AR 15 Reclassification

Not looking to get lambasted here, but simply looking for some sincere thought. Why do you want to hunt with that rifle? Don't get me wrong... I think they are cool as it gets. And I'd love to shoot one... but I don't feel the need to go and take down a deer with it. My mentality is different... I hunt so I can eat what I've taken. I don't really care if it was taken with a .303, a bow, or an AR-15. And because of that, it doesn't matter a whole lot what I hunt with - I am content to use my old British rifle - cause it gets the job done.
NOW... again, not looking to get roasted here, just wanting to hear the other side - the side that says, "I'm not content with that old .303 - I want to use the one the cops have!" Thoughts? (again... no hate, or judgement... just looking for some opinions.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frederickwreid

Not looking to get lambasted here, but simply looking for some sincere thought. Why do you want to hunt with that rifle? Don't get me wrong... I think they are cool as it gets. And I'd love to shoot one... but I don't feel the need to go and take down a deer with it. My mentality is different... I hunt so I can eat what I've taken. I don't really care if it was taken with a .303, a bow, or an AR-15. And because of that, it doesn't matter a whole lot what I hunt with - I am content to use my old British rifle - cause it gets the job done.
NOW... again, not looking to get roasted here, just wanting to hear the other side - the side that says, "I'm not content with that old .303 - I want to use the one the cops have!" Thoughts? (again... no hate, or judgement... just looking for some opinions.)

---

Maybe it's more about owning one, and transporting it without special permission?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frederickwreid

Not looking to get lambasted here, but simply looking for some sincere thought. Why do you want to hunt with that rifle? Don't get me wrong... I think they are cool as it gets. And I'd love to shoot one... but I don't feel the need to go and take down a deer with it. My mentality is different... I hunt so I can eat what I've taken. I don't really care if it was taken with a .303, a bow, or an AR-15. And because of that, it doesn't matter a whole lot what I hunt with - I am content to use my old British rifle - cause it gets the job done.
NOW... again, not looking to get roasted here, just wanting to hear the other side - the side that says, "I'm not content with that old .303 - I want to use the one the cops have!" Thoughts? (again... no hate, or judgement... just looking for some opinions.)

---

Fred
There are several issues at play on this one. I believe I am safe in stating that most Ontario hunters don't have any desire to go hunt deer with a semi-auto 5.56 mm/.223 Rem rifle. On the other hand the 5.56 mm/.223 Rem cartridge is great for small game. If I was looking to go tip ground hogs and I knew there would be many then I think an AR-15 chassis would be just fine. This is just but one example, the thing is that it comes down to choice and consistency in the law.

The issue of choice boils down to allowing the RCMP to classify one type of semi-auto as restricted based upon a criteria that is not defined in the law. As such, Canadians are denied this choice for no other reason than - it looks scary.

The issue of consistency is the more ominous part. If this ruling is allowed to persist what stops the RCMP for re-classifiying other firearms at a whim? The AR15 is but one example of many other such rulings that defy logic and pander to the left-wing emotional response to scary = banned

On the personal side, I don't see myself ever hunting with an AR-15. BUT, I am willing to do whatever it takes within the law to allow other Canadians to have a choice to use their property in the manner they see fit (within the law).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frederickwreid

Not looking to get lambasted here, but simply looking for some sincere thought. Why do you want to hunt with that rifle? Don't get me wrong... I think they are cool as it gets. And I'd love to shoot one... but I don't feel the need to go and take down a deer with it. My mentality is different... I hunt so I can eat what I've taken. I don't really care if it was taken with a .303, a bow, or an AR-15. And because of that, it doesn't matter a whole lot what I hunt with - I am content to use my old British rifle - cause it gets the job done.
NOW... again, not looking to get roasted here, just wanting to hear the other side - the side that says, "I'm not content with that old .303 - I want to use the one the cops have!" Thoughts? (again... no hate, or judgement... just looking for some opinions.)

---

Why do you want to hunt with a 303? You want to use it because it works and you enjoy that gun and shooting it. Remember, every sporter 303 Brit was an assault rifle for its time, just does not have a black stock.

The Remington 742 semi auto is no different than the AR15, one has wood and one has plastic, they are both semi auto and limited to 5rds in the magazine in Canada so why the difference in classification.

I think you need to find someone who shoots an AR at the range and go shoot one, you will find out why people would want one, it is similar to those people here who don't understand why anyone would want a handgun or even a fast car, motorcycle or boat for that matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frederickwreid

Not looking to get lambasted here, but simply looking for some sincere thought. Why do you want to hunt with that rifle? Don't get me wrong... I think they are cool as it gets. And I'd love to shoot one... but I don't feel the need to go and take down a deer with it. My mentality is different... I hunt so I can eat what I've taken. I don't really care if it was taken with a .303, a bow, or an AR-15. And because of that, it doesn't matter a whole lot what I hunt with - I am content to use my old British rifle - cause it gets the job done.
NOW... again, not looking to get roasted here, just wanting to hear the other side - the side that says, "I'm not content with that old .303 - I want to use the one the cops have!" Thoughts? (again... no hate, or judgement... just looking for some opinions.)

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frederickwreid

Maybe it's more about owning one, and transporting it without special permission?

---

I don't think you will be lambasted. I believe you asked an honest question. I believe most guys want to use one to hunt with because it would be another tool in the cabinet. Let's not forget the AR-15 platform can be chambered for rounds other than 5.56mm. So if those rounds are legal suitable for game and the AR-15 meets the criteria of a non-restricted firearm (semi-auto centrefire, magazine capacity of 5 rounds,etc) for hunting purposes, why shouldn't people who can legally use other semi-auto centrefire rifles with a 5 round magazine capacity for hunting purposes not be able to use the AR-15?

Dyth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frederickwreid

NOW... again, not looking to get roasted here, just wanting to hear the other side - the side that says, "I'm not content with that old .303 - I want to use the one the cops have!" Thoughts? (again... no hate, or judgement... just looking for some opinions.)

---

Back in the day, I used to have unlimited access to shooting the Armed Forces assault rifle, at the time the FNC1. I spent many hours and hundreds of boxes of ammo thru the old gal...great long distant shooter on the 300+ yd range.

Then the military switched to the Colt C7 ( Canada's version of the AR 15) and I once again had unlimited access to the range and all the ammo I could could shoot. It was 'fun' originally shooting a gun like the M16 that I saw in the movies etc, lots of rounds, rapid fire at the standing targets, made it seem more realistic as a gun to kill with...fill the air with lead..."oorah"

It wasn't even that bad as far as accuracy on the close range single shot but was no comparison to the FN when it came to shooting out to 300+.

It didn't take long before I craved the return to shouldering the cumbersome old wood of the FN and sit and 'snip' from the sand bag. I started passing on the opportunities to shoot the C7...the novelty had worn off and I wanted to return to what we had become calling the 'real' gun'.

The new 'Mattel' gun never really measured up a shooter for those that had trained on the older guns. It was a far better rifle for all our Military assault training; lighter to carry, easier to clean etc etc....what an AR is designed for....but few guys who shoot it regularly ever went on to own one personally for hunting, just not the best tool for the job.

But like the others have said it's the principle, the inability to have the choice if you wanted to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

Back in the day, I used to have unlimited access to shooting the Armed Forces assault rifle, at the time the FNC1. I spent many hours and hundreds of boxes of ammo thru the old gal...great long distant shooter on the 300+ yd range.

Then the military switched to the Colt C7 ( Canada's version of the AR 15) and I once again had unlimited access to the range and all the ammo I could could shoot. It was 'fun' originally shooting a gun like the M16 that I saw in the movies etc, lots of rounds, rapid fire at the standing targets, made it seem more realistic as a gun to kill with...fill the air with lead..."oorah"

It wasn't even that bad as far as accuracy on the close range single shot but was no comparison to the FN when it came to shooting out to 300+.

It didn't take long before I craved the return to shouldering the cumbersome old wood of the FN and sit and 'snip' from the sand bag. I started passing on the opportunities to shoot the C7...the novelty had worn off and I wanted to return to what we had become calling the 'real' gun'.

The new 'Mattel' gun never really measured up a shooter for those that had trained on the older guns. It was a far better rifle for all our Military assault training; lighter to carry, easier to clean etc etc....what an AR is designed for....but few guys who shoot it regularly ever went on to own one personally for hunting, just not the best tool for the job.

But like the others have said it's the principle, the inability to have the choice if you wanted to.

---

AR 15s are not the same in accuracy as they once were. Maybe the CF forces ones were 8"@100yds per the military specs for acceptance. The M16A1 spec from the GAO to go overseas was 8" mean radius at 100 yds.

Even the civilian run of the mil out of the box AR-15 does way better than that now. Custom barrels make them a precision firearm for use as a Military or Police Designated Marksman Rifle.

An AR 15 is simply a great accurate shoulder fired, magazine fed, air cooled, gas operated, semi auto(or select fire) firearm for numerous uses.

It isn't a big deal to qualify with it at 602 yds or 550 meters depending on Country with milspec M61 ammo, recruits do it routinely.

FN also makes it.

It why Canadian Police are now carrying it as the "Patrol Carbine."

Would MSR fans be ok with AR-15s becoming non restricted provided they had a non-detachable 5 round magazine? E.g SKS are non restricted. Or is having the option to attach different magazines really important? Just wondering......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pinepointer

Would MSR fans be ok with AR-15s becoming non restricted provided they had a non-detachable 5 round magazine? E.g SKS are non restricted. Or is having the option to attach different magazines really important? Just wondering......

---

I don't see how a non-detachable mag could work with that design. I think it is likely that centrefire semi-auto rifles that take 30-round detachable mags will all end up on the restricted list sooner or later -- an unintended consequence of abolishing the LGR.

Since the one real benefit of registries is that they interfere with transfers to the black market, and since the only long guns that are a significant concern re said transfers are those that take larger detachable mags, I think the writing is on the wall. That's what a no-compromise position has earned us.