Author Topic: The Great Gun Control Debate  (Read 692839 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline NavyShooter

    Boaty McBoatface!

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 170,491
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,679
  • Death from a Bar.....one shot, one Tequilla
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #3700 on: June 15, 2017, 11:08:39 »
It'd be tough to convert an M-305 to an M-14, since the rear lug is completely absent from the receiver.  There'd be welding/heat-treat/etc issues with that idea.

An 80% lower receiver is often sold with a jig that enables you, using just a drill-press, to complete the frame into a fully functional state.  The 'hard' cutting and drilling are already done.  I suspect that if I had one of the kits and a jig, I could complete a receiver in less than 2 hours and have the rifle assembled in another 30-45 minutes.

Usually all that's left to do with an 80% lower is to cut out the pocket for the fire control group, as well as drill the holes for the pins, and drill/tap the tower for the buttstock. 

A milling machine is not normally needed to complete an 80%, but, if you had one, it would make things a LOT quicker and more accurate.

Insert disclaimer statement here....

:panzer:

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 213,046
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,736
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #3701 on: June 15, 2017, 12:05:05 »
Why is the RCMP so terrified of shittily-converted full-autos?  Even that POS guy who shot the RCMP officers was interviewed and said he considered trying to make his rifle into a fullauto but realized (paraphrasing) how stupid and ineffective that was.

So what does someone do if they have an 80% AR15 lower receiver that's been sitting there for 4 years awaiting apotheosis? Smash it with a hammer along side 10/22 mags?

There are no wolves on Fenris

Online Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 176,012
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,510
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #3702 on: June 15, 2017, 12:34:42 »
Trudeau pere created the first list of prohibited weapons in 1977/1978, which included nunchucks, shuriken, and blowguns.

Shortly afterwards, he and his family appeared in a press photograph as they were disembarking from the CF Boeing 707 that brought them back from a trip to somewhere in South America. One of his sons was clutching a souvenir blowgun.

By current RCMP "logic", every length of half-inch copper pipe at The Home Depot or in your house should be smacked with "prohibited" status because of what it could become or be used for.

There is no common sense or public benefit to any of this. It is simply abuse of honest citizens for sadistic recreation or political gain.

Online Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 99,020
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,661
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #3703 on: June 15, 2017, 13:58:01 »
I always caution people not to apply logic to the Firearms Act, Thankfully due to the prohibitions, I no longer live in fear of being attacked by pygmy's with their blowguns or Ningas with handheld crossbows.

I love introducing law enforcement personal to the deep reaches of the Firearms Act, I love watching them trying to figure how it's supposed to help and then watch their head explode as the logic centre overloads.   

Online Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 176,012
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,510
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #3704 on: June 15, 2017, 15:01:32 »
Additional links are embedded in the text of this article. I've "known" Dr Mike and Christopher electronically for a couple of decades.

http://christopherdiarmani.com/12813/big-brother/bureaucratic-incompetence-2/dr-mike-ackermanns-answer-rcmp-unfinished-receiver-edict/

Dr. Mike Ackermann’s Answer to RCMP Unfinished Receiver Edict

Posted on June 14, 2017    by Christopher di Armani
 
Dr. Mike Ackermann is one of my favourite people.  He's intelligent and has a heart bigger than the Atlantic ocean. He's on the Board of Directors of the Canadian Shooting Sports Association (CSSA) and devotes incredible amounts of time, energy and money to defending our firearm rights.

He's also mischieveous and willing to put Government in its place without a moment's hesitation. And, of course, he despises bureaucratic interference in his life. Every last bit of it.

Seriously, how do you not love this guy? He's 100% MAN.

When the RCMP issued its latest edict turning hunks of metal into restricted or prohibited firearms and countless gun owners into criminals with the stroke of their bureaucratic pens along with it, Dr. Mike channeled his outrage it into a practical method to give the Horsemen a taste of their own asinine medicine.

His Facebook post reads:

OK, folks. Time to teach them a little lesson.

You will note that in this bulletin the point along the manufacturing process at which aluminum ore becomes a firearm receiver worthy of registration is nowhere defined. In fact it is not defined in law at all.

So let's pick a point. Let's say once you have a block of aluminum bar stock you have an object that can be machined into a firearm receiver.

Since we all want to remain within the law, I think it is reasonable to dutifully register all our pieces of bar stock.

In order to make it easy for you, I have included below in comments the proper registration form filled out except for your own particular information.

Have fun and play safe!

Dr. Mike Ackermann believes in following the law, the precise letter of the law. If the RCMP wants to register hunks of metal then we register hunks of metal.

Below is the instructions for what the RCMP demands of us. We must follow these instructions to the letter.

Registration

Non-restricted receiver blanks do not need to be registered.

In order to register a restricted or prohibited receiver blank you must submit a registration application. Inf your receiver blank cannot be matched to an existing Firearms Reference Table (FRT) listing, please include as much information as possible, along with photographs of the receiver blank and any paperwork from the manufacturer which describes the receiver blank.

If your receiver blank does not bear a serial number, you must leave this field blank when submitting a registration application for a firearm. On the registration certificate that is issued for a receiver blank, you will find the firearm identification number (FIN) assigned to the receiver blank.

[ much rcmp doublespeak deleted for brevity ]

Receiver blanks will be registered as frame/receiver only. Any modifications made to a registered frame/receiver that would change its class, make it capable of discharging ammunition, or result in the firearm ceasing to be a firearm must be reported to the Registrar as outlined in section 4 of the Firearms Registration Certificates Regulations. (Who knew?)

Dr. Ackermann provided three partially-filled pages to make the process easier for you.  Those three documents can be downloaded from these links:

•Application to Register Firearms (for Individuals) Page 1
•Application to Register Firearms (for Individuals) Page 2
•Sample showing what photos to include with your registration forms

Perhaps a copy of these documents to the Minister of Public Safety and the Prime Minister, along with your cover letter expressing your appreciation for the RCMP's willingness to keep us safe from dangerous hunks of metal. We wouldn't want our political masters to think we're not grateful, after all.

Lastly and most importantly, remember what the RCMP memo said.  If something happens to the receiver blank that would "result in the firearms ceasing to be a firearm" you must report this to the Registrar.

In a few months, after you've turned your hunk of metal into something other than a firearm receiver, be sure to deregister it, as the RCMP demands and required by the Firearms Registration Certificates Regulations.

If the RCMP wants to waste their time pushing useless paper all day, it is the job, nay, it is the DUTY of mere citizens to comply!

References:
•RCMP Bulletin to Firearms Businesses (PDF)
•RCMP Information on Receiver Blanks (80% Receivers)

Christopher di Armani.com - One man's thoughts on life, liberty, freedom of speech, self-defence, gun control, thought control, human rights and the justice system.

Offline recceguy

    A Usual Suspect.

  • At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child – miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats. -P.J. O’Rouke-
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 237,422
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 17,366
  • doddering docent to the museum of misanthropy
    • Army.ca
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #3705 on: June 17, 2017, 00:44:34 »
Oh man, we got scrap all over the place. :rofl:
“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.”

John G. Diefenbaker

Offline FJAG

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 82,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 830
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Wolf Riedel Google+ Page
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #3706 on: June 22, 2017, 00:50:40 »
...   But I don't give a rats rectum about US gun laws, I live in a country where it's ridiculously complicated to own an AR-15 because of the way it looks.

I couldn't agree more.

Many more decades ago then I would like to remember/admit to I took on a case under the then existing seizure laws where a gun dealer/museum operator had three weapons seized by the RCMP: a semiautomatic Indian FN 1A1; a US M2 Carbine converted to semi automatic only; and various receiver parts of a Thompson submachine gun which had also been converted to semi automatic.

The crowns argument was that each of these could be converted to selective full automatic fire (in the case of the Thompson by pretty much getting another full auto Thompson and substituting the parts.

Luckily I had interviewed the RCMP witnesses more than the crown had and with them together with my own witnesses was able to convince the rural Manitoba judge that the conversions that the RCMP suggested would pretty well work on many of the standard civilian semi automatic rifles that you could buy openly in the market. The only real difference between the civilian models and the army ones was the military appearance of them and not the ease of conversion or down range effects.

We won that one (I reiterated a rural Manitoba judge) and luckily the crown lost sight of the case during the Christmas holidays and forgot to appeal so we did get all three of them all released.

I'm still firmly convinced that the RCMP decisions on what is and isn't allowed is based almost solely on the appearance of the respective firearms. There seems to be precious little science/engineering behind it.

:cheers:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" book series at:
https://wolfriedel.wordpress.com

Offline Ostrozac

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 25,820
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 629
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #3707 on: June 22, 2017, 02:07:37 »
I'm still firmly convinced that the RCMP decisions on what is and isn't allowed is based almost solely on the appearance of the respective firearms. There seems to be precious little science/engineering behind it.

There's always been a bit of an urban legend floating around that the list of Prohibited, Restricted and Non-Restricted was indeed determined by a committee going through a copy of that year's Gun Digest with a pen marking off guns that "looked like" assault weapons.

Hence why the semi-auto versions of the FN-FAL (Prohibited), AR-10 (Restricted), and M-14 (Non-Restricted) ended up in three different categories, despite all three being 7.62mm battle rifles of the same generation.

Offline Lightguns

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 24,970
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,016
  • I live for trout and deer
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #3708 on: June 22, 2017, 07:00:41 »
There's always been a bit of an urban legend floating around that the list of Prohibited, Restricted and Non-Restricted was indeed determined by a committee going through a copy of that year's Gun Digest with a pen marking off guns that "looked like" assault weapons.

Hence why the semi-auto versions of the FN-FAL (Prohibited), AR-10 (Restricted), and M-14 (Non-Restricted) ended up in three different categories, despite all three being 7.62mm battle rifles of the same generation.

The FN is somewhat legit, it was real easy to convert the C1 to full auto.  Back in the day, it seemed every second infantryman would trade a case or two of rations to get a C2 safety lever from a Wpns Tech.  Break open, rotate and insert and you are rocking and rolling.......  I never got the mystic around converting anyway, full auto gets old real fast when you have to buy your own ammo. 
Done, 34 years, 43 days complete, got's me damn pension!

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 213,046
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,736
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #3709 on: June 22, 2017, 07:18:09 »
There's always been a bit of an urban legend floating around that the list of Prohibited, Restricted and Non-Restricted was indeed determined by a committee going through a copy of that year's Gun Digest with a pen marking off guns that "looked like" assault weapons.

Hence why the semi-auto versions of the FN-FAL (Prohibited), AR-10 (Restricted), and M-14 (Non-Restricted) ended up in three different categories, despite all three being 7.62mm battle rifles of the same generation.

I recall seeing a paper from the RCMP that actually assigned points towards restricting and phorhibiting guns based on things like plastic or wood grips, removable magazines, pistol grips,  what material the stock is made from. I'll try and dig it up.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Lightguns

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 24,970
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,016
  • I live for trout and deer
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #3710 on: June 22, 2017, 07:24:46 »
There is a catalog that was used and it has been seen by Doug Young if I recall correctly.  It was not the RCMP though, it was that numbty that worked in Justice, that impartial civil servant who had the Champagne party paid for by Wendy Cukier after the act was passed.  He later went on to chair the BC Human Rights Panel.  He wrote a letter tot he editor a few years ago which basically confirmed that the Firearms Act was a conspiracy between the liberals and the gun controllers. 
Done, 34 years, 43 days complete, got's me damn pension!

Offline AlphaWhiskey

  • Guest
  • *
  • 165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #3711 on: June 22, 2017, 10:01:11 »
I endeavored to look through the Government's prohibited list for all the dangerous firearms kept off the street by the good people of the RCMP. The first example to catch my eye is the deadly Heckler and Koch G11 rifle.

Though the G11 never left the prototype stage and even individual caseless rounds for it rarely surface on online auctions, if not for the swift action of our well-informed legislators, this powerful weapon would no doubt be a scourge on our streets. I cannot imagine a more attractive weapon for the criminal element than a rare, expensive, and large automatic rifle that never even saw production, let alone civilian sales.

Offline NavyShooter

    Boaty McBoatface!

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 170,491
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,679
  • Death from a Bar.....one shot, one Tequilla
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #3712 on: June 22, 2017, 10:11:49 »


Here's how much sense Canada's firearms laws make....

(OK first try didn't work.  Let's see if the attachment works.)

« Last Edit: June 22, 2017, 10:14:34 by NavyShooter »
Insert disclaimer statement here....

:panzer:

Offline Kat Stevens

    non atrocitate, non clementia mutabatur.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 190,770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,326
  • that's how we roll in redneck land
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #3713 on: June 22, 2017, 11:57:35 »
Ruger mini 14; cal. NATO 5.56mm
                      auto loading
                      box mag fed
                      Gas operated
                      Rotating bolt
                      Non restricted
Colt AR 15;     cal. NATO 5.56mm
                      Auto loading
                      Box mag fed
                      Gas operated
                      Rotating bolt
                      Restricted

The difference? Militaries and LE around the world have used both, but the AR looks mean.
                       
Apparently, a "USUAL SUSPECT"

“In peace there's nothing so becomes a man as modest stillness and humility; but when the blast of war blows in our ears, then imitate the action of the tiger; stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood, disguise fair nature with hard-favor'd rage.”

 Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and start slitting throats

Offline FJAG

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 82,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 830
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Wolf Riedel Google+ Page
Re: US Second Amendment
« Reply #3714 on: June 22, 2017, 12:55:31 »
Would have a title for that case, so I read up on it?

Sorry I don't. As I said many decades ago. I checked my electronic files that I copied from my practice and this didn't show up so it was a paper file predating it which has by now probably been shredded by the firm.

I also did a quick CANLII search and it didn't show up.

I'll send you a quick PM with some of the particulalrs so that you can pursue it if you'd like.

:cheers:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" book series at:
https://wolfriedel.wordpress.com