Type 97 Classification Issues - PART TWO

I highly suggest letter to the new Minister of Public Safety, Vic Toews.

This is a political situation, and must be solved by the Minister, and his staff.
 
Clobbersauras said:
I'd like to hear from anyone who has ever had their rifle seized. I know some guys had to give up their Spas 12's. How did it go down?

I'm sure compensation is out of the question?:mad::rolleyes:
Click to expand...

My buddy had his SPAS 12 seized. The goverment offered no compensation but there was guy at the Police station buying them for use in the movies. They gave him 150 bucks for his SPAS :(
nasty.......
 
jakerazer said:
My buddy had his SPAS 12 seized. The goverment offered no compensation but there was guy at the Police station buying them for use in the movies. They gave him 150 bucks for his SPAS :(
nasty.......
Click to expand...

I like how Hollywood that shows the general public how to kill each other can get a hold of automatics and prohibited weapons, but a law abiding citizen that is only here to live his life and protect his country cant.
 
Cautionary tale? what lessons can be learned from this? "don't buy any guns cuz the government will come and seize it."

Funny thing is my grandma kinda told me the opposite: "buy as many guns as you can because the government will try to seize them.."

and yes I agree if the RCMP ask for it they get it.. No messing around there! unfortunately there is no legal way of disposing of it otherwise... it is chinese, you can't even sell it to the USA.. Maybe break it down and give them the reciever only. That way if any RCMP approved ones make it into the country, at least you have a pile of spare parts!!!

-e

Clobbersauras said:
Careful guys, please don't discus anything illegal. These boards are monitored.

At the end of the day, if the CFO wants the rifle he'll get it. My job in all this it to document the experience as best I can and use it as a cautionary tale for all.

Rest assured, I will post everything I find out on this site.

I wish I'd never bought the d@mn thing now. I'd have saved myself a lot of money and stress.
Click to expand...
 
I think I would deactivate it. It will still be worth a few bucks and you can keep it to display. I would buy one deactivated just because it's kind of a cool looking rifle.
 
sillymike said:
Wasn't the American revolution started by a door-to-door confiscation of lawfully-owned firearms by peaceable citizens?

Any body have any idea on how to commemorate the April 19, 1775 event? Maybe we should have a "buy a black-gun day!"
:pirate:
Click to expand...

THE REDCOATS ARE COMING [to take our guns]!

Funny how they cut-out that last part from the history books.
 
Ok - so I called the BC CFO Office today and asked them if they were going to try to sieze my T97. The information officer put me on hold and got the information "right from the horses mouth" (his words:D).

He wanted to reminded me of two things:

1) The CFO office does not do seizures. This is the responsibility of the RCMP or the registry.

2) The BC CFO is not responsible for the firearms themselves - they only do licensing.

CanAm's previous post seems to indicate that the BC CFO knows something about seizures. But if they do, they weren't telling me......
CanAm said:
They are currently moving to sieze those in private hands, at least in BC. This is according to the BC CFO.
Click to expand...


So I checked out the CFC website and they state the duties of the CFO to be:

"There is a Chief Firearms Officer for each Province and Territory. The Chief Firearms Officers are responsible for the decision-making and administrative work related to licenses, authorizations to transport and authorizations to carry, transfers of firearms by individuals and businesses, and gun show sponsorship approvals.

This involves determining an applicant's eligibility and either issuing, refusing to issue, renewing or revoking the license, authorization to transport, carry, transfer or sponsor. It also involves setting conditions on these documents."

I asked the guy to transfer me to the registry. I then asked them to check the class of my T97 and gave them the registration #. They told me that there is no class. I asked her if they were going to try to confiscate the T97's and she said she had hadn't heard that they were. She put me on hold for several minutes and said that she would find out what determination has been made regarding the T97's and get back to me tomorrow....

Soooo......who the heck knows????? Meh....
 
Last edited:
Clobbersauras said:
Ok - so I called the BC CFO Office today and asked them if they were going to try to sieze my T97. The information officer put me on hold and got the information "right from the horses mouth" (his words:D).


CanAm's previous post seems to indicate that the BC CFO knows something about seizures. But if they do, they weren't telling me......



So I checked out the CFC website and they state the duties of the CFO to be:

"There is a Chief Firearms Officer for each Province and Territory. The Chief Firearms Officers are responsible for the decision-making and administrative work related to licenses, authorizations to transport and authorizations to carry, transfers of firearms by individuals and businesses, and gun show sponsorship approvals.

I asked the guy to transfer me to the registry. I then asked them to check the class of my T97 and gave them the registration #. They told me that there is no class. I asked her if they were going to try to confiscate the T97's and she said she had hadn't heard that they were. She put me on hold for several minutes and said that she would find out what determination has been made regarding the T97's and get back to me tomorrow....

Soooo......who the heck knows????? Meh....
Click to expand...



Well, so far same news from my local QC CFO.

My T97 is still class as restricted but they were not able to give more information regarding the case. I believe they were not involved or knew about it...

They also suppose to call me back (today) as they will get back to me with the accurate information.
 
Sent:


23 February 2010



Honourable Mr. Vic Toews
Minister of Public Safety

Dear Sir,

I am writing this letter today to urge you and your department to take steps to immediately address the rampant abuses of power occuring within the Canada Firearms Program, currently administered by the RCMP.

In late 2007 the RCMP approved an importation of Type 97 Rifles, which they classified as restricted due to barrel length. Subsequently, an importer ordered a shipment of these rifles with a longer barrel length which were classified as non-restricted.

Like many Canadians, I purchased one of these rifles based on the RCMP's classification. However, on import, the RCMP revoked the classifications of ALL of the Type 97 rifles, restricted and non-restricted, and directed that CBSA seize the shipment on what were now prohibited rifles by virtue of their lack of classification.

Now a year later, I am $1000 out of pocket thanks to the RCMP's arbitrary reclassification of a previously legal firearm. Despite multiple requests to the RCMP, firearms technicians, and your department, I have yet to recieve a definitive answer. In fact, in many cases it appears that my correspondence was lost as there is no record if it ever being recieved.

The RCMP management has a goal of maintaining their monopoly on the use of force by subjecting law-abiding firearms owners to increasing regulation. I can cite various cases where the RCMP is classifying firearms based soley on appearance, not due to function, including the GSG-9, the M&P 15-22, and many many others, now including the Type 97. Your department needs to establish clear guidlines for the the length of time the RCMP can take to reclassify a firearm, as many of these remain unclassified, and thus prohibited.

Take action now. Repeal the Liberal orders in council regarding firearms classification and magazine capacity, and start seriously reforming the Firearms Act. Abolishing the long-gun registry is barely appeasement, only a baby step to protecting Canadian's right to self defense.

Thank you,

shootemup
Click to expand...
 
Last update:

My local QC CFO was not able to answer my questions and they forward me to the central CFO.

Here is the info i have from them.
1- The first batch of T97 (restricted) which Clobb and me have, was only allowed on paper regarding the specs.

2- When the second batch (non-restricted) showed up, they did some random check at their lab. They found some T-97 that were fully auto instead of the semi mode.
Bad lot from China, wrong boxes shipped, who knows..
It seems that they were many like that and we already know the result.

3- because of those results, They also requested some sample from owners of the restricted version for test in their lab. So far so good.
There is no intention (if the results are the same from the sample they get) to change their status and they should stay in our hand as restricted rifle.
worst case scenario, they may send us letter requesting that we send our individual T-97 for some test to ensure they are in fact semi not full auto.

Until further notice and the end of the investigation/test done by their lab, all transfer of restricted T-97 will be put on hold.

Hope Clobb will have the same kind of info on his side...
 
that would have been pretty cool opening your type 97 and seeing a fun switch. so canam might still be getting the type 97 after all ?? provided it dosent have a fun switch ?
 
If that was the case then all the RCMP has to do is work their way through the seacan of Type 97s with a case of .223 and weed out the FA models. There is no requirement for them to sit on the shipment and be a PITA. Besides, if this was the case I'm sure CanAm would have been facing charges and it would be on the news: "Gun Store Imports Automatic Baby Killing Rifles to sell to Legal Gun Owners"
 
Eth0 said:
Last update:

My local QC CFO was not able to answer my questions and they forward me to the central CFO.

Here is the info i have from them.
1- The first batch of T97 (restricted) which Clobb and me have, was only allowed on paper regarding the specs.

2- When the second batch (non-restricted) showed up, they did some random check at their lab. They found some T-97 that were fully auto instead of the semi mode.
Bad lot from China, wrong boxes shipped, who knows..
It seems that they were many like that and we already know the result.

3- because of those results, They also requested some sample from owners of the restricted version for test in their lab. So far so good.
There is no intention (if the results are the same from the sample they get) to change their status and they should stay in our hand as restricted rifle.
worst case scenario, they may send us letter requesting that we send our individual T-97 for some test to ensure they are in fact semi not full auto.

Until further notice and the end of the investigation/test done by their lab, all transfer of restricted T-97 will be put on hold.

Hope Clobb will have the same kind of info on his side...
Click to expand...

Wow that sounds realistic and level headed "not use to that on here lol"
 
Eth0 said:
Last update:

My local QC CFO was not able to answer my questions and they forward me to the central CFO.

Here is the info i have from them.
1- The first batch of T97 (restricted) which Clobb and me have, was only allowed on paper regarding the specs.

2- When the second batch (non-restricted) showed up, they did some random check at their lab. They found some T-97 that were fully auto instead of the semi mode.
Bad lot from China, wrong boxes shipped, who knows..
It seems that they were many like that and we already know the result.

3- because of those results, They also requested some sample from owners of the restricted version for test in their lab. So far so good.
There is no intention (if the results are the same from the sample they get) to change their status and they should stay in our hand as restricted rifle.
worst case scenario, they may send us letter requesting that we send our individual T-97 for some test to ensure they are in fact semi not full auto.

Until further notice and the end of the investigation/test done by their lab, all transfer of restricted T-97 will be put on hold.

Hope Clobb will have the same kind of info on his side...
Click to expand...

Well Etho - that's not exactly the info I was told today. I wish it was.:(

I was transferred "to the lady that is handling the case"..

(She was very friendly on the phone but she had a heavy accent, so I had a little bit of a problem getting everything down on paper). I was told that there were "questions and doubts" about the original shipment of rifles. They wanted to do some physical inspections of the original rifles and that those inspections were now done. She has given her findings to "management" and it is now up to them to make a decision. She said that decision should come in two weeks and that I would be contacted if need be.

My rifle still officially has no class.

I asked her if I could still take it to the range. Her advice to me was that if I suspect changes might happen than it was best to avoid it.

Is everyone confused? :mad:

My feelings from her tone of voice and her statement about taking my rifle to the range is that they are going to try to change their classification to prohib, and then well, act on that change. I think my rifle is gone to tell you the truth. Well see in two weeks I guess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom