From what I'm told this is all in the process of being hammered out. The reason the T97s and VZ58s were nailed is because they are somewhat new and not in line with the current agenda. Official announcements are likely slated after the latest bill goes through. Proof is difficult as the people leaking the info are putting themselves at risk.
"military like" Semi's to be restricted
- Thread starter suprathepeg
- Start date
Since when is a Mini 14 a converted auto? Since when is an SKS or a Norinco M14s/M305 or an M1 Garrand a converted auto? THINK! The RCMP cannot prohibit a firearm as a converted auto if it isn't. They may try with that one specific newly imported batch of 858s (which according to the thread in quesiton have a different FRT than the ones already here) or the T97s and they need to be smacked down in that case if the rifles are not CA. But they can't just claim that firearms that are NOT CA are CA and prohibit them.
- Location
- land of f-cktards
The m305 is a variant of the m14 as the mini14 is a variant of the AC-556 just as the vzs are variant of the cz-58 as the ar 15 is a variant of the m16
as far as the garand and the sks goes IT HAS ALREADY BEEN REPEATEDLY BEEN STATED by the chiefs of police and the liberal party and wendy that semis have NO SPORTING PURPOSE.
so golly gee whiz i don't know where that came from m_ _ _ _ is working for someone
Yea, but all of that can be challenged in court, if it indeed a wrongful reclassification.
- Location
- land of f-cktards
since your an expert how many such cases have been won?
there needs to be a "head in sand " emoticon
they are coming for our semi's , there is very little doubt..... then they will come for everything else.
the rcmp and the antigunners have decided it's time for them to declare full war on gun owners.
molon labe brothers ... or sell what you own now ...... or just stick yer head back in the sand and pretend this can not possibly be happening..... then try and remind yerself that Kim Campbell was P.M. once........ ask the "ostritches" from those days if that worked for them....
the rcmp has become public enemy number one as far as every law abiding liscenced gun owner is concerned. Hey they can whitewash murders in thier own jail cells.... they can whitewash all kinds of police misbehavior.. they can whitewash us gun owners into no existance.
wake the fug up and close ranks , and do something. I've spent the past week or so, running my business, looking after house and home and burning through printer ink, paper and envelopes to every conservative, family member, local provincial politicians ect ect.....
do your part or give up now.
they are coming for our semi's , there is very little doubt..... then they will come for everything else.
the rcmp and the antigunners have decided it's time for them to declare full war on gun owners.
molon labe brothers ... or sell what you own now ...... or just stick yer head back in the sand and pretend this can not possibly be happening..... then try and remind yerself that Kim Campbell was P.M. once........ ask the "ostritches" from those days if that worked for them....
the rcmp has become public enemy number one as far as every law abiding liscenced gun owner is concerned. Hey they can whitewash murders in thier own jail cells.... they can whitewash all kinds of police misbehavior.. they can whitewash us gun owners into no existance.
wake the fug up and close ranks , and do something. I've spent the past week or so, running my business, looking after house and home and burning through printer ink, paper and envelopes to every conservative, family member, local provincial politicians ect ect.....
do your part or give up now.
But, but, but... Mantis, johnone (The Owner of Marstar Canada) has already stated that the most recent shipment of vz rifles were prohibited by the RCMP because of the INTERNALS, not the receiver!!! They can NOT be made legal by Marstar replacing the internals, they remain as PROHIBITED rifles & can't even be sold to those that hold the proper prohib class licence. Why, because the rifles themselves are not grandfathered into the system, they are new!
So, what the others have said smacks true, any firearm with an auto "cousin" could be RE-classified simply by the RCMP "having another look" at them...
POOF, overnight, your AR15, SKS, M14, M1 carbine etc etc etc, are PROHIBITED!!!
What amazes me about members on this forum is the amount of time they will spend on here complaining, & yet DO NOTHING... No emails, faxes, letters or phone calls to their MP, or anyone else who might listen, such as the Prime Ministers Office.
Most of all, they refuse to listen to common sense, to accept the fact that those leaking tidbits of info CAN NOT be made public for fear of the consequences, likely being fired and worse than that, the pro-firearm side LOOSING the sources of this information! Is it really such a stretch of the imagination that the RCMP & anti's could be shuffling the cards & trying to re-align firearm law, policy & management in Canada? I think not!
Cheers
Jay
P.S. Click on this link, it just might be the most effective thing you could do to save your sport!
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=335585
well said Jay
i have gone to that link and downloaded the conservative party donation PDF and printed 12 cpoies. My mission everday will be to get at least 6 of those forms filled out by friends and family every stinkin day, and posted to the conservative party head quarters.... every day
if 10 % of all us gun nuts could get ONE of those filled out and sent in every day by at least ONE person that they know..... there would defiantley be a message ringing loud and clear.
Pass bill C-301
No to S-5
No to the rcmp control of canadian firearms ownership and reclassifications
in bold on every donation form sent in.
do it now and feel good about yourself.
The AR15 is probably immune, for now, since it is RESTRICTED BY NAME (actually, the M16 is but you get the idea) ... All others though, as long as an FA "variant" exists, there is a remote possibility that they would try to pull something. Let the courts sort it out sort of thing, which would take years (and they know it), result in a hellovalot of guns being seized, and by the time the court cases are done, well, sorry folks, they went to the smelter already.
Last edited:
Here is the major concern regarding the courts: They are hugely time and resource intensive. How many people are willing to or even able to take anything to the courts? Dealing with this at the political stage is so much more effective.
If they deem a firearm type to be easily converted then that type of firearm is ( law as it stands now) a prohibited weapon.
No such thing in Canadian law ... the "Easily converted" is a US thing, it's either a full-auto, a converted auto (if it came from the factory as a full-auto and was then modified to fire in semi-auto only), or a semi-auto (if it left the factory NOT capable of firing full auto).
The "easily converted" is a Canadian thing ever since the Hasslewander Supreme court ruling. Supreme Court rulings automatically become law.
REASONS FOR DECISION
This is a re-hearing of an appeal under subsection 68(2) of the Customs Act [1] (the Act) further to a decision of the Federal Court of Canada - Trial Division (the Federal Court), setting aside and returning back for reconsideration a Tribunal decision in the original matter. [2] The re-hearing of this matter proceeded by way of video conference in Hull, Quebec, and Edmonton, Alberta.
As in the Tribunal's original decision, the goods in issue are 910 firearms of 23 different types. These firearms were seized by Customs and further classified by the respondent as “offensive weapons” under Code 9965 of Schedule VII to the Customs Tariff, [3] which refers to the definition of “prohibited weapon” in the Criminal Code. [4] The Tribunal, in its original decision, found that, but for three types of firearms, the goods in issue were not prohibited weapons under the Criminal Code and, therefore, that they did not fall within the meaning of “offensive weapons” under the Customs Tariff. The appellants and the respondent appealed that decision to the Federal Court.
The Tribunal's decision was based, among other things, on its interpretation of case law relevant to the interpretation of the words “prohibited weapons” in criminal proceedings. A specific argument made at that time concerned the possible reconversion of the firearms. These firearms, prior to their importation, had been modified to allegedly prevent them from firing in automatic mode. This argument was central to the case because the Criminal Code defines “prohibited weapon” as “any firearm” that is “capable of firing bullets in rapid succession during one pressure of the trigger” (emphasis added). The case law that was cited revolved around the interpretation of the word “capable,” hence, the importance of the reconversion issue.
In its decision, the Tribunal, after examining the case law, made a statement as to its irrelevance in a customs matter as opposed to a criminal proceeding. The Federal Court found that this constituted an error in interpretation. The matter was, thus, referred back to the Tribunal for reconsideration. Consequently, the only issue before the Tribunal is an issue of law. Furthermore, based on the Federal Court's reasons and order, the Tribunal's reconsideration dealt with the application of judicial interpretations of the words “prohibited weapon” to the evidence on the record. This was not a hearing de novo. Therefore, at the hearing, counsel relied on the evidence on the record in the original matter, including expert testimony of armourers who were called by both sides to explain either the conversion that took place prior to importation or the reconversion that was done based on a random selection of each type of firearm.
In his oral argument, counsel for one of the appellants, Douglas Anderson (counsel for the appellant), acknowledged that, since the seizure of the goods in issue, the case law has changed significantly, particularly since the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Her Majesty the Queen v. Bernhard Hasselwander. [5] Counsel admitted that, based on the evidence on the record, it appeared that some of the goods in issue would be able to be reconverted to their fully automatic mode status. Counsel further admitted that, even though the goods in issue were seized in 1985, the law that applies is the law as it stands today. Consequently, counsel added, the only issue for the Tribunal is to determine whether the length of time that it took the respondent's expert to reconvert the firearms falls within the parameters of the decision in Hasselwander. Counsel argued, in this regard, that there was some evidence from the appellant's expert as to the time and expertise required to reconvert the goods in issue. He asked the Tribunal to consider that evidence when applying the principles set forth in Hasselwander.
Also relying on Hasselwander, counsel for the respondent argued that the Supreme Court of Canada determined that the word “capable” means “capable of conversion to an automatic weapon in a relatively short period of time with relative ease [6] ” (emphasis added). Counsel further relied on the Tribunal's decision in Special Missions Group Limited v. The Deputy Minister of National Revenue, [7] a case, she claimed, similar to the one at hand in terms of modifications brought to the firearms. The Tribunal, in that case, applied the Hasselwander decision and found that the firearms were capable of being reconverted to automatic weapons in a relatively short period of time with relative ease. Counsel added that the Tribunal also concluded that it was irrelevant whether the replacement parts were actually available and whether the firearms were imported by people who were knowledgeable on weapons. Counsel argued that the type of tools and parts used in this case to reconvert the goods in issue into the automatic mode are such that the goods were capable of being reconverted with relative ease. Given that the time of reconversion ranged from 30 seconds to 37 minutes, counsel concluded that the time period was also relatively short. On that basis, the goods in issue were “prohibited weapons” at the time of their importation.
It is worth noting that most of the written submissions of counsel for the appellant dealt with the availability of other programmes and remedies, including a deactivation procedure monitored by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and the disposition of goods illegally imported or the disposal of things abandoned or forfeit under sections 102 and 142 of the Act respectively. Although, at the hearing, counsel moved away from these submissions, the Tribunal wishes to clarify that it does not have jurisdiction with respect to any of these programmes or remedies. The Tribunal's jurisdiction, in this case, is limited to determining the classification of the goods in issue under section 67 and subsection 68(2) of the Act.
As admitted by counsel for the appellant, the case law has changed considerably since the Tribunal's original decision, particularly since the Hasselwander decision. The Tribunal is of the view that, in light of that decision, the only issue is to determine whether the length of time and the ease or difficulty with which it took the respondent's expert to reconvert a sample of these firearms make them fall within the parameters of the Hasselwander case. The Tribunal also notes that, contrary to the case law that existed at the time of the original decision, the Hasselwander decision makes it clear that the word “capable” in the English version of the definition of “prohibited weapon” includes “a potential for conversion [8] ” and that the definition of the word “pouvant” in the French version includes “a potential which has yet to be realized, a future possibility as opposed to just an immediate capacity. [9] ” Thus, in cases involving converted firearms (or reconverted firearms for that matter), the Supreme Court of Canada has established two criteria for determining whether a specific firearm is capable of firing bullets in the so-called automatic mode, namely, a relatively short period of time for the conversion and the relative ease of that conversion.
Having examined the evidence on the basis of the criteria in Hasselwander, the Tribunal finds that the reconversion of the goods in issue to the automatic mode was done in a relatively short period of time, ranging from 30 seconds to 37 minutes. The Tribunal notes, in this regard, that, in Special Missions Group, reconversion work ranging from five minutes to one hour was found to fall within the parameters of the Hasselwander decision. As to the relative ease with which the reconversion was made, the Tribunal is of the view that among the factors to consider are the type of tools involved (including the general, as opposed to the specialized, nature of the tools involved, their complexity, etc.) and the availability of the parts or the ease with which they can be either adapted or replaced. The Tribunal notes, in this regard, that the testimony of the respondent's expert was that the reconversion took place not in a machine shop but merely in the armourer's workshop of the Calgary Police Service. The tools used included a drill press, a grinder, a Dremel tool, an arc welding set, an acetylene torch, emery paper, files, grinding stones and hacksaws. As to the parts used, only in one instance was it necessary to make a piston head, otherwise the piston heads were found with the firearms. In the Tribunal's view, most of the tools used are not complex, while the parts used were readily available or were easy to replace and, therefore, the reconversion also meets the second test of Hasselwander. The Tribunal finally notes that counsel for the appellant has made no arguments regarding the three types of firearms that were able to fire in the automatic mode as taken from the shipment.
The Tribunal concludes that all the goods in issue are “prohibited weapons” within the definition of the Criminal Code and, consequently, that they fall under the definition of “offensive weapons” within the meaning of Code 9965 of Schedule VII to the Customs Tariff, which prohibits their importation into Canada.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
rcmp/association of police chiefs = the new world order, alive and well and coming for your guns (and other rights and freedoms) in Canada.
let's face it..... the stones have been thrown, thier intentions have been made perfectly clear, as has Ignatief's liberals. The Liberal mind set and lust for control is obviously deeply ingrained in the top brass of our country's LEO agencies.
this should concern all canadians.... not just the law abiding gun owners.
let's face it..... the stones have been thrown, thier intentions have been made perfectly clear, as has Ignatief's liberals. The Liberal mind set and lust for control is obviously deeply ingrained in the top brass of our country's LEO agencies.
this should concern all canadians.... not just the law abiding gun owners.
