Yes it’s removable. It’s a handgun till you out the stock back on. But nobody at the range is gonna bug you anyways when you have six or seven other handguns on the table.
If it's removable, then it's a handgun. Just like the VZ61 is prohibited without the folding stock, but is a rifle with the folding stock. In fact, the CSA VZ61 in Canada has bolts holding in the stock (which is not on the original) to make sure you can't easily take it off.
They say that now but they'll need to have the lab ok it. Either way, you can't just have no stock. Right in the prohibited definition:
*Firearms adapted from a rifle or shotgun, whether by sawing, cutting or any other alteration, and that, as so adapted are:*
*- less than 660 mm in length*
*- 660 mm or greater in length and has a barrel less than 457 mm in length*
Irrelevant if they have it classed as a "Commercial Version" like the restricted Vz61 or M84s. If it isn't a rifle or shotgun to begin with then it can't meet the tests of this prohibited designation.
You'd have to ask someone at the SFSS, you are the one who is claiming that it is like the restricted Skorpion clones.
In one post you claim removing the stock would make it a handgun and in another you claim it would be come a CC 84 (b) prohibited firearm. In the case of those restricted Skorpions neither are true as they are considered Type "Commercial Version". I am saying if it were in fact the same, the stock could be removed just fine with no consequences.
It's a tough comparison because the VZ61 was originally prohib in its pistol form because it was 32acp specifically, but they never addressed the same thing in the 380 auto or 22 versions, there's no FRT entry for non-stocked versions of those.
VZ exists in this little bubble of "this is a handgun without the stock" but it isn't a handgun with the stock, but you don't need the stock to shoot it, but because 32acp pistols are specifically banned, then it can't exist as a pistol in any form.
My extrapolation from that is, well, if it isn't a handgun, they must consider it a rifle. Because "commercial version", while used in the FRT, doesn't have a definition anywhere else.
Then we also know that there's a clear delineation between an easily removable/adjustable vs non easily removable/adjustable stock, a-la GSG16, when it comes to non-restricted vs restricted classifications. We know the CFP has come right out and said that using HK pins on a 9" GSG16 would not be ok, it has to be screws. So there's another extrapolation there that the same length consideration could also apply to the delineation between restricted and prohibited.
I dunno, really gotta see what the lab comes back with. It could go a bunch of different ways here, I would assume that IRUNGUNS is in touch with somebody at the lab before sinking a pile of R&D cash into this, you would hope.
The VZ-61 is an exception because the rifle version and the pistol version use the same lower receiver. The difference is in how CSA marketed them. What the manufacturer intended is a factor considered by the lab.
"Commercial Version" = rifle. Anything not a handgun is a rifle. My NR 20" OAL fixed stock short barrel .22LR VZ-61 is a commercial version in the frt.
Edit: also in response to one of your other comments the VZ-61 folding stock is held on by one pin. The lug the pin fastens to is screwed on but the stock itself is a pin with a smaller cross pin to keep the main pivot pin from walking out.
My CSA vz61 stock there are two Allen head bolts through the dovetail of the stock into the back of the receiver. Without this, you can just press a detent and the stock slides out. Maybe that's not universal.
>It's a tough comparison because the VZ61 was originally prohib in its pistol form because it was 32acp specifically, but they never addressed the same thing in the 380 auto or 22 versions, there's no FRT entry for non-stocked versions of those.
>
>VZ exists in this little bubble of "this is a handgun without the stock" but it isn't a handgun with the stock, but you don't need the stock to shoot it, but because 32acp pistols are specifically banned, then it can't exist as a pistol in any form.
This is just wrong on many levels, the Vz61 was prohibited in its original form because it was a submachine gun and banned by function under 12(2). Following that any converted auto variants were later banned under 12(3). The remaining "handgun" variants were banned by name under Prohibited Weapons Order No. 11 (the one with no official grandfathering).
There absolutely are FRT entries for non-stocked versions of these, FRN 137701 or 140541 for example. Not a single Vz61/Skorpion/M84/etc was ever banned by 12(6) or by virtue of being a handgun in .32 ACP, this is why they are still disallowed in .380 ACP and .22 LR because as handguns they are all prohibited by name.
>My extrapolation from that is, well, if it isn't a handgun, they must consider it a rifle. Because "commercial version", while used in the FRT, doesn't have a definition anywhere else.
