Modern Sporter Update April 5th 2018

CRBurton said:
Ok I understand that. What I wonder about is what we say to police that may question our rifle if the see us in the bush or something. How will they know our rifle is non-restricted without an FRT? Will they be ok with our explanations? Genuine question I am having trouble finding an answer too.
Click to expand...

The firearms act defines what class a firearm falls under. Be prepared to have the rifle confiscated if the officer is unsure at roadside and later returned if no laws were broken. Make sure you get a receipt for any property that is seized, take pictures of condition if possible and follow up immediately via a lawyer to get your property returned as quickly as possible.

If you hunt with a black rifle, this will happen to you sooner or later
 
CRBurton said:
That makes sense but what do you tell the police if they think you have a restricted rifle? How do you prove to them it's non-restricted? Or will they just take your gun?
Click to expand...

Let them take it, get a receipt, then follow up with a phone call to your lawyer immediately to get your property back
 
PZero said:
Will the lower be produced with an ambi bolt release?
Please direct me to the post if this question was already answered.
Click to expand...

No because that would require some proprietary parts being made AND it would increase the price and as everyone wants cheapest possible these will not have the additional features our AT15, MH and MV come with.

BUT a BAD lever will fit the MS
 
no-one special said:
For NR, I don't think so at this time. Post C71 is still anyones guess.
IF the RCMPee decided that the MS is classed a restricted , I could see some significant fallout. The only way I would consider going ahead and releasing them prior to the FRT would be by recording each purchasers R PAL details so in the event of a restricted classification, ATRS could then register them and transfer the rifles that had been sold. This then becomes a nightmare logistically and I think there would be significant backlash from the public who had the rifles already.
Pretty much a no win situation to be in really. On 1 hand many thousands of dollars are at stake for ATRS versus the potential nightmare the RCMPee could unleash on ATRS.
Glad it is not my dilemna. Personally I will await the FRT.
Click to expand...

Oddly most of the folks we have sold MH's and MV's to have RPALs. I would have thought the appeal was more to the standard PAL holders. Who knew?
We have always been of the opinion that the less client info we have on file, the better. I DO see where you are going however. A CYA plan for us should we get an undesirable legal classification should we elect to sell these prior to the FRT.
Reading the letter Wolverine shared re their new rifle Etter is very clear that should they (SFSS/RCMP) deem their version of the 180 to be anything but NR Wolverine would then be responsible for any fall out.

With their being absolutely no rhyme nor reason to the legal classifications of firearms in Canada and knowing how expensive and likely it would be to be put out of business should the feds elect to pursue some possible wrong doing, it is the "what IF" that concerns me.
It is easy for guys to say go ahead I will take the risk, but their total exposure is about $1000.00, my exposure is significantly greater.

"Good day John:

With respect to your statement: - “If Wolverine Supplies was to manufacture a semi auto center fire rifle in Canada with a 19 inch barrel I assume we could simply go ahead and market her without your inspection as there is no legal requirement to have an FRT”.


1. For the purposes of the FRT, I would like to draw a clear distinction between the “manufacturer” who makes all components from “scratch” including the receiver and barrel and is not just an assembler of components with metal working, metal finishing and woodworking skills, which accurately describes the average “gunsmith”. The former is a “manufacturer”, the latter is not.

2. I presume that Wolverine (the business entity) in the hypothetical statement above, and their supply chain have all the required licences and authorities.

Then the answer is YES, BUT the manufacturer assumes full responsibility for assuring accurate classification of the firearm and accessories such as stocks and cartridge magazines.

Be aware that other regulators may require an FRT Record for their purposes.

Regards.

Bill Etter

F.A. William (Bill) Etter
Chief Firearms Technologist
Specialized Firearms Support Services
Firearms Investigative and Enforcement Services Directorate
RCMP-CFP
Specialized Policing Services"
 
jiffx2781 said:
Also this statement is concerning;

"Be aware that other regulators may require an FRT Record for their purposes."

My interpretation of it is that "other regulators" may mean Law Enforcement Agencies and or CO's who rely on checking the FRT database to determine the legalities of an item they aren't sure about.

This is the part of the letter that doesn't limit the intent of the letter to only the manufacturer. The customer needs to be aware that they would assume some form of risk factor if in possession of a not yet approved item.

On the surface the letter may seem like a free pass for evaryone but if you read carefully it's anything but.
Click to expand...

"Distrust of authority should be the first civil duty" Henry David Thoreau

In my case the distrust is of the current government especially but also of the RCMP.
The laws are purposefully vague and those who wield the power are very light in being of service in so far as what really is and isn't.

I do not want to have any hand in someone getting jacked up and their lives ruined because of LE uncertainties, and I know they have happened with regards to the legal classification of a rifle.
 
Hi
Atrs. Suppose this gets less than favourable classification. Is there anything stopping you from selling the current MV assembled upper/lower minus the barrel, furntire etc. Basically the matched set and all the proprietary parts. We can complete the builds as NR then. ? Just a thought.
 
robab said:
Hi
Atrs. Suppose this gets less than favourable classification. Is there anything stopping you from selling the current MV assembled upper/lower minus the barrel, furntire etc. Basically the matched set and all the proprietary parts. We can complete the builds as NR then. ? Just a thought.
Click to expand...

Yes there is. Being a proprietary rifle we have to release only completed and test fired rifles to comply with our insurance carriers policy.
About the only completely non proprietary parts in the MH or MV is the furniture, which you can supply and we simply deduct the cost of the base model furniture.

Again I want to point out that although these rifles are similar to an AR they are also very different is some respects.
 
A friend of mine had an issues over the weekend, someone seen him in the bush with his BCL 102 and called the RCMP and said he had an AR. They pulled him over leaving and had a chat with him, took his word for it being NR after NOT being able to get through to CFP to check for an FRT.

Brian46 said:
The firearms act defines what class a firearm falls under. Be prepared to have the rifle confiscated if the officer is unsure at roadside and later returned if no laws were broken. Make sure you get a receipt for any property that is seized, take pictures of condition if possible and follow up immediately via a lawyer to get your property returned as quickly as possible.

If you hunt with a black rifle, this will happen to you sooner or later
Click to expand...

Brian46 said:
Let them take it, get a receipt, then follow up with a phone call to your lawyer immediately to get your property back
Click to expand...
 
jiffx2781 said:
Also this statement is concerning;

"Be aware that other regulators may require an FRT Record for their purposes."

My interpretation of it is that "other regulators" may mean Law Enforcement Agencies and or CO's who rely on checking the FRT database to determine the legalities of an item they aren't sure about.
Click to expand...

You are correct. Good example is CBSA. If FRT says prohibited, good luck getting it into Canada even if you appeal it, yet if you go to court on the same issue fighting "prohibited" label, you may likely win. Multiple layers of agencies create huge effect when one mistake by one agency may cause domino effect.
 
guess_kto said:
Here is a good question, if you get frt tomorrow, can I order tomorrow or I would have to wait 6 month for production to start and enjoy various delays?
Click to expand...


You can get onto the "email notification list" so the minute we have the classification we will let you know, but until we have the classification feel it would not be wise to start machining parts on spec. IF there was a certainty of success it would be 1 thing but given that there is no rhyme nor reason in the classification criteria, every new design is a gamble.
We have aluminum plate here, cut and ready to be fed into the mills. As soon as we get approval we can start to machine it literally the same day. Given the number of guys who have already expressed that they are in for 1 we figure it will take about 4 months to machine and anodize the nearly 300 units that interest is expressed for. Needless to say the number of units will shrink as not all who have been put onto the notify list will follow through.

Seeing as these are being sold as stripped upper/lower combos we are not having to worry about the time frames for delivery from outside suppliers.
 
Hey ATRS, have you guys ever considered doing a premium upper/handgaurd combo? Its purely aesthetics but alot of guys AR side are making handgaurd/uppers that seem to be seamless and all the lines line up perfectly. Ideal for me would be something like LWRC I think that's a great look.
 
Can we get them raw without anodizing? Can you just paint them all with cerakote instead of anodizing? What would the price increase be, if any? I don’t know what the cost difference is between cerakote and anodizing is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom