Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 114

Thread: BD38 Discrepancy

  1. #21
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Niagara Region, Ontario. For now
    Posts
    11,649
    Quote Originally Posted by johnone View Post
    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
    What a childish response.....

    I merely suggested that you are not likely to just give refunds on the guns and may have to go through the courst to persue compensation from you.

    I never suggested you lied to anyone, and assume you were likely misinformed, but as the retailer the advertising and sales of the gun are your responsibility.

    Nobody is threatening you, but here is a promise; I will sure as F@#+ not be buying anything from somebody who comes on here and acts like you!

  2. #22
    Expired Business
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,342
    CGNNER;
    "now that the RCMP have stated that the opposite is the case you have done nothing to refute it. What are we supposed to think ? "

    I know you have a personal bone to pick with the RCMP, please do not get Marstar involved in your affairs

    John

  3. #23
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Niagara Region, Ontario. For now
    Posts
    11,649
    Quote Originally Posted by cgnner View Post
    I think it could because of this statement from Marstar... (please note these rifles will not accept original trigger group components) And now that the RCMP have stated that the opposite is the case you have done nothing to refute it. What are we supposed to think ?
    Exactly!

    If somebody bought a rifle based on the description online, and now it has been proven to be false, that is Marstars responsibility!

    Like I said it is more than likely they were also mislead but that is between them and the manufacturer.

  4. #24
    CGN Regular SWAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    220
    Quote Originally Posted by johnone View Post
    MLEHTOVAARA;

    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[/B]

  5. #25
    CGN frequent flyer
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,791
    I'm going to take a hint from the rats abandoning ship, and bail out of this thread

  6. #26
    CGN frequent flyer canuckchap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,018
    Can someone with access both to an original and the SSD copy simply confirm if the parts are interchangable? I believe that is what the OP was simply asking.
    That "someone" is likely Johnone (Marstar) who are properly licensed.
    The OP asked a pretty simple question of the RCMP. The RCMP state that the parts are interchangable. That should be easy to verify by someone with access to both. As for the "trigger mods" required as well, lets just assume that the RCMP is correct on that.

  7. #27
    CGN Regular TT_270wsm's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    464
    Johnone, if I might ask, if you still had (or possibly you still do) stock of the BD-38, would you have any recourse with the manufacturer about sending back new stock based on their lack of attention to detail in ensuring it would remain restricted?

    I'm not sure there's anyone to blame here but the manufacturer, and it sucks for all parties involved, including Marstar. If someone was to have purchased this firearm privately from another member on CGN, would you take action against them though? I'm not sure Marstar should be dragged through the mud for something they had no part in.

    Either way, I feel for you guys... Can someone elaborate on the options given to them by the Registrar of Firearms?

  8. #28
    CGN Ultra frequent flyer Jericho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    2,430
    Quote Originally Posted by johnone View Post
    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
    I understand where you are coming from, but your company sold firearms, quoting that they cannot accept the FA trigger group. If anyone is goin to spend 3-4k on an iffy gun, that sentence guarenteeing that they cannot be easily converted, would have been a real seller.

    Anyone who has sold these firearms and boasted that they cannot be easily converted is promoting false advertising. While I doubt that it is intentional, someone would have really good grounds against any of the sellers for misrepresenting the product through false advertising.

    Rather than get defensive, Marstar should either suck it up and agree that they made a booboo or prove the RCMP wrong.

  9. #29
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by canuckchap View Post
    Can someone with access both to an original and the SSD copy simply confirm if the parts are interchangable? I believe that is what the OP was simply asking.That "someone" is likely Johnone (Marstar) who are properly licensed.
    You are correct. Unfortunately that someone appears reluctant to confirm that. Looks as if the BD38 owners are being screwed twice.

  10. #30
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by johnone View Post
    CGNNER;
    "now that the RCMP have stated that the opposite is the case you have done nothing to refute it. What are we supposed to think ? "

    I know you have a personal bone to pick with the RCMP, please do not get Marstar involved in your affairs

    John
    The RCMP appear more innocent with every post you make.

Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •