The Great Gun Control Debate

[Eaglelord17]

It's utterly ridiculous to say that.  Now that is what the RCMP lab says, but if you look at the original Stoner AR-10, the AR-15, then the Reed Knight/Gene Stoner SR-25 and the way they where created, the AR-15 had much less to do with the SR-25 (which was the first modern AR-10) than the original AR-10.
  Some parts where used initially, but many found not to work.
The second AR-10's (Armalite/Eagle Arms) where even less like the AR-15, using M-14 magazines that where modified.

The whole system is broken for the Prohibited/Restricted/ and NR classes anyway.

I believe the argument which was used was that the original AR-10 cannot be a variant of the AR-15 as it is the original design. Either way as you have said the system is broken, but the good news is these shotguns have been properly reclassified as NR.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

"broken" infers that it was working at one time. It was a clusterf*ck from the day of it's birth

 

[Jarnhamar]

It's utterly ridiculous to say that.  Now that is what the RCMP lab says, but if you look at the original Stoner AR-10, the AR-15, then the Reed Knight/Gene Stoner SR-25 and the way they where created, the AR-15 had much less to do with the SR-25 (which was the first modern AR-10) than the original AR-10.
  Some parts where used initially, but many found not to work.
The second AR-10's (Armalite/Eagle Arms) where even less like the AR-15, using M-14 magazines that where modified.

The whole system is broken for the Prohibited/Restricted/ and NR classes anyway.

Do I have this right?

The AR10 was developed by Stoner for the US Military service rifle replacement competition.
It was rejected but the gov't said make it a 5.56, make it full auto (do a couple other little chances) and come back.
The change were made and the full auto 5.56x45mm M16 was put in to service with the military while the AR15 was marketed to civilians as a sporting rifle.
The M110, SR25 variants were 7.62x51 caliber rifles based off the AR15 platforms?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Not sure if this should also not be in the WTF? topic?

If the facts of this case are as they first seem, it does indeed give one cause to shake one's head. 

G2G

We have our own cases here. Of note, is the turmoil and financial stress the Crown put Ian Thompson through, compared to his attackers. He defended his home and animals against fire bombing miscreants and the Crown tried their damnedest to make him the bad guy.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/man-faces-jail-after-protecting-home-from-masked-attackers

<snip> Mr. Thomson’s is the latest in a series of high-profile cases in which people have been charged after defending their homes and businesses against criminals. Central Alberta farmer Brian Knight became a local hero after shooting a thief who was trying to steal his ATV. He pleaded guilty to criminal negligence earlier this month. In October, Toronto shopkeeper David Chen was acquitted of forcible confinement charges after he tied up a repeat shoplifter and demanded he stop raiding his grocery store.

Making, possessing and using molotov cocktails against people, is not as criminal as owning and using a firearm for it's intended purpose apparently. Even when you follow all the stupid firearms laws that the Crown has imposed on owners.

 

[Jarnhamar]

We have our own cases here. Of note, is the turmoil and financial stress the Crown put Ian Thompson through, compared to his attackers. He defended his home and animals against fire bombing miscreants and the Crown tried their damnedest to make him the bad guy.

I may be mixed up but I recall reading that one of the police officers involved in this story took to internet forums like Canadian Gun Nuts to call Ian a liar and accuse him of orchestrating an inside job.

 

[Good2Golf]

We have our own cases here. Of note, is the turmoil and financial stress the Crown put Ian Thompson through, compared to his attackers. He defended his home and animals against fire bombing miscreants and the Crown tried their damnedest to make him the bad guy.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/man-faces-jail-after-protecting-home-from-masked-attackers

Making, possessing and using molotov cocktails against people, is not as criminal as owning and using a firearm for it's intended purpose apparently. Even when you follow all the stupid firearms laws that the Crown has imposed on owners.

Which shows that countries that would like to think of themselves as progressive (Denmark, Canada, many more, etc..) and respectful of all right, need to consider if in some cases they haven't swung the balance to far, and eroded the base rights of its citizens. :nod:

Regards
G2G

 

[PPCLI Guy]

Which shows that countries that would like to think of themselves as progressive (Denmark, Canada, many more, etc..) and respectful of all right, need to consider if in some cases they haven't swung the balance to far, and eroded the base rights of its citizens. :nod:

Regards
G2G

Canadians have not had the right to use deadly force to protect property for a very long time - what right exactly is being eroded?

 

[dapaterson]

If you're going to quote a five year old case, you should at least acknowledge that he was acquitted on all charges.  http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/matt-gurney-after-two-years-judge-acquits-man-who-defended-himself-with-a-gun

 

[PuckChaser]

If you're going to quote a five year old case, you should at least acknowledge that he was acquitted on all charges.  http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/matt-gurney-after-two-years-judge-acquits-man-who-defended-himself-with-a-gun

How much did it cost him in legal fees for charges that should never have been brought up? That's the point here, not that he was acquitted.

 

[Jarnhamar]

How much did it cost him in legal fees for charges that should never have been brought up? That's the point here, not that he was acquitted.

I believe it was either $50'000 or $60'000 when  all was said and done. 

Edit: $60'000 for lawyers.  Lost a house.  $260'000 in total costs.

 

[Good2Golf]

PPCLI Guy, I see your point about property protection; I was thinking more about protection of self or others (family, etc...) wherein one has a reasonable right to self-defence, whether by weapon (firearm, blade, blunt object) or by hand, considering what a jury of peers might consider reasonable use of force in the situation.

Regards
G2G

 

[PuckChaser]

I believe it was either $50'000 or $60'000 when  all was said and done. 

Edit: $60'000 for lawyers.  Lost a house.  $260'000 in total costs.

And unfortunately, to get all that money back he'd have to go further in debt to sue the Crown.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Just moving the gun bits to where they're a closer match - please carry on, folks.

Milnet.ca Staff

 

[KevinB]

Do I have this right?

The AR10 was developed by Stoner for the US Military service rifle replacement competition.
It was rejected but the gov't said make it a 5.56, make it full auto (do a couple other little chances) and come back.
The change were made and the full auto 5.56x45mm M16 was put in to service with the military while the AR15 was marketed to civilians as a sporting rifle.
The M110, SR25 variants were 7.62x51 caliber rifles based off the AR15 platforms?

Not specifically.

AR-10 was designed and rejected
  AR-15 was designed in 5.56mm from AR-10 design for USAF program
AR-15 was adopted as M-16 by DoD (with a few changes).

SR-25 was designed off AR-10, but using some AR-15 parts (gas tube, buffer tube) but AR-10 magazine, bolt, and some hybrid items - fire control was common.

James B. (decided redacting name is best bet) sends SR-25 into RCMP as he is worried it will be prohib - and they class it as restricted as an AR-15 variant.

Variant has never been defined or challenged in the courts -- so...

 

[Loachman]

Is the last letter following the "B" a "y", and is he very sarcastic?

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I was wondering much the same thing...

 

[TCBF]

Do I have this right?

The AR10 was developed by Stoner for the US Military service rifle replacement competition.
It was rejected but the gov't said make it a 5.56, make it full auto (do a couple other little chances) and come back.
The change were made and the full auto 5.56x45mm M16 was put in to service with the military while the AR15 was marketed to civilians as a sporting rifle.
The M110, SR25 variants were 7.62x51 caliber rifles based off the AR15 platforms?

- Armalite AR-10 was submitted for trials, but the Stellite lined barrel burst and it was not reconsidered. What became the M-14 won those trials. AR-10 was purchased in some quantities by Portugal, Sudan, and a few other countries. Sudanese contract AR-10s (mfgd by Artillerie Inrictingen/NWM) were imported into Canada circa 1978 by Matachewan Gun and Tackle and retailed for $475 or so. I owned one for about five years. Grouped tighter than the C1A1 or L1A1, though YMMV.

 

[KevinB]

Is the last letter following the "B" a "y", and is he very sarcastic?

Ding Ding Ding 

 

[Loachman]

Is he still as sarcastic? He was a delight in the early nineties, but I don't think that I've seen him since.

And is he taking this through the courts?

 

[KevinB]

I have not seen him in a year or two at least (me not going to Calgary much, and JB not really heading down here often - though occasionally for SHOT)
  He was the initiator - he did not contest.
I think he was happy it did not get prohib...