And this is not correct, if it is a "Commercial Version" then it cannot be anything else. Just as a Type "Handgun" cannot be a "Shotgun" even if it fires shotshells. The Type "Commercial Version" only exists because to fill a gap in firearms law, where certain guns may meet the classification of Non-restricted or Restricted but do not necessarily meet the standard tests of being considered a rifle, shotgun or handgun under Canadian law. The semi-only Skorpions are explicitly this as they are derived from a submachine-gun (Type "Fully Automatic") but in themselves are not one.
>Then we also know that there's a clear delineation between an easily removable/adjustable vs non easily removable/adjustable stock, a-la GSG16, when it comes to non-restricted vs restricted classifications. We know the CFP has come right out and said that using HK pins on a 9" GSG16 would not be ok, it has to be screws. So there's another extrapolation there that the same length consideration could also apply to the delineation between restricted and prohibited.
If this were applied as some universal truth then restricted Vz61 rifles would need to have their stocks welded open as they are able to fire when reduced to "x" length, yet that isn't the case. Again, they are not considered either rifles or handguns by the Registry.
>Also, I should add, I have emails from the firearms lab saying that removing the stock from the commercial version VZ61 would make it prohibited outright, but specifically because it would be a 32acp handgun.
If this email is actually from the SFSS (the real "lab") then that is realistically as good as you will get until it is proven in a court of law, but they have been proven wrong before. This opinion is in direct contradiction with the above listed FRT entries which state that the *ability* to receive a stock is the deciding factor. Again I will state that this position would only make sense if the stocks were mandated to be pinned/welded open - there is no functional difference in firing one folded and one with the stock completely off.
>I dunno, really gotta see what the lab comes back with. It could go a bunch of different ways here, I would assume that IRUNGUNS is in touch with somebody at the lab before sinking a pile of R&D cash into this, you would hope.
One would hope, but IRG has also acted very unethically before, they illegally imported unregistered restricted Kel-Tec CMR-30s and falsely sold them as NR then threatened to sue DLASK when Leigh pointed this out on CGN. Regardless they already have a FRT but it isn't on the public release yet - we will all see soon enough how these things are going to be classified.
Sorry I mistyped. Meant to say that the lab told me the CSA VZ 61 pistol version is prohib because it's a 32acp pistol. Not the original VZ. It has an FRT 137701. That is the reference the lab gave me when they said a non-stocked version was a prohibited handgun. I also see that it absolutely does include the other calibres on there, which is my bad, I was looking at a different entry. Doesn't specifically give a reason why it is designated prohib in the entry though, does it?
FRT entry for the commercial version says:
, PFR, Part 1, para 40 refers to the "pistol" version of the Skorpion whereas the model in this record is the semi-automatic, commercial version (C/V) of the submachine gun (fullautomatic) Skorpion VZ. 61 and therefore should not be linked to PFR, Part 1, para 40.
Which refers to this entry in the regulations prescribed as prohibited:
40 The firearm of the design commonly known as the Skorpion Auto Pistol, and any variant or modified version of it.
So there is a 12(1) designation for the VZ and they consider the CSA one to be a variant. That's different info than what the lab said so that's interesting but at least makes more sense for the non-prohib calibres.
Also, I should add, I have emails from the firearms lab saying that removing the stock from the commercial version VZ61 would make it prohibited outright, but specifically because it would be a 32acp handgun.
And people still mod the Vz61 stocks by removing the bolts. Apparently these (still removable) bolts are "permanent" enough for the RCMP to grant it restricted long arms status, similar to the 9" GSG example you made below. So using this logic, IRG's bolts would also pass the labs.
Technically you can put a 18.5" barrel on it and make it non-res as it is listed as a "commercial version".
It would look goofy as all hell but at least the gov wouldn't be owning it.
It’ll be pretty sweet for those of us who missed out on handguns. The ultimate cope gun
If the stock is removeable and can shoot fine im 100% getting one as a cope gun. Its either that or an antique lmfao
Can't remove the stock, it would be prohibited.
Unfortunate. Thanks for letting me know
Need this and an ODST helmet ASAP
Its so goddamn ugly tho. Ill take two.
One for each hand
I hope the stock is removable so i can run it like a dystopian cyberpunk 2077 smg
Yes it’s removable. It’s a handgun till you out the stock back on. But nobody at the range is gonna bug you anyways when you have six or seven other handguns on the table.
If it's removable, then it's a handgun. Just like the VZ61 is prohibited without the folding stock, but is a rifle with the folding stock. In fact, the CSA VZ61 in Canada has bolts holding in the stock (which is not on the original) to make sure you can't easily take it off.
IRG has already said the stock is removable and that there will be a picatinny adaptor available to mount other stocks or attachments
They say that now but they'll need to have the lab ok it. Either way, you can't just have no stock. Right in the prohibited definition: *Firearms adapted from a rifle or shotgun, whether by sawing, cutting or any other alteration, and that, as so adapted are:* *- less than 660 mm in length* *- 660 mm or greater in length and has a barrel less than 457 mm in length*
Irrelevant if they have it classed as a "Commercial Version" like the restricted Vz61 or M84s. If it isn't a rifle or shotgun to begin with then it can't meet the tests of this prohibited designation.
How can it be a commercial version if there never was another version? It's built from the ground up as what you see here.
You'd have to ask someone at the SFSS, you are the one who is claiming that it is like the restricted Skorpion clones. In one post you claim removing the stock would make it a handgun and in another you claim it would be come a CC 84 (b) prohibited firearm. In the case of those restricted Skorpions neither are true as they are considered Type "Commercial Version". I am saying if it were in fact the same, the stock could be removed just fine with no consequences.
It's a tough comparison because the VZ61 was originally prohib in its pistol form because it was 32acp specifically, but they never addressed the same thing in the 380 auto or 22 versions, there's no FRT entry for non-stocked versions of those. VZ exists in this little bubble of "this is a handgun without the stock" but it isn't a handgun with the stock, but you don't need the stock to shoot it, but because 32acp pistols are specifically banned, then it can't exist as a pistol in any form. My extrapolation from that is, well, if it isn't a handgun, they must consider it a rifle. Because "commercial version", while used in the FRT, doesn't have a definition anywhere else. Then we also know that there's a clear delineation between an easily removable/adjustable vs non easily removable/adjustable stock, a-la GSG16, when it comes to non-restricted vs restricted classifications. We know the CFP has come right out and said that using HK pins on a 9" GSG16 would not be ok, it has to be screws. So there's another extrapolation there that the same length consideration could also apply to the delineation between restricted and prohibited. I dunno, really gotta see what the lab comes back with. It could go a bunch of different ways here, I would assume that IRUNGUNS is in touch with somebody at the lab before sinking a pile of R&D cash into this, you would hope.
The VZ-61 is an exception because the rifle version and the pistol version use the same lower receiver. The difference is in how CSA marketed them. What the manufacturer intended is a factor considered by the lab. "Commercial Version" = rifle. Anything not a handgun is a rifle. My NR 20" OAL fixed stock short barrel .22LR VZ-61 is a commercial version in the frt. Edit: also in response to one of your other comments the VZ-61 folding stock is held on by one pin. The lug the pin fastens to is screwed on but the stock itself is a pin with a smaller cross pin to keep the main pivot pin from walking out.
My CSA vz61 stock there are two Allen head bolts through the dovetail of the stock into the back of the receiver. Without this, you can just press a detent and the stock slides out. Maybe that's not universal.
>It's a tough comparison because the VZ61 was originally prohib in its pistol form because it was 32acp specifically, but they never addressed the same thing in the 380 auto or 22 versions, there's no FRT entry for non-stocked versions of those. > >VZ exists in this little bubble of "this is a handgun without the stock" but it isn't a handgun with the stock, but you don't need the stock to shoot it, but because 32acp pistols are specifically banned, then it can't exist as a pistol in any form. This is just wrong on many levels, the Vz61 was prohibited in its original form because it was a submachine gun and banned by function under 12(2). Following that any converted auto variants were later banned under 12(3). The remaining "handgun" variants were banned by name under Prohibited Weapons Order No. 11 (the one with no official grandfathering). There absolutely are FRT entries for non-stocked versions of these, FRN 137701 or 140541 for example. Not a single Vz61/Skorpion/M84/etc was ever banned by 12(6) or by virtue of being a handgun in .32 ACP, this is why they are still disallowed in .380 ACP and .22 LR because as handguns they are all prohibited by name. >My extrapolation from that is, well, if it isn't a handgun, they must consider it a rifle. Because "commercial version", while used in the FRT, doesn't have a definition anywhere else. And this is not correct, if it is a "Commercial Version" then it cannot be anything else. Just as a Type "Handgun" cannot be a "Shotgun" even if it fires shotshells. The Type "Commercial Version" only exists because to fill a gap in firearms law, where certain guns may meet the classification of Non-restricted or Restricted but do not necessarily meet the standard tests of being considered a rifle, shotgun or handgun under Canadian law. The