Colt Canada to Sell Rifles and Carbines on Commercial Market

1280px-Canadian_C7A2_Rifle

Colt Canada intends to release semi-automatic versions of its C7 rifles and C8 carbines on the Canadian commercial market under the Diemaco name sometime this summer. The rifles and carbines will be categorized as “restricted” under Canadian law.

The C7 and C8 are slightly different than their American brethren, having modified Weaver optics rails instead of 1913 standard, ambidextrous safety/selectors with an automatic position in place of burst, and a few other differences. The Canadian rifles and carbines are very well regarded iterations of the AR-15 family, and serve not only with all Canadian armed forces, but the Danish and Dutch as well.

To read more, follow the link.

Thanks to Kevin for the tip.

Related

Nathaniel F

Nathaniel is a long time firearms enthusiast who enjoys refining his understanding of small arms both on the range and in the drafting room. In addition to contributing to The Firearm Blog, he runs 196,800 Revolutions Per Minute, a blog devoted to small arms design and theory.


Advertisement

  • you cant spell art without AR

    with the recent incident in Canada this may sell out.

    • Burst

      There is no right to self-defense in Canada.
      These will remain range toys, though they may be popular anyway.

      • Raven

        There is self-defense, it’s just not the same as the American castle doctrine.

        • nougabol

          True.. Same over here in Belgium

        • iksnilol

          If you follow the 3 S’ then there is self-defence without prosecution everywhere.

          The 3 S’ are Shoot, Shovel, Shut up.

          NOTE: This is a joke, I am not being serious.

          • David Sharpe

            You must be Albertan, Ol’ Ralph said that.

        • Evan

          “Castle doctrine” or “stand your ground laws” have some differences from state to state. It’s only recently become a media buzzword, but has been around for some time. It simply states that in a self defense scenario, the law/police/etc. must assume that the defender actions were/are justified, until proven otherwise.

          The reason it’s become a big deal is that previously, states such as Florida had laws that were written to the very opposite end of the spectrum, “duty to retreat” laws. With these type of laws, the burden of proof lies with the defender to show that he/she was acting reasonably. This legislation usually includes sections stating that the defendant first had tried to avoid conflict, secondly, had taken reasonable steps and attempted to retreat, and so demonstrated
          an intention not to fight before eventually using force.

          While in some people’s opinion (not mine) the “duty to retreat” laws were being used to punish attempted rape victims, etc. because the burden of proof set upon the defender was retardedly high.

          Also, leftist yuppie legislation like “duty to retreat” flies in the face of legal precedent, despite activist judges. Since at least 1856, (South v. Maryland, 1856) the courts have held that self defense is a personal responsibility; the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that local
          law-enforcement had “no duty to protect individuals”, but only
          a general duty to enforce the laws. Many more cases have gone to the Supreme Court since and have followed the precedent, the most famous of which probably is Bowers v. DeVto, 1982.

          • Evan

            Correction:

            While in some people’s opinion (not mine) the “duty to retreat” laws
            *were coming from the right place, in reality they were being used to punish* attempted rape victims, etc. because the
            burden of proof set upon the defender was retardedly high.

      • floppyscience

        Of course Canada has a right to self-defense. Stop propagating this silly myth.

        The Criminal Code authorizes the use of force, including deadly force, if it’s necessary to defend oneself.

        The only thing that hinders self-defense in Canada is storage laws. although it’s near impossible to prove someone had their guns stored improperly, and to my knowledge nobody has ever been stuck with an improper storage charge in a self-defense situation. You’re the only one who knows whether your handgun/AR was next to your bed, or in the safe across the room.

        http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-13.html

        Defence — use or threat of force

        34. (1) A person is not guilty of an offence if

        (a) they believe on reasonable grounds that force is being used against them or another person or that a threat of force is being made against them or another person;

        (b) the act that constitutes the offence is committed for the purpose of defending or protecting themselves or the other person from that use or threat of force; and

        (c) the act committed is reasonable in the circumstances.

        • MrBobBarker

          One of the catches of Canadian self-defense laws is you’re not allowed to carry anything for the specific purpose of self-defense. You can carry as a knife, but the purpose of that knife cannot be primarily for self-defense. There have been self-defense cases where people have successfully defended themselves, but were later placed under suspicion because the courts determined that the individual had premeditated his defense by carrying the “tool” in question.

