AR 15 Reclassification

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skypilot

An AR 15 isn't, by even the most ridiculous stretch, a machine gun.

Your "needs" may not be the same as other's needs and needs are of no bearing here. Freedom isn't about minimum needs. It's about the free ability to drive a VW beetle or a Lamborghini Gallardo. To drink no alcohol or to drink beer or wine to own an island or a swamp,..........PLUS it is a RIGHT granted by the US Constitution and if one RIGHT that is granted under the Constitution falls, no other rights are safe from an over reaching government.

On Semi Auto ARs...

I have had on several occassion had a "pack" or several separate individual coyotes come in to a call and an AR is well suited as a hunting rifle for that situation, gopher hunting and or target shooting.

My AR 15 when left alone has hurt no one.

It is borderline psychotic to blame an object for or add some type of personification or anthromorphism to an inanimate object.

Pulse was an islamist terrorist attack. The forensics say so, the LE say so, the victims say so, heck the shooter said so.

No one needs a pressure cooker, an airplane, nails, blackpowder, boxcutters, cars, motorcycles or any of the things they have used to further their 7th century harmful beliefs.

---

^Thank you. Boy do I get tired of hearing guns being blamed for atrocities. When lives are lost to gun violence, guns take the blame. I can't remember ever hearing breweries or distilleries being blamed for lives lost to drinking and driving/liver failure, etc. What about vehicle manufacturers for car accidents? Baseball bats or golf clubs used in beatings? Knives in stabbings? In all of those cases~it's the behavior of the person committing the crime drawn into question (rightfully so!) not the tool/device that made it happen so easily. Why is that? Because law makers can't see past the nose on their face, and PAL/RPAL holders are the low-hanging fruit when they want to look tough to the voting public. It's disgusting.

Anybody who calls an AR15 a "machine gun" should have their own PAL revoked. lol You are aware it's a self-loading (=semi-auto), .223/556 rifle with a magazine capacity limit of 5...right? Is Canada a safer place because this 1 self-loading .223 is restricted? Give your head a shake. You can walk into Bass Pro and buy a self-loading .223 right now. Does hearing that make you feel less safe? Please remove the words "do we need?" from any gun discussion if you're a PAL/RPAL holder if you value what rights we have left. By saying that, you're undermining your own rights because if you think law makers will stop with the AR issue, you're out to lunch. You're also deciding that the interest of others matters less than your own. Just because you may not want/feel the need for an AR, don't work against those who would love to have one for sporting purposes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DGearyFTE

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).

---

I also don't see myself hunting with an AR-15 BUT, I am willing to do whatever it takes within the law to prevent Canadians from getting shoot in a school,public mall,university campus,by a nut job who has been allowed to own a AR-15.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrouseWhisperer

^Thank you. Boy do I get tired of hearing guns being blamed for atrocities.

---

This is the oldest, tiredest straw man in the whole debate.

Proposing to put controls on firearms is not "blaming guns" any more than imposing speed limits is "blaming cars."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrouseWhisperer

^Thank you. Boy do I get tired of hearing guns being blamed for atrocities. When lives are lost to gun violence, guns take the blame. I can't remember ever hearing breweries or distilleries being blamed for lives lost to drinking and driving/liver failure, etc. What about vehicle manufacturers for car accidents? Baseball bats or golf clubs used in beatings? Knives in stabbings? In all of those cases~it's the behavior of the person committing the crime drawn into question (rightfully so!) not the tool/device that made it happen so easily. Why is that? Because law makers can't see past the nose on their face, and PAL/RPAL holders are the low-hanging fruit when they want to look tough to the voting public. It's disgusting.

Anybody who calls an AR15 a "machine gun" should have their own PAL revoked. lol You are aware it's a self-loading (=semi-auto), .223/556 rifle with a magazine capacity limit of 5...right? Is Canada a safer place because this 1 self-loading .223 is restricted? Give your head a shake. You can walk into Bass Pro and buy a self-loading .223 right now. Does hearing that make you feel less safe? Please remove the words "do we need?" from any gun discussion if you're a PAL/RPAL holder if you value what rights we have left. By saying that, you're undermining your own rights because if you think law makers will stop with the AR issue, you're out to lunch. You're also deciding that the interest of others matters less than your own. Just because you may not want/feel the need for an AR, don't work against those who would love to have one for sporting purposes.

---

Here's a little reading.

wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15

Just on the history of the AR-15


"""Anybody who calls an AR15 a "machine gun" should have their own PAL revoked"""

LOLOLOL So then I am sure you know the AR-15 comes in 2 models, 1 fully automatic with selector switch(making it a "Machine Gun" and 1 civilian model semi auto.

• Various magazine capacities, ranging from 5 to 100-round(which can also be used in the semi auto models), And I should get my PAL revoked. humm

Speeding and gun capabilities are a good comparison. Increased speed and a higher gun capability only add to the level of carnage. By themselves, they're not really responsible for the accident.
There'll always be lots of people that'll say speeding kills just like they say guns kill, but in reality, irresponsible behavior by individuals will always be the root cause.
When the right to own trumps the right to have screening, you're going to have problems.

It may be onelessarrow. A "direct" comparison? No, but with regards to "society" or people realizing the carnage is adding up, and then subsequently accepting "limits" or change to reduce (not eliminate because we never will) the road toll.

speeding, drunk driving, and these days texting. All things that evolved as time went by. And all things that people have been dragged "kicking and screaming". . The problems in the U.S. are complex, and imo extend to and include socio economic. That shouldn't prevent starting somewhere. First steps to reduce....see if hopefully they have some small impacts.

i I hopefully will be worn food before the U.S. blows. We are seeing more and more signs. Whether it's cops being executed and anarchy in the streets, whether it's current boiling tensions with the current elections as the rifts grow wider and wider, more polarized, gun deaths and two sides so entrenched, and even the house, where getting anything passed, etc. If Trump wins, and he could very well throw fuel on the fire. At home and abroad.

As for us, Canada. Well we are limited with respect to magazine capacity, and have some other "controls". Are semis the same "problem" here? Don't think so. We also have a history either over regulation (registry) or high handed RCMP (high river, reclassification) or people getting jacked by trumped up charges, that end up in bankruptcy or worse.

shame Utopia will never exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I also don't see myself hunting with an AR-15 BUT, I am willing to do whatever it takes within the law to prevent Canadians from getting shoot in a school,public mall,university campus,by a nut job who has been allowed to own a AR-15.

---

Perfect logic~the AR15 does nothing, shoots nothing, in no way differently than non-restricted rifles like the Ruger Mini 14, Robinson Arms XCR-L, Tavor, T97, SU-16, AR180b, Swiss Arms, Benelli MR1 etc. etc. All non-restricted, all the same caliber, all semi-auto...and yet the sky hasn't fallen in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

This is the oldest, tiredest straw man in the whole debate.

Proposing to put controls on firearms is not "blaming guns" any more than imposing speed limits is "blaming cars."

---

Sure it is. If you think it's not, I'd question your grasp on the controls currently in place in Canada. Or are you even talking about Canada at this point? The "controls" are there now, perhaps you'd care to see more. If you can tell me what the AR15 does (other than look ominous) that the other, aforementioned rifles don't do~I'm all ears. This is political, and nothing more. I'd suggest you take-up archery.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Gunner

Here's a little reading.

wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15

Just on the history of the AR-15


"""Anybody who calls an AR15 a "machine gun" should have their own PAL revoked"""

LOLOLOL So then I am sure you know the AR-15 comes in 2 models, 1 fully automatic with selector switch(making it a "Machine Gun" and 1 civilian model semi auto.

• Various magazine capacities, ranging from 5 to 100-round(which can also be used in the semi auto models), And I should get my PAL revoked. humm

---

Rather than posting a link the the first hit you found on Google, why don't you take another 15 seconds and figure-out what version of this rifle is even being discussed for re-classification in Canada. Are you suggesting that any of the over 25,000 people who signed that petition are hoping for a select-fire version for hunting, or sporting purposes? lol Good one.

Listen guys~I don't own a black gun of any kind, nor have I any desire to get an RPAL so that I'm forced to join a club just to shoot a very specific model of semi-auto at paper targets. The same caliber, same action, in several other makes~I can hunt, or target shoot with where legal. If the AR ever becomes non-restricted, I may consider getting one..but probably not. However, it's remarkable to me that it's restricted when nearly identical firearms are not~for political reasons alone. Several of the rifles I mentioned also accept AR magazines~in case any Google aficionados want to run that up the flag pole. In other words, you can't cite magazine capacity as part of your anti-AR argument when loads of AR mags are sold for non-restricted rifles every day in this country. What IS loud and clear to me...having read all the comments in this thread...is that plenty of you (hopefully, PAL holders) see no issue with inconsistencies in regulation surrounding this issue. Give your semi-auto rifles and shotguns a hug~especially if they have blued steel and walnut. They're not nearly as dangerous, so no chance that they're on the RCMP's radar...right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBen

It may be onelessarrow. A "direct" comparison? No, but with regards to "society" or people realizing the carnage is adding up, and then subsequently accepting "limits" or change to reduce (not eliminate because we never will) the road toll.

speeding, drunk driving, and these days texting. All things that evolved as time went by. And all things that people have been dragged "kicking and screaming". . The problems in the U.S. are complex, and imo extend to and include socio economic. That shouldn't prevent starting somewhere. First steps to reduce....see if hopefully they have some small impacts.

i I hopefully will be worn food before the U.S. blows. We are seeing more and more signs. Whether it's cops being executed and anarchy in the streets, whether it's current boiling tensions with the current elections as the rifts grow wider and wider, more polarized, gun deaths and two sides so entrenched, and even the house, where getting anything passed, etc. If Trump wins, and he could very well throw fuel on the fire. At home and abroad.

As for us, Canada. Well we are limited with respect to magazine capacity, and have some other "controls". Are semis the same "problem" here? Don't think so. We also have a history either over regulation (registry) or high handed RCMP (high river, reclassification) or people getting jacked by trumped up charges, that end up in bankruptcy or worse.

shame Utopia will never exist.

---

Well said JBen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrouseWhisperer

Sure it is. If you think it's not, I'd question your grasp on the controls currently in place in Canada. Or are you even talking about Canada at this point? The "controls" are there now, perhaps you'd care to see more. If you can tell me what the AR15 does (other than look ominous) that the other, aforementioned rifles don't do~I'm all ears.

---

The AR-15 was classified as restricted by order-in-council at a time when the Federal Asssault Weapons ban was being debated in the United States. There were far fewer black rifles on the market at that time, and they tended to be civilian variants of a small number of military firearms. Canada chose to classify those rifles specifically, by order-in-council, rather than to try to control the market more broadly by creating classification criteria that would separate the "assault weapon" class from other semi-automatic firearms, which was the approach taken in the United States.

When the AWB expired in 2004, the market for black rifles exploded and many more rifles entered the marketplace. But with the CPC in power from 2006 on, and unwilling to alienate gun owners (who complained throughout the CPC's tenure that the CPC was not living up to its promises), no action was taken to update firearms classifications in Canada or to change the classification criteria.

Consequently, classifications are now a mess. But the lack of any rhyme or reason in the classification of semi-autos is a consequence of changes in the market, and government failure to react to those changes, rather than of "blaming the gun." Had the black rifle market in 1992 been what it was today, likely our government would have created criteria similar to the AWB criteria, which would have had the effect of making your list of other semi-autos restricted today.

There is a simple explanation for the mess. It is not a matter of "blaming the gun."

Can we just combine the "Black gun" and "Dangerous dog breeds" debates into one and pin it to the top of all of the relevant forums? Seems like the same argument over and over again... :whacked:

Perhaps we can allow "dangerous breeds" provided they are only allowed to have 5 teeth left in their mouths.... :moose: lol