After effects of the T97 Ban

[Pcahill]

I'm a reader not a poster however to this I have to respond. I think we are kinda missing the point on this one. I don't believe the "can make it full auto" argument is valid in any way. Any one of us can create any number of prohibited devices ex. un-pinned mags, sound suppressor and neither one of these devices would take a rocket scientist to make. Any one of us is capable of breaking laws, I've always assumed that we aren't guilty of breaking a law until we do.
We are now being presumed guilty (of making a prohibited device) even if we had no intent of doing so.
This also applies to the "hi-capacity" magazine import case. Gah, so angry.

 

[SCDL]

http://1.bp.########.com/_60A8zsWp2jY/TRRS-ZNMb5I/AAAAAAAAAjw/DiHwa9uSw6c/s1600/minority_report_poster.jpg

 

[Paul Morrison]

I know of at least 1 person outside of the RCMP who was given the specifics of how the RCMP converted the gun... whether they told Chris from CanAm or not doesn't change the facts. Perhaps it was un- intentional and/or unauthorized that they gave those details, I don't know, but they did it and your statements to the contrary don't change that.

Or what you heard might be entirely hearsay. I've heard three or four different means of conversion. One involved toothpicks, one involved paperclips, all of the people were told by some functionary in the registrar's office. I'm simply positing that your source may or may not know the truth.

whether they told Chris from CanAm or not doesn't change the facts. Perhaps it was un- intentional and/or unauthorized that they gave those details, I don't know, but they did it and your statements to the contrary don't change that.

Considering Chris himself has had the RCMP tell him several different stories, and is using the court process to compel the RCMP to release the report, that's strong evidence that no one has a reliable and definitive read on the real method.

I'm just saying that what you think you know and what you actually know may differ. You should give Chris a call.

 

[Clobbersauras]

It was never my intent to slam any T97 owners... you interpreted what I was saying totally wrong. Sorry for any confusion.

Mark

Fair enough, I'm sorry if I misunderstood you and responded harshly. I understand your argument.

 

[Starscream]

Considering Chris himself has had the RCMP tell him several different stories, and is using the court process to compel the RCMP to release the report, that's strong evidence that no one has a reliable and definitive read on the real method.

I'm just saying that what you think you know and what you actually know may differ. You should give Chris a call.

+1, RCMP and pretty much anyone in authority has a fun history of deny verbally passed knowledge if it came down to a court of law. I'm holding off judgement until something on paper is released.

 

[suprathepeg]

The only person offering anything constructive to this thread that I can read is Paul, I suggest that Wicked and Questar remove their comments as they are not only ill informed but allude to a conclusion that is NOT TRUE or at best completely out of context. With all due respect to law enforcement the way the RCMP has handled this case should be both embarrassing and enraging to fellow members. I cannot find the words to convey how disturbing this is.

THERE ARE NO CREDIBLE DETAILS BEING RELEASED WRT THE T97 RECLASSIFICATION. All the details have been classified due to purported national security concerns. Whoever talks to the "cancer man" next may want to tell him to shut his ill informed mouth. Why would anyone risk personal legal action to convey scant details that don't even fit with the evidence to date? Gimme a break.

To date the RCMP haven't brought the reclassification details up in court at any of the reference hearings that I am aware of. To date their argument has been as follows:
1. RCMP contracted a third party to classify firearms on their behalf.
2. Third party allegedly made faulty classifications.
3. RCMP reviewed the classifications and found multiple firearms to have been wrongly classified the T97 one of them.
4. RCMP changed the classifications and promptly classified the details of said changes.

Any half witted village idiot can find multiple issues with that alone. Sadly the reference court judges have so far bought this BS. No details of the RCMP actions have been released, due to "national security". Not to mention under what grounds does the RCMP change classifications without a OIC?

The readers of this thread need to try and get their heads around just how bad this could be for Canadian citizens in general not to mention law abiding gun owners. Frankly this is a huge deal and if you care about your rights as a gun owner you really should support Canada Ammo in this effort. This case has the potential to transfer legislative and judicial powers to a police force. A police force that has no business holding such powers and has proven by this case alone is in no way capable of effectively employing them.

BTW the efforts of CSSA and the NFA WRT this case are disappointing and not in the way that has been suggested.

 

[wicked_police]

I suggest that Wicked and Questar remove their comments as they are not only ill informed but allude to a conclusion that is NOT TRUE or at best completely out of context.

I suggest that you and p.m. are the ones misinformed, and your posts should be removed for misleading the gun owners on cgn.

And for you to say I, or anyone else, is misinformed is laughable. The rest of your post above is just plain wrong.

 

[Teapot]

In the British Army out directing staff showed us how to make our SLR's automatic with a matchstick. It is my belief that the RCMP have their own agenda for preventing the Canadian people from owning certain firearms and it has little to do with their stated reasons.

 

[suprathepeg]

I suggest that you and p.m. are the ones misinformed, and your posts should be removed for misleading the gun owners on cgn.

And for you to say I, or anyone else, is misinformed is laughable. The rest of your post above is just plain wrong.

So you are suggesting that you have been given classified information from sources you know to be involved in the reclassification of the T97 despite the fact that it would be illegal to do so? Or are you suggesting that you are involved with the process and are now posting on open forum despite the fact that this is currently a national security issue? I'm assuming that being an RCMP officer yourself either of these options could be true.

 

[wicked_police]

Nope. Never suggested anything of the sort.

Your problem is your last sentence, "I'm assuming..."

 

[North Eastern Arms]

Nope. Never suggested anything of the sort.

Your problem is your last sentence, "I'm assuming..."

hahahahaha, your wasting your time my friend. Think of it this way, your an explorer and you have just walked into a village who has never before seen an outsider. No amount of reasoning, teaching etc is going to change the belief of the locals that you are there to eat their children and there fore you must be cooked and eaten immediately.

 

[suprathepeg]

Based on what you've said so far it would seem to be a fair assumption. Frankly I fail to see how anyone could have any legitimate details about the reclassification without either breaking the law or allowing someone else to break the law in telling them. Either way why you as a police officer would post about it online is beyond me.

Look I don't have an anti RCMP agenda, in fact my best friend is an RCMP member. The bottom line is wrong is wrong and this is definitively not a good time to "pass a fault". Even if what you apparently know comes from a legit source, based on everything that has gone on WRT the T97 including the reference hearings to date just doesn't fit. This whole thing stinks plain and simple.

 

[Questar]

So you are suggesting that you have been given classified information from sources you know to be involved in the reclassification of the T97 despite the fact that it would be illegal to do so? Or are you suggesting that you are involved with the process and are now posting on open forum despite the fact that this is currently a national security issue? I'm assuming that being an RCMP officer yourself either of these options could be true.

I don't accept your statement that the information is a "National Security" issue or "classified" as you indicate above. The RCMP may not be giving it out freely and may be withholding it from their evidenciary disclosures (made to date), however, I will again restate what I said previously, that I have direct knowledge of at least 1 person outside of the RCMP who was given these details.

If some law was broken by doing so then so be it, but it doesn't change the fact that it happened.

Just because you don't like what I say doesn't mean that I'm "ill informed". Get over it.

Mark

 

[wicked_police