Type 81 Trainer (Norinco XS-B3-1)

Congratulations, you just gave the RCMP a reason to scrutinize this specific air rifle model as it may be using a regulated firearm receiver.

Youza.
 
enefgee said:
Yeah, because they need CGN to tell them what's out there.
Click to expand...

The RCMP do monitor CGN. Official RCMP documents/memos to that effect and obtained through FOI have in the past been posted on here.
So yes, they do feel they need CGN, enough to monitor it.

those are the facts.

Youza.
 
Youzawhale said:
The RCMP do monitor CGN. Official RCMP documents/memos to that effect and obtained through FOI have in the past been posted on here.
So yes, they do feel they need CGN, enough to monitor it.

those are the facts.

Youza.
Click to expand...

They monitor yes...

The air gun version already has an FRT... so ya... they already know of it and it past their muster...

Find a bigger size of tinfoil. Yours might be too tight.

Btw... under the same FRT for the BAM branded version... the .177 calibre are restricted due to barrel length and the fact they shoot over 500fps... The 22 calibre are cc2/84(3) exempt as they don't shoot over 500 fps and thus don't need a licence.

Same receiver. Same parent frt entry.

Same story for the xisico branded version of the same gun. Different frt parent entry for xisico vs BAM due to different branding... .177 restricted... 22 needs no licence. Same receiver.
 
Last edited:
I was wondering were you been.......haven’t seen you posts!
fenceline said:
They monitor yes...

The air gun version already has an FRT... so ya... they already know of it and it past their muster...

Find a bigger size of tinfoil. Yours might be too tight.

Btw... under the same FRT for the BAM branded version... the .177 calibre are restricted due to barrel length and the fact they shoot over 500fps... The 22 calibre are cc2/84(3) exempt as they don't shoot over 500 fps and thus don't need a licence.

Same receiver. Same parent frt entry.

Same story for the xisico branded version of the same gun. Different frt parent entry for xisico vs BAM due to different branding... .177 restricted... 22 needs no licence. Same receiver.
Click to expand...
 
fenceline said:
They monitor yes...

The air gun version already has an FRT... so ya... they already know of it and it past their muster...
Click to expand...

You mean like the Swiss Arms once did? And the CZ?

Find a bigger size of tinfoil. Yours might be too tight.
Click to expand...

No, its not. Its reality. Guns can, and do get reclassified when RCMP is handed compromising information they might not have had when initially issuing an FRT.
Wether that information is passed on from a dealer's phone or from a 200k-member gun forum, doesn't make a difference.
Its not a matter of opinion.

So why risk it?

Youza.
 
Youzawhale said:
Congratulations, you just gave the RCMP a reason to scrutinize this specific air rifle model as it may be using a regulated firearm receiver.

Youza.
Click to expand...

before you make the tin foil hat comments you should actually be able to identify what you are talking about and not get it confused with a chinese copy of the YUNKER-3/4
 
Youzawhale said:
You mean like the Swiss Arms once did? And the CZ?



No, its not. Its reality. Guns can, and do get reclassified when RCMP is handed compromising information they might not have had when initially issuing an FRT.
Wether that information is passed on from a dealer's phone or from a 200k-member gun forum, doesn't make a difference.
Its not a matter of opinion.

So why risk it?

Youza.
Click to expand...

Omg... the 22cal restricted pellet gun might go to... gasp... restricted or non restricted depending on barrel lenght!

Wait... it already is... unless it doesn't shoot 500fps like the .177... then the Firearms Act doesn't apply...

So you are worried they will change it to what it already is?

Pretty basic stuff. It won't change. The pellet gun has been classified well over a decade and nothing changed when they examined the NR/R Type 81.
 
fenceline said:
Omg... the 22cal restricted pellet gun might go to... gasp... restricted or non restricted depending on barrel lenght!

Wait... it already is... unless it doesn't shoot 500fps like the .177... then the Firearms Act doesn't apply...

So you are worried they will change it to what it already is?

Pretty basic stuff. It won't change. The pellet gun has been classified well over a decade and nothing changed when they examined the NR/R Type 81.
Click to expand...

You're missing the point. Entirely.

The OP mentioned it looked like the pellet gun was made from surplus parts.
And the last time the RCMP looked into something similar, the guns in question became prohibited as they were deemed converted auto.
Now take a deep breath, calm down, and take a minute to actually consider the valid point i'm making.
You come off as very agitated by what i'm saying.

Youza.
 
Youzawhale said:
You're missing the point. Entirely.

The OP mentioned it looked like the pellet gun was made from surplus parts.
And the last time the RCMP looked into something similar, the guns in question became prohibited as they were deemed converted auto.
Now take a deep breath, calm down, and take a minute to actually consider the valid point i'm making.
You come off as very agitated by what i'm saying.

Youza.
Click to expand...

Well luckily the pellet gun is missing the trunnions from a full auto to make it a converted auto.

So again... not going to happen.

You come off as excitable. You should take a minute to take a deep breath, calm down and take a minute to actually understand the why of the what you are talking about.
 
fenceline said:
Well luckily the pellet gun is missing the trunnions from a full auto to make it a converted auto.

So again... not going to happen.
Click to expand...

I don't know the specifics of the gun, the images aren't even up anymore.
All I know is the OP mentionned the rifle being made from surplus parts, including the receiver.
So was entirely reasonnable to caution against volunteering such info.

You come off as excitable. You should take a minute to take a deep breath, calm down and take a minute to actually understand the why of the what you are talking about.
Click to expand...

Take a minute to take a minute? Go it. Will absolutely do.

I can see what you did there, repeating the exact thing I told you, super original. Also, not childish at all. :rolleyes:

The amount of irritability that is palpable in your posts for no real reason points to you needing an overdue oil change.

Until then, stay petty!

Youza.
 
Youzawhale said:
I don't know the specifics of the gun, the images aren't even up anymore.
All I know is the OP mentionned the rifle being made from surplus parts, including the receiver.
Click to expand...

Translation: I don't know anything about the gun but i can make wild assumptions about what could happen with its classification based on what limited info I've heard first while ignoring all else.

The flat metal bent into shape for a receiver is fitted with trunions not of the same design as the full auto trunions. Thus not converted auto.

So again... its safe.
 
Lol you just cant help yourself can you...

It does sound like you love listening to yourself a lot, so hopefully you feel super important now. You really showed me didnt you!

Laugh2
 
fenceline said:
So we're done with the gun talk?
Click to expand...

If someone owned X firearm and thought there was even a slight risk that the gun was made from a surplus prohib/FA, I guess you'd advise them to go ahead and post about it on a public forum?

I'm done with the talk, but I can't get enough of your infinite wisdom! Need so much more of it... :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom