That sucks for the people who bought these relying on the marketing information and advertising by Marstar. However, I doubt Marstar "lied" (meaning, intentionally stated something untrue, knowing it was untrue, with the intent to deceive); Marstar almost certainly relied on what the manufacturer said.
I'd be curious to know if Marstar can really pass the blame here.
Regardless they were the ones selling the guns, and advertising them as "not interchangeable". People bought the guns from Marstar, nobody else.
Might have to take it through the courts, but I believe it they should be held responsible.
It is on them to then go back to SSD, and do the same, not the consumer.
If this is the Bill Etter I knew nearly 25 years ago, he is a knowledgible man. There was a father and son combination of Etters who knew just about everything there was to know, and then some more, about Canadian military small arms. These men were a credible resource. That said, there is no way of knowing whether the technicians found a new and devious way of altering or levering bad parts into the new gun. If they found a way to 'easily modify' a firearm to full automatic, t is all the law requires.
Jean Charest after coming a distant second to Pierre Poilievre. “You deserve a clean slate and the opportunity to unite the membership. ... Only Liberals benefit from a divided (Conservative Party).” Will the malcontents listen?
To be fair, I think that Marstar description is in reference to the 42h and not the 38. Anyone who owns the bd-38 and says he doesn't know how they made it full auto is either lying or never took his gun apart. That being said, I don't think they are justified in prohibiting a 3000$ gun that no one would use in a crime, especially one that you are by law prohibited from firing anywhere other than a range.
MLEHTOVAARA;
"I'd be curious to know if Marstar can really pass the blame here."
Why would we, as you put it, pass the blame ??
"People bought the guns from Marstar, nobody else."
OK so people bought these guns from us, a few dealers, even Wolverine brought some in, are you suggesting that we all misled the buying public ? Do you think it would be responsible of any one dealer to sell a product with full knowledge that they would be reclassified ?
"Might have to take it through the courts, but I believe it they should be held responsible."
Since this seems to be your leaning, please do so, I do feel obligated to tell you that in all my years of court challenges, Marstar has won ALL cases undertaken.This includes several with Canada Customs, Federal and provincial authorities, United States Federal Court, The Italian Supreme Court, just to mention a few....
In short don't threaten me, just do it and lets see what you are made of.... Very simple, put up or shut up
John
RECLASSIFICATION;
Why are we the bad guy all of sudden, how many out there have lost their firearms in the past due to changes in the regulations. ??
How many lost when the M-97s did not show up ?
How many did not get mags because the regs changed ?
Complain to the government, write your MP,
Come on people let get real
John
my question is why did it take eight years to discover this and what kind of checks are made on these guns before they are allowed into the Canada? it is all well and good to say they will fire full auto with minor modifications or parts replacements but were was the R.C.M.P. eight long years ago when the importer was bringing these guns into the country. it seems to me the R.C.M.P. were negligent then and did not do their job ,or were inspected by someone who was not qualified.it is not fair to the owners or the distributor to take the loss. this is a regular occurrence as i can think of a number of guns that were sold to the public only to be reclassified or prohibited altogether at a latter date and the classifiers do not suffer in any way that i know of . please correct me if i am wrong .
the rcmp is simply moving through the frt one gun at a time. they are a small staff and go after the low hanging fruit first; small numbers in private hands.