Order In Council Firearms problem / solution

[Robin Craig]

So,

Lets keep our politics to ourselves and deal with the problem and possible solutions.

A friend has an M72, a very nice bilingual one. Made utterly useless by the laws now in place. Can not transport, sell, display etc.

What can he do? Wait for some sketchy buy back from the feds at a notional value that doesn't reflect what he paid for it?

Maybe not. Recently we were brain storming and came up with an idea. Cut both ends off roughly at the lengths shown in these cropped pictures and stick something tubular up inside and then put them in a period correct ruckack or webbing bag and just have the ends sticking out of the bags.

Looks like two M72 but wholly legal and actually doubles his display material.

Maybe this is the way to go. Removes any of the "is it deactivated properly' quibble as there is only a few inched there.

Sensible comments invited please.

[rob love]

If he is worried about de-valuing it, do not cut it in half. That will de-value it a lot more than whatever level of deactivation they want.

I have more than a few half M72s. I'll trade him 4 halves for a Whole one, provided the whole one has a bunch of holes drilled in the tube along the bottom, and a rod epoxied in place somewhere along the bore.

These days, an M72 launcher in one piece (but demilled to some tasteful degree) is worth between $450 to around $600.

During the recent election campaign, the PM indicated the plan was to either buy back or else deactivate at government expense. More recently, the outline of the plan from IBM includes setting values based on pre-ban sales prices, and there being an arbitration element to account for accessories or options. They are now under 6 months to implement this plan..they better get moving.

[Tony Smith]

Originally Posted by Robin Craig

Sensible comments invited please.

The correct spelling of the Thread Title is "Odour".

[Bruce Parker]

It begs the question what does deactivate mean for those items now banned but don't fall into the 'firearm' definition (like that M72). For firearms there are guidelines that the government expects to be followed that will render them sufficiently non-gun to own. But I don't expect any such guidelines exist for the rest, in Canada anyway.

[Chris Suslowicz]

Originally Posted by Tony Smith

The correct spelling of the Thread Title is "Odour".

Are you sure it's not "Ordure"?



The LAW 66 tube is just a length of pipe. Few people would have the capability of duplicating the rocket and reloading it, so this ban is just playing to the newspapers. (Similarly the demands that deactivation involves welding every movable part into a solid lump for some items.)

Bah!

Chris. (Proper deactivation leaves something outwardly untouched but harder to return to being a usable weapon than making a new one from scratch.)

[Robin Craig]

Rob I will contact him and see if he is willing to barter

[maple_leaf_eh]

Originally Posted by Bruce Parker

It begs the question what does deactivate mean for those items now banned but don't fall into the 'firearm' definition (like that M72). For firearms there are guidelines that the government expects to be followed that will render them sufficiently non-gun to own. But I don't expect any such guidelines exist for the rest, in Canada anyway.

The current RCMP Deactivation standards turn a functioning firearm into a single solid block of immoveable parts. So, on my Indian Ishapore and BSA FN-FAL, the magazine follower is welded to the body, which is welded to the inside feed ramps; the breech block carrier is welded to the upper receiver on the inside; the gas plug is spot welded to the gas block; there is a hole up into the chamber and a hardened steel rod is welded into place from the bottom; and the upper and lower are welded together with a dot of weld on the hinge pin for good measure. The change lever moves and the folding end of the charging handle opens and closes, but that is about it.

The problem has long been backyard workshops singly or in semi-production scale, cutting welds and replacing destroyed parts. There are enough uncontrolled parts around that a simple unsophisticated (or old-specification) deactivation can be returned to firing condition. With the latest specification, the feds wanted to make it as hard as possible to do that.

Specific to Robin's question, I agree that an aligned pair of look-alike ends with a rolled up cylinder of hardware mesh or some 66mm ID plastic drain pipe and lots of holes would pass the visual test.

[charlie fitton]

"A friend has an M72, a very nice bilingual one. Made utterly useless by the laws now in place. Can not transport, sell, display etc.

What can he do? Wait for some sketchy buy back from the feds at a notional value that doesn't reflect what he paid for it?"

Last time I read through the scary-movie gun ban, his logical solution is to get a Turkish M72 tube, as they are not affected by the vote-pandering bill

[rob love]

Originally Posted by charlie fitton

Last time I read through the scary-movie gun ban, his logical solution is to get a Turkish M72 tube, as they are not affected by the vote-pandering bill

Don't bet on it. The OIC is the guideline. It results in a lot of other similar firearms or devices being prohibited for being similar. They changed a lot of firearms from non-restricted over to prohibited that were not on the list simply because they were similar, including a few that, a month previous, were listed as NOT being related to the parent firearm that they are now using to prohibit them. And just because the turkish M72 tube isn't listed doesn't mean that they can't add that FRT when the time comes with their opinion as to it's status.

I have an airsoft M-72. Kind of heavy duty in that it's made of metal rather than fiberglass. Hopefully they don't consider it a replica. Those are banned too.

[Lynn Eades]

Rob, that sounds more real than the real (toy) (plastic) real one.

[rob love]

I bought it from a local surplus dealer's closure auction a couple years back. I liked them because they would be less likely to get damaged than the fiberglass ones.

I actually won the bidding on two of them, but when I went up front to collect them, I noticed one packing tube was lighter than the other. Turned out that it only contained a short piece of 2x4 which had likely been placed inside the tube during the previewing the day before. The owner sorted it out. I even got to keep the empty shipping tube and the piece of 2x4, which I burned in the woodstove.

[Ed Landstrom]

Originally Posted by rob love

Don't bet on it. The OIC is the guideline. It results in a lot of other similar firearms or devices being prohibited for being similar. They changed a lot of firearms from non-restricted over to prohibited that were not on the list simply because they were similar, including a few that, a month previous, were listed as NOT being related to the parent firearm that they are now using to prohibit them. And just because the turkish M72 tube isn't listed doesn't mean that they can't add that FRT when the time comes with their opinion as to it's status.

I have an airsoft M-72. Kind of heavy duty in that it's made of metal rather than fiberglass. Hopefully they don't consider it a replica. Those are banned too.

It doesn't even have to be similar to anything, It only has to have a bore greater than 20mm or be capable of discharging a projectile at a muzzle energy greater than 10 000 Joules. The list is only a sampling of things that are included in the prohibition. If it meets the above criteria, it's outlawed whether they remembered to put it on the list or not.

Collectors are still speculating (and the feds haven't chosen to issue any clarification) whether the ban includes flare guns, antiques, muzzle loading match-fired cannons, line-throwers, industrial devices such as kiln guns, and other gun-like devices that have been traditionally exempt.

[Bruce Parker]

Originally Posted by Ed Landstrom

Collectors are still speculating (and the feds haven't chosen to issue any clarification) whether the ban includes flare guns, antiques, muzzle loading match-fired cannons, line-throwers, industrial devices such as kiln guns, and other gun-like devices that have been traditionally exempt.

What you say is correct. Regarding the flare guns and industrial devices I recall some early soothing words that they would be exempt. However if it's not in writing and the definition includes them I wouldn't take my chances in court as they say.

How an unlicensed shooter with illegal smuggled guns somehow justifies a ban on WW1 relics and empty fiberglass M72 tubes is beyond me. That those items were already on the list well before the shooting tells me a great deal as well.

[Ed Storey]

It is bad enough that the Canadian Government and Press consistently paint legal firearms owners as a potential safety risk and that the government has done everything in its power to strip legal owners of their firearms; but now it appears the medical profession has jumped into the fray. I guess if you cannot legislate the legal confiscation of personal property then you can always try a new approach and go after those Canadians over 60 who own firearms by scaring unwitting relatives into believing that the older, firearms owning, members of their family are a potential risk to themselves or other people due to potential mental health issues.

https://ottawacitizen.com/health/men...ms-and-suicide