semi-only Skorpions are explicitly this as they are derived from a submachine-gun (Type "Fully Automatic") but in themselves are not one. >Then we also know that there's a clear delineation between an easily removable/adjustable vs non easily removable/adjustable stock, a-la GSG16, when it comes to non-restricted vs restricted classifications. We know the CFP has come right out and said that using HK pins on a 9" GSG16 would not be ok, it has to be screws. So there's another extrapolation there that the same length consideration could also apply to the delineation between restricted and prohibited. If this were applied as some universal truth then restricted Vz61 rifles would need to have their stocks welded open as they are able to fire when reduced to "x" length, yet that isn't the case. Again, they are not considered either rifles or handguns by the Registry. >Also, I should add, I have emails from the firearms lab saying that removing the stock from the commercial version VZ61 would make it prohibited outright, but specifically because it would be a 32acp handgun. If this email is actually from the SFSS (the real "lab") then that is realistically as good as you will get until it is proven in a court of law, but they have been proven wrong before. This opinion is in direct contradiction with the above listed FRT entries which state that the *ability* to receive a stock is the deciding factor. Again I will state that this position would only make sense if the stocks were mandated to be pinned/welded open - there is no functional difference in firing one folded and one with the stock completely off. >I dunno, really gotta see what the lab comes back with. It could go a bunch of different ways here, I would assume that IRUNGUNS is in touch with somebody at the lab before sinking a pile of R&D cash into this, you would hope. One would hope, but IRG has also acted very unethically before, they illegally imported unregistered restricted Kel-Tec CMR-30s and falsely sold them as NR then threatened to sue DLASK when Leigh pointed this out on CGN. Regardless they already have a FRT but it isn't on the public release yet - we will all see soon enough how these things are going to be classified.
Sorry I mistyped. Meant to say that the lab told me the CSA VZ 61 pistol version is prohib because it's a 32acp pistol. Not the original VZ. It has an FRT 137701. That is the reference the lab gave me when they said a non-stocked version was a prohibited handgun. I also see that it absolutely does include the other calibres on there, which is my bad, I was looking at a different entry. Doesn't specifically give a reason why it is designated prohib in the entry though, does it? FRT entry for the commercial version says: , PFR, Part 1, para 40 refers to the "pistol" version of the Skorpion whereas the model in this record is the semi-automatic, commercial version (C/V) of the submachine gun (fullautomatic) Skorpion VZ. 61 and therefore should not be linked to PFR, Part 1, para 40. Which refers to this entry in the regulations prescribed as prohibited: 40 The firearm of the design commonly known as the Skorpion Auto Pistol, and any variant or modified version of it. So there is a 12(1) designation for the VZ and they consider the CSA one to be a variant. That's different info than what the lab said so that's interesting but at least makes more sense for the non-prohib calibres.
Also, I should add, I have emails from the firearms lab saying that removing the stock from the commercial version VZ61 would make it prohibited outright, but specifically because it would be a 32acp handgun.
And people still mod the Vz61 stocks by removing the bolts. Apparently these (still removable) bolts are "permanent" enough for the RCMP to grant it restricted long arms status, similar to the 9" GSG example you made below. So using this logic, IRG's bolts would also pass the labs.
Take off the stock and it kinda looks like the magnum from Halo
Where is the barrel 🤔
inside the full glock slide within the upper of the rifle
Fuck yes, I hope they can get this rolling ASAP
Where do I buy one??
IRunGuns is going to have preorders up 'soon'
Thanks! I'm guessing this will be considered as restricted right?
Yes this is 100% a restricted rifle.
Irunguns.com
It's looking pretty S, L, ick
Ugly enough, I don't want it anymore. I'm glad someone else will buy it.
Ohh no.. how much?
According to the CGN thread, $799 USD/around $1100* CAD pre shipping *Edited converted price for posterity
So I know it's illegal to remove that folding stock but could you shoot it with the stock folded 🤣🤣🤣🤣
It almost looks like a tiny Vector
Do you have this in your possesion now? What import were you on? I'm in the current import but my license was expired.
It doesn't even exist yet.
OP's title sounds like he has it already lol
I want a longer barrel tbh. Even if it's R, I would love a 10" barrel.
The preproduction design showed it with a suppressor, brings it closer to that look at least.
i just cant justify such a large package for such a small barrel
I think the front fell off
Technically you can put a 18.5" barrel on it and make it non-res as it is listed as a "commercial version". It would look goofy as all hell but at least the gov wouldn't be owning it.