JR Carbines -- NOTICE

E

epps

Regular
Business Member
Rating - 100%
55   0   0
3 March 2011

Please be advised that ALL purchases of the JR Carbines from Ellwood Epps will be subject to a review by the Chief Firearms Office, and that this review will result in a delay in delivery of all newly purchased firearms. This delay is caused by the requirement of the CFO to review the registration and sale of these guns due to the inclusion of a 10-round magazine with a semi-automatic center-fire rifle. This is not a measure that was put in place by Ellwood Epps, but by the Chief Firearms Office themselves.

The average delay time in receiving confirmation for transfers of the JR Carbines to individual buyers and to businesses is ranging from 2-3 days.

If you are intending to purchase a JR Carbine, we would strongly suggest that you call ahead, or use our electronic order form to place your order in advance so that you can pick up your rifle in 2-3 days' time once the transfer has been completed.

We do apologize for this situation, but the matter is not of our control, and is the current method by which we are able to sell these guns.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation in this matter.
 
the delay wasn't long

why...if you want the rifle, order it and wait 2-3 days.

Epps customer service is top notch, and they send items out promptly. From time to order to receipt of my JR was 5 days....even with the CFO...its really a non-issue

Stevo said:
Why not just un-include the mag and discount the price?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
It is an issue. It's another BS CFO restriction that has no reason to exist.

Rolling over for it and saying "it's not so bad" is not the way.
 
Stevo said:
It is an issue. It's another BS CFO restriction that has no reason to exist.

Rolling over for it and saying "it's not so bad" is not the way.
Click to expand...

BS and CFO go hand in hand and usually are in the same sentence in my province.:mad:
 
I agree. Don't ship the mag with the rifle. Either discount the cost of the mag or just send the mag separately. Now non-restricted firearms need a review?!?!? Why? because of how they look? I wouldn't let precedents like this go unchallenged.
 
I can see with the first one double checking the mag that it comes with as there was issues with the CX4 storm when it first was released.

But why the #### do you need to review everyone? You know exactly what is happening after the first couple, this is just BS!
 
OK..what are you doing to change the "BS" then...

Sorry, but pushing this back on Epps to solve is counter productive.
a) creates more work for a valued retailer of ours
b) The CFO will continue the BS

I believe you pick your battles, and frankly, this one is "small" compared to some of the others that need fighting.

I'd suggest, that the best way to effect the change you want is not to do it on one small issue at a time, rather go after the system.

That means as a start, getting a government in place that can make these changes. (ie: lets start with getting rid of the LGR)


Stevo said:
It is an issue. It's another BS CFO restriction that has no reason to exist.

Rolling over for it and saying "it's not so bad" is not the way.
Click to expand...
 
Stevo said:
It is an issue. It's another BS CFO restriction that has no reason to exist.

Rolling over for it and saying "it's not so bad" is not the way.
Click to expand...

This is just another bureaucratic roadblock to make it more difficult or a pain in the a$$ to obtain a particular firearm. There is no reason for it other than they (the CFO) want it to be as aggravating as possible for us. There is very little Epps or any other dealer can do about it. The CFO has deeper pockets courtesy of our tax dollars than anyone who dares to challenge them on it.
 
Suggesting they sell them without a mag is "pushing this back on Epps"? Seriously?

In no way is this Epp's problem. I just made a very simple, easy suggestion that could get rid of the BS CFO restriction. How many sales will Epps lose of this non-restricted rifle because of the waiting period? It's in their best interest to fight this "small battle".

Not fighting the small battles is why all the BS keeps stacking up.

canuckchap said:
Sorry, but pushing this back on Epps to solve is counter productive.
a) creates more work for a valued retailer of ours
b) The CFO will continue the BS

I believe you pick your battles, and frankly, this one is "small" compared to some of the others that need fighting.

I'd suggest, that the best way to effect the change you want is not to do it on one small issue at a time, rather go after the system.

That means as a start, getting a government in place that can make these changes. (ie: lets start with getting rid of the LGR)
Click to expand...
 
Stevo said:
Not fighting the small battles is why all the BS keeps stacking up.
Click to expand...

You hit the head on the nail (see what I did there :) )

Every time I post, "is this where the line in the sand is drawn?", someone always posts "well, this isn't the issue to push" or some other equally lame thing. Every single issue needs to be a line in the sand issue now. The mag gimping that happened with the M&P 22 rifle, HUGE ISSUE, and see what happens? They try it again on the Chiappa one, EVEN BIGGER THAN HUGE ISSUE. But people will say, "but no one cares about a restricted 22 that very few people own", or "it's just the RCMP applying the law as written, sometimes it works in our favor, sometimes is doesn't". That is an epic fail. If it works in our favor great, if it doesn't, time to march on Parliament. Death by a thousand cuts still leaves you dead. How many more of these tiny cuts before the bleeding is too great to stop.
 
I was interested in the Sub 2000, then found out it was a toy gun. Then, I got interested in Centerfire Systems Suomi, then found out about the barrel length. No thanks. Then I found out about the JR Carbine and said hey this is nice! non restricted, 10 rounder. I think I will pass on this one too. ;)
 
Shipping the gun with or without the mag would not have any effect on the review issue, the issue is that any semi auto rifle with a "legal" mag capacity of over 5 rds will go for registry review. The FRT screen is built with a 10 rd capacity because of the Glock mags and therefore it does not matter if it is included or not. The same thing happened with my non-rest Beretta Storm and the registry confirmed it with me that the system was structured that way. Is it stupid, sure but it is only one of many " kinks" in the system.
 
ok..ok...here's mine

CIMG0450.jpg



First thoughts...all metal (except grip and butt)
Very nicely finished, matte black is very uniform
Mag inserts, drops out nicely

Safety is STIFF...though I understand this is an AR type safety (??) and maybe these are stiff?

Unfortunate but butt stock has to be removed to remove the bolt

mlehtovaara said:
Still no pics? WTF?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom