T97 News.. not good.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Exactly, but who knows what was given up to ensure c-301 passes? Personally I think van loan doessnt have a handle on his job, and the RCMP know this. I also believe they know they're untouchable. Honestly what do they care if canam or johnone have to spend a lot of $$$ and time in court? They dont have to pay anything, they don't even get fired for these antics
 
Throttle_monkey1 said:
Exactly, but who knows what was given up to ensure c-301 passes? Personally I think van loan doessnt have a handle on his job, and the RCMP know this. I also believe they know they're untouchable. Honestly what do they care if canam or johnone have to spend a lot of $$$ and time in court? They dont have to pay anything, they don't even get fired for these antics
Click to expand...

I can see why so many people here are pining for the days when Stockwell Day was in charge of public safety. He seems like a guy who spoke with authority and didn't take no $%^# from no one.
 
Ponts wrote
T-97 You would think Canam should have brought in a few of there version of the rifle BEFORE the big shipment and submitted samples to the RCMP to get classified properly.

In part they did. The CFC had seen the T97 shorties when they were reviewed and put in as Restricted due to barrel length. There is no diffrence between the shorties and the new shipment either than the new ones have a longer barrel = Non Restricted.
AFAIK
 
Savage said:
No in the in the governments eye's it still is a C/A no matter how many parts you change the classifaction result is once a C/A always a C/A.I believe Marstar could sell all the parts less the recievier,
Click to expand...

You will note that I said to ship them out of the country, make the changes and then import them as a different rifle, requiring a fresh review.
 
ponts said:
Ok so here is how I see it....I could be wrong

New VZ from Marstar = too many full auto parts so CFC makes it prohib. LEAVING ALL other CZ-858's NON RESTRICTED and all VZ-58's PREVIOUSLY imported as RESTRICTED.

T-97 = Lazy CFC techs making a determination by a picture and then when they finally get one in there hands they class it as prohib. They may have done this from the start if they had one in hands. You would think Canam should have brought in a few of there version of the rifle BEFORE the big shipment and submitted samples to the RCMP to get classified properly.

Sorry guys I just don't see ANY conspiracy from the RCMP or Conservatives for new OIC's or to ban semi's. In fact ALL I see is the Conservatives trying to fulfill there one and only promise to kill the registry. They never promised anything else. Neutering bill C-301 HAD to be done or it would not have a chance to pass.
Click to expand...


Actually, I think I agree. That is also a good point, did Canam submit one of his own for a review? Does Canam's have the extra "A" selection though.
 
Can't image that. The purpose of FRT is to guide owners and dealers to follow the firearm law. It's their job to keep FRT accurate, not CanAm.

CanAm don't have to summit samples just because there might be a lazy guy in RCMP.
 
ponts said:
Ok so here is how I see it....I could be wrong

New VZ from Marstar = too many full auto parts so CFC makes it prohib. LEAVING ALL other CZ-858's NON RESTRICTED and all VZ-58's PREVIOUSLY imported as RESTRICTED.

T-97 = Lazy CFC techs making a determination by a picture and then when they finally get one in there hands they class it as prohib. They may have done this from the start if they had one in hands. You would think Canam should have brought in a few of there version of the rifle BEFORE the big shipment and submitted samples to the RCMP to get classified properly.

Sorry guys I just don't see ANY conspiracy from the RCMP or Conservatives for new OIC's or to ban semi's. In fact ALL I see is the Conservatives trying to fulfill there one and only promise to kill the registry. They never promised anything else. Neutering bill C-301 HAD to be done or it would not have a chance to pass.
Click to expand...

It is ridiculous to pretend that the conservatives really care about firearms owners or scrapping the registry. If they wanted to kill the registry they would've introduced a government bill. It is that simple. Private members bills rarely pass, and never pass on issues as contentious as this.

Stop being so partisan. It's not advancing this cause. Instead it allows the conservatives carte blanche to ignore the firearms issues that they were partially elected on.

Part of the Minister's job is to keep the RCMP in check, yet this example is showing that he can't. He's incompetent or really doesn't care. What has his response to this been? Nil. That's a significant indicator of his concern.
 
michaelsabre said:
Can't image that. The purpose of FRT is to guide owners and dealers to follow the firearm law. It's their job to keep FRT accurate, not CanAm.

CanAm don't have to summit samples just because there might be a lazy guy in RCMP.
Click to expand...

Dealers/Importers submit samples to CFC tech's all the time for classification. Would you want to risk 100's of thousands of dollars without doing so? Look at what's going on now.
 
Johnny_Bigshot said:
It is ridiculous to pretend that the conservatives really care about firearms owners or scrapping the registry. If they wanted to kill the registry they would've introduced a government bill. It is that simple. Private members bills rarely pass, and never pass on issues as contentious as this.

Stop being so partisan. It's not advancing this cause. Instead it allows the conservatives carte blanche to ignore the firearms issues that they were partially elected on.

Part of the Minister's job is to keep the RCMP in check, yet this example is showing that he can't. He's incompetent or really doesn't care. What has his response to this been? Nil. That's a significant indicator of his concern.
Click to expand...

Amen to that.
politics are politics and we can't epect the PM's office to support something when it's not politically expedient.

One issue voting is not the answer.
 
diananike said:
Amen to that.
politics are politics and we can't epect the PM's office to support something when it's not politically expedient.

One issue voting is not the answer.
Click to expand...

Yet people around here talk about Harper like he is the second coming of Christ. It blows my mind how uncritical of the conservatives some people seem to be.
 
Johnny_Bigshot said:
It is ridiculous to pretend that the conservatives really care about firearms owners or scrapping the registry. If they wanted to kill the registry they would've introduced a government bill. It is that simple. Private members bills rarely pass, and never pass on issues as contentious as this.

Stop being so partisan. It's not advancing this cause. Instead it allows the conservatives carte blanche to ignore the firearms issues that they were partially elected on.

Part of the Minister's job is to keep the RCMP in check, yet this example is showing that he can't. He's incompetent or really doesn't care. What has his response to this been? Nil. That's a significant indicator of his concern.
Click to expand...


It's called a Minority Government last time I checked you need opposition support to pass a bill. The only party that has a chance at a majority that supports gun owners is the Conservative party. I am a proud member and will continue to be partisan. Again I just don't see a conspiracy here at all.
 
Colin said:
You will note that I said to ship them out of the country, make the changes and then import them as a different rifle, requiring a fresh review.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that would work Colin.

Would 'once assembled as a prohib, always a prohib' apply?
 
ponts said:
It's called a Minority Government last time I checked you need opposition support to pass a bill. The only party that has a chance at a majority that supports gun owners is the Conservative party. I am a proud member and will continue to be partisan.
Click to expand...

Harper isn't getting a majority anytime soon. He would need Quebec or Ontario and we know that won't happen.

The liberals will not defeat the government over a bill like this.

Besides the obvious lack of substantial effort to scrap the registry the conservatives are distancing themselves from us. That is clear by Gary Breitkreuz's actions regarding the CSSA auction. Where do you think that decision came from? Harper.
 
Satain said:
But this makes no sense. All AR's can be made to go full auto with a simple change of parts. So how is the VZ any different from an AR then? Also how is a Tavor any different then a T97. Considering all the BS aside I think the RCMP is just trying to make us remeber that they doing something to constitute there recent power grab of the CFC, plus remind us that "they have the power". Just another great example of how government is the problem.
Click to expand...

Um NO.

That statement is 100% incorrect.

A simple change of parts will not machine in an auto-sear slot, the holes for it's pin and install them.

There are a number of variants of the AR out there, some with milspec parts in them, some without.

That said, the following parts (at a minimum) would have to be capable of being installed:

M-16 selector
M-16 Trigger
M-16 disconnector
M-16 Hammer
M-16 Auto Trip
M-16 Bolt

That said, the Drop In Auto Sear (DIAS) does exist, but requires some of the above parts as well, and potentially modifications to your lower receiver due to fit requirements.

It is not a simple "Drop the parts in" process to make an AR-15 into an automatic weapon.


On the subject at hand, I don't know how the VZ is different from an AR-15, but I suspect that you also don't know the difference, with the lack of knowledge you exhibit above.

NavyShooter
 
Gothmog said:
I'm not sure that would work Colin.

Would 'once assembled as a prohib, always a prohib' apply?
Click to expand...

Depends, if they don't have a list of serial numbers the guns go out and come back in with a new name, the lab may have no choice but to do a new review. I doubt it would make sense from a cost point of view, but I know people have had success with other products doing a similar sort of thing. Of course logic and firearm laws have little in common.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom