|
Firearm laws do cover "possible" modification as demonstrated by the 1993 R v Hasselwander case.
The TL;DR from that case was that if a firearm was "capable of conversion to an automatic weapon in a relatively short period of time with relative ease" it was prohibited.
The big question mark is what defines as a relatively short period of time, and what is relative ease?
Does it consist of 6 hours of machining a lower to hold a Real steel upper? Does it consist of ship of Thesusing an Airsoft gun so much that its more other parts then airsoft?
Obviously if you could slap an AR-15 upper on a GBBR lower and have the GBBR lower fit AR-15 parts it should be restricted/prohibited as a real firearm. But when you have to spend hours in a machine shop making either of them fit together it shouldn't count as the case precedent did say "with a relatively short period of time and with relative ease".
|