BD38 Discrepancy

[tiriaq]

Splatter - Why do you not simply call Bill Etter and ask him?

[HammerHand]

Did you know that in the spring of 2010, there was a formal complaint made to the RCMP about why the SKS has not been reclassified as prohibited on the basis that it can be converted to full auto by the simple expedient of attachment of a piece of wire into the trigger mechanism?

I guess it's a good thing the SKS is currently non-restricted and the non-restricted registry is dead and gone.

Even if they do suddenly make it a prohib, I sold my SKS a long time ago, in a galaxy far far away.

[CanAm]

Tiriag, you need to understand how the Henderson case makes its affect; by comparison. Thus to challenge it, you also need to make a comparison.

BTW, Mr Smith stated he believes the SKS was meant to be full-auto, thus that is the reason it has a OOB safety sear.

The big concern with this case is that is was physically reviewed, them reclassified some years later.

This is what we need to focus on, it break news ground.

[mlehtovaara]

Dancing around the issue...........

It makes no difference if there is a removable " trigger group" John. The RCMP and your statement talk about "trigger group components".

Please note these rifles will not accept original trigger group components

The RCMP says different, implying that some of the components that make up the "trigger group" do in fact swap between the full auto and semi versions.

The two receivers are so similar that the original German Model MP38 and MP38/40 Submachine Gun trigger mechanisms will fit and function in the BD38 to support full automatic fire.

It doesn't make any difference that there is no actual single removable trigger group. The individual components that make up the trigger mechanism are often referred to as a "trigger group" wether they are a separate unit, or mounted inside the receiver.

So far all I have seen is semantics, and avoiding the actual issue.

You haven't even actually said the Mr. Etter is wrong.

[johnone]

JERICHO;
" would you not head up a lawsuit/challenge? ]OK we should sue them for what ? Would you mind explaining the grounds for such an action ?

You did boast that Marstar has been undefeated in the court room. Quite true,but we take action or defend ourselves when there are grounds for such action, hell we have not even been advised of any action taken by the CFC other than to say the are prohibs now....

If these rifles will not accept trigger group components, THESE firearms as well as the original version (FA) DO NOT have trigger groups please read my posting....

then the RCMP are lying and should be held accountable. " Go for it and then you can explain the grounds upon which you have based your actions....

John

[B [/B]

[skip1600]

Although I'm not in the marstar fan club for personal reasons I think you need to cut John some slack as he has answered the original question about the trigger groups... I don't think that there are many semi auto firearms that can't be converted with modification of the trigger group, and it seems to me that its the case here. I don't believe it would benefit John or his company in any way to "rat us out" as these are expensive firearms and one would think would bring a good size profit to selling these.

Instead of wasting time trying to get a question re answered spend some time writing your mp about your concerns

[johnone]

MLEHTOVAARA;
"It doesn't make any difference that there is no actual single removable trigger group.You are obviously well versed on the law, as well you are well aware of the regulations governing removable trigger groups....
The individual components that make up the trigger mechanism are often referred to as a "trigger group" wether they are a separate unit, or mounted inside the receiver.
Then we should seek accuracy in our descriptions and discussions, just to be on the safe side ?

"So far all I have seen is semantics, and avoiding the actual issue."
Exactly what is you want to know, this is ridiculous....

You haven't even actually said the Mr. Etter is wrong.
Hell I have not even seen a hard copy of anything from Mr Etter,all I have is the posting here on CGN that is supposed to be the letter received from Mr Etter's office.... NOR have we ever received any official notice of any kind from Mr Etter regarding this matter....

So Really how can expect me to call him a liar when he has not said or written anything to myself or Marstar ????

John

[johnone]

SKIP1600;
Excellent short summary of the whole matter....
You are 100000% right when you say "Instead of wasting time trying to get a question re answered spend some time writing your mp about your concerns "

John

[smythestreebling]

MLEHTOVAARA;

So Really how can expect me to call him a liar when he has not said or written anything to myself or Marstar ???? [/B]

John

As you don't seem to trust anyone else why not let Mr Etter tell you himself.



William (Bill) Etter
Chief Firearms Technologist
Specialized Firearms Support Services
Firearms Investigative & Enforcement Services Directorate
RCMP - CFP
Specialized Policing Services

613-993-6684

[jwillmoore]

Did you know that in the spring of 2010, there was a formal complaint made to the RCMP about why the SKS has not been reclassified as prohibited on the basis that it can be converted to full auto by the simple expedient of attachment of a piece of wire into the trigger mechanism?

Thank you fro the info. No Ididnt know about the SKS

Still I would like to see the NFA NRA and CSSA challenge the rulling.