isnt there a FRT number for a home built version of the TNW1919? not that that would help in this case.Originally Posted by mildcustom2
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
isnt there a FRT number for a home built version of the TNW1919? not that that would help in this case.
Actually several home builts to my knowledge. Even if I made one I'd still have to send it in for examination. It's like S&W making a 1911 and Colt makes the same gun but both still have to go in for examination even if they are the exact same firearm.
that still applies to non-restricted? im sure its come up but i couldnt remember.
It's actually debatable if there would be a legal requirement to send in a firearm built to non restricted status as defined by Canadian law if that firearm is built in Canada. It's not like it's going to be imported or exported.
hey North sylva any news on the M37 or the M3hb?
just doing my bi-yearly check up.
Sure would be nice to get a simple yes or never gonna happen on these wouldn't it?
it sure would. at least knowing where their at in this proses would be nice.
Pretty sure the answer will not change for a while yet. Alberta Tactical was going through the same headaches as will effect these guns. The RCMP's new rule of all five sides of the receiver being new will put a halt to any new guns showing up. And now, if for some reason your existing TNW goes to the lab for determination, they will declare it a converted auto despite the non-restricted calssification in the FRT. After all, they are just applying the law.
I have heard rumour that something is supposed to happen with regard to the classification of these guns soon, but whether it will be favorable or not will be the $10,000 question.
i like rumours. they are better then silence...
Only if they are good rumours........
Did I mention I have a complete set of drawings for all 5 sides of the receiver in semi auto form.......
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote