B&T APC9 at home

[u/TheGoldShipper]

Really wanted a APC9 or GHM9 but alas, prohib.

So I turned my 1970s 10/22 into the closest thing. 26inch OAL without comp.

Ruger 10/22 carbine receiver
SB22 Fixed Kit chassis
Ballistic Advantage 8” barrel
Tac Sol X Ring compensator
SBI super lite stock
TANDEMKROSS bolt release and skeletonized mag release
Butler Creek 25/22 mag pinned at 10 of course
Holosun ARO
Magpul VFG

[u/hunterofsteelhead]

You keep saying youre not an expert and asking people to correct you and then when they correct you then you default to posting the same thing over and over. BTW I havent downvoted you im just confused whether you actually know what youre talking about or just repeating rcmp nonsense over everybody that may actually be correct

[u/Sad-Stop-2401 → u/hunterofsteelhead]

Not one of them have quoted an authoritative source or have admitted to be a lawyer or someone who knows this law well. To top it all some of them have made some obvious mistakes.

Again, it is not about me being right as much as it is to have an authoritative answer to this. The reason is because this is something that can land a person in trouble. I will like them to be able to find the right source for this question.

My position comes from the obvious literal reading of the law. If that is not correct, I will love to have an authoritative source for that.

BTW, it is not RCMP bullshit. It is actually the law. That is literal text of Firearms Act.

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-14.html#h-117002

[u/hunterofsteelhead → u/Sad-Stop-2401]

And that rcmp qoute you keep posting , is it referring to rimfire firearms and is changing the barrel to a factory barrel considered an alteration? If neither then that qoute doesnt apply

[u/Sad-Stop-2401 → u/hunterofsteelhead]

No, that definition is applicable to firearms (and that means all firearms).

I believe if you go through my responses, the literal reading of the law is that modification (say be substituting) the barrel with another barrel of different length should trigger adaptation part of the definition. However, to the best of my reading of the law, if you replace the barrel with exactly same length barrel, say reparing the firearm, it should not be considered as adapation. Because the length of the barrel was that to begin with.

The source of barrel is not been mentioned in the law. However, when a firearm is produced out of the factory, it will not be called as adapted because the firearm was made that way only. So a firearm that came out with say 5 inches barrel (like TR410 micro) should not trigger this part of definition, IMHO.

Here, likely, an existing longer barrel was replaced with a shorter one. Which can likely trigger this definition of prohibited firearm.

The question is not that of factory or non factory in barrel because barrels do not have firearm classes. It is if firearm has been adapted or not.

Here is the Firearm Act, definitions. Search for prohibited firearms. The text is literal.

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-14.html#h-117002

[u/hunterofsteelhead → u/Sad-Stop-2401]

I saw your post about sawing or cutting the barrel to shorter lengths but I dont see where you posted the law that says a shorter factory barrel cant be installed

[u/Sad-Stop-2401 → u/hunterofsteelhead]

(b) a firearm that is adapted from a rifle or shotgun, whether by sawing, cutting or any other alteration, and that, as so adapted

So yes, replacing longer barrel with shorter barrel should apply, IMHO. Replacing longer barrel with shorter barrel is an alteration to firearm. Likely it may trigger this part of definition.

[u/NeruLight → u/Sad-Stop-2401]

You’re effectively trying to tell people that putting a 16” barrel on your 18” factory Ruger model is against the rules. It isn’t. IANAL but the source here is the hundreds of people who have put 12” and 8” barrels on them.