          • floppyscience

            We’re mainly talking about home defense here, but I agree, the laws regarding the carry of weapons are silly. I always carried a knife and/or a multitool throughout highschool and college in Canada, and I still do when I visit, and nobody’s ever taken issue because I don’t claim they’re for defense. That said, if you’re carrying a knife and just happen to use it in defense, you shouldn’t get into trouble if you can demonstrate a “valid” reason for having carried it in the first place. It’s a lot easier to justify carrying a little folder, let’s say a Kershaw Leek, then something big and “scary” like a fixed Buck knife. A police officer probably isn’t going to believe that 6″ hunting knife is for opening boxes, packages, and odds and ends in your daily life.

      • David Sharpe

        Yes there is.

    • dan citizen

      they definitely are going to change the name on their “Moncton Carbine” line.

      -Too soon?

  • Mouldy Squid

    sweet. too bad I won’t be able to afford one. they will definitely will be a hot commodity.

  • Eurocopter

    And a thicker barrel if I´m not mistaken…

  • Steve Truffer

    I imagine this selling wonderfully in the US, if they swap to 1913 or STANAG instead of weaver.

    • Dracon1201

      So an ambidextrous AR15…

      • Steve Truffer

        A “stock” style AR, with true upgrades, like ambidexterity, and hammer forged barrels, without Noveske or DD expense. An upgraded platform to tailor to one’s preferences.

    • Mike

      They have that on gen3 as an option

  • BattleshipGrey

    So just to be clear, they’re selling them on the U.S. market?

    • Maxpwr

      No. That is the exact opposite of what this article is about.

      • BattleshipGrey

        It just made no sense to say they’re introducing them into the Canadian market when they’re “restricted”. Thus my confusion.

        • floppyscience

          “Restricted” is a legal class of firearms in Canada. It’s the class that handguns and short rifles/shotguns fit into. Basically it’s a little more paperwork to add a Restricted endorsement to your license and you can’t shoot restricted firearms outside of a range or take them hunting.

          • BattleshipGrey

            Thanks for the clarification.

          • 1leggeddog

            A LOT more paperwork

            More background checks/phone calls

            A different course

            An additional course if you’re in quebec

            Even tougher storage laws

          • floppyscience

            I have an RPAL. There is not “a lot more paperwork”. If I remember correctly (it was a few years ago) it was one more form. The background check takes the exact same amount of time (I had my license right after the minimum 28 day period). Additionally, they didn’t call any of my references, which is weird, but they did call me to ask me the same questions that were on my app. I didn’t take any course because I already had experience with firearms and ON just allows you to take the test and skip the class. Like the application, it was one additional page of multiple choice questions, as well as two or three more guns to handle in the “practical exam”.

            All in all I can’t see why anyone wouldn’t choose to get their Restricted endorsement right from the start. Unless they’re in QC of course, because you say they need an extra class, and I’m assuming the class is mandatory there.

            The storage laws are more annoying, but not by much. If you have a legitimate safe then nothing changes. If you have something like a sheet metal Stack-On cabinet you need to also cable/trigger lock your Restricted firearms when they’re stored.

    • floppyscience

      I’m sure they would if US importation laws didn’t prohibit it.

      Ever wonder why all those “assault rifles” are made domestically by foreign companies (FN, Beretta, HK, etc) and aren’t imported? Or are imported in gimped “sporting” versions a la the HK SL8? US firearms import policies are very strict; partly because the antis want less guns in the country, and partly because the gun industry wants less foreign competition.

      tl;dr you’ll never see Diemaco C7s and C8s unless the American Colt produces them here.

  • C.

    Finally!

  • Lance

    Hope parts kits and lower can be sold ehre soon. Be awesome addition to any collection. Hope C-8 barrels come there different from a M-4 barrel but better being cold hammer forged.

  • Holdfast_II

    The Ambi selector must be new. Wish they’d had it when I was in.

  • Miami JBt

    I would love to have a proper C8A2 or C7A2.

  • Ryan

    UKSF tend to run the C8.

  • Ken

    The barrels are cold hammer forged and are very highly regarded.