-Restricted?

NavyCuda said:
Could you imagine how much work there would be if you were allowed to hunt with the AR? Overnight, I think, it would be the most popular hunting/sporting rifle. If you could take it out and hunt with it, you'd see a number of people take the time to get their restricted licences. If it went non-restricted I bet there would be a shortage for a while.
Click to expand...

I know if it was a n/r I would have at least one of them. Until then not a chance
 
As you may recall, the AR was non-restricted. Back in the early 90's we'd load up about 20 or 30 30-rd mags and we would take our Colts or Oly Arms A2's out into the bush. We would blaze away and have a ball. Some of the guys would actually hunt Island deer with their AR's. And then things changed - for the worse. We were forced to register our AR's and they suddenly became restricted. It will take a hell of a lot of effort to reverse this crappy decision, but nothing is impossible. Just keep hammering away at the politicians.
 
The powers that be have no interest in dealing with the licencing issue or firearm reclassifications unfortunately.
Will the AR ever become non restricted?
Yes
After the fall of civilization....
But that doesn't mean you should accept the status quo;
Join a firearms club.
Join a firearms association.
And take part in them because I (hopefully) could be wrong.
 
NavyCuda said:
There is nothing scary about the AR at all. What we have to get across is that Eugene Stoner was genius who designed the ultimate sporting rifle. We have to drive home how many Canadian companies there are devoted to manufacturing and supplies parts for these rifles.

Could you imagine how much work there would be if you were allowed to hunt with the AR? Overnight, I think, it would be the most popular hunting/sporting rifle. If you could take it out and hunt with it, you'd see a number of people take the time to get their restricted licences. If it went non-restricted I bet there would be a shortage for a while.
Click to expand...
Could you imagine hunting grizzley bears with an AR10 in 338 Federal???
Or white tail hunting with an AR15 in 300 black out???
 
Why do so many people focus on one firearm they want non restricted? They should all be "non restricted". We have bigger problems to handle than taking one gun from that list.
 
I think our gun laws are completely messed up over many years of BS attitude towards making them as they went along.

What our gun laws, ATT, and classification needs is someone with unbiased opinion to fix them with some old fashioned logic.

Instead of classifying firearms by walking in to a room of angry soccer moms with a rifle and asking dawes this look offensive to and if 2 out of 5 say yes it's restricted. :kickInTheNuts:

Hypotheticaley speacking :nest:
 
Ebola said:
it will never be non restricted. it was originally supposed to be phrohib. count your lucky stars that we can even shoot one now on a range.
Click to expand...

They were at one time - non restricted. I owned a non restricted COLT HBar when they were first introduced. And yes I am that old:eek

All semi should be non restricted !!! Restrictions based on look is just stupidity.
 
Ar180shooter said:
Not really. We can always go with the "handguns and restricted rifles are registered, so that's the difference". A big step towards this, IMO, would be to push for ATT reform that allows for handgun hunting.
Click to expand...

I agree, this would be a step forward. I'd like to see the end of 'classifications', but simply allowing restricted & prohibited firearms to be used legally where non-restricted are allowed, would be a huge step forward!

Cheers
Jay
 
Jay said:
I agree, this would be a step forward. I'd like to see the end of 'classifications', but simply allowing restricted & prohibited firearms to be used legally where non-restricted are allowed, would be a huge step forward!

Cheers
Jay
Click to expand...

I agree with this. If I can shoot a gun in certain areas legally that is capable of dropping a moose, why couldn't I shoot a 9mm pistol or a 223 AR in the same area? Makes no sense.
 
MensaMan said:
As you may recall, the AR was non-restricted. Back in the early 90's we'd load up about 20 or 30 30-rd mags and we would take our Colts or Oly Arms A2's out into the bush. We would blaze away and have a ball. Some of the guys would actually hunt Island deer with their AR's. And then things changed - for the worse. We were forced to register our AR's and they suddenly became restricted. It will take a hell of a lot of effort to reverse this crappy decision, but nothing is impossible. Just keep hammering away at the politicians.
Click to expand...

I remember those days. Those were the good times! Enter the Not-so-Honorable Kim Campbell and her wonderful Bill C-17 to pacify the typical knee-jerk reaction to the 1991 Polytechnique massacre. :rolleyes:

That pretty much ended my shooting days...
 
AFAIK it would be legal to go hunting with a restricted firearm, so long as you had an ATT to do it, and there were no hunting regulations stating otherwise. Getting rid of the requirement of begging the CFO for an ATT would basically turn the AR15 into a non-restricted firearm (ignoring the registration aspect). That said, there's a benefit in the AR15 being restricted, in that the entire firearms act has to be re-opened in order to prohibit it.
 
cancer said:
AFAIK it would be legal to go hunting with a restricted firearm, so long as you had an ATT to do it, and there were no hunting regulations stating otherwise
Click to expand...

Yes, this is another avenue. If the Wildlife Orgs would back handgun/restricted hunting... why not. Just get an ATT for the WMU you want to hunt in and fill your tags... Discussions with the CFO`s out here have suggested that they would issue ATTs for hunting, if it was allowed by the Province.

Again, this is political work. If folks want to see this happen they need to get involved. Present handgun hunting data from the US to back it up etc...

Food for thought...
 
:agree:

Yes I remember the time when they were non restricted:rolleyes:
Now they are considered EVIL just because of their looks like all the AK variants available that are now prohib.

Fight for your rights and give nothing back !
Tell your MP that you are unhappy about it and why !
 
Relaxing the ATT rules, or completely turfing them is a much more realistic goal. Allow restricteds to be used anywhere a firearm can normally be used...
Click to expand...
Then why even have a restricted class?
Turf the whole works I say.
 
supernova said:
If you ask me, there shouldnt be a single rifle or shotgun in the restricted class. With the exception of guns short enough to fit in the handgun class, there is no logical reason for it. I can understand trying to control the number of handguns carried by criminals but the rest of it is blatant disrespect towards the law abiding gun owners, who happen to make up the majority of gun owners. Lets get the LGR six feet under and once again collectively establish and fight for a common goal.
Click to expand...

And this sentiment is what has always concerned me about the demise of the LGR. Once the Fudds have what they want, they will quickly abandon the handgun guys to the wolves. Gun owners can be our own worst enemies sometimes.

There should be no restricted or other classifications. A gun is a gun. If the LGR didn't keep rifles out of the hands of criminals then why would anyone think the registration of handguns would be any different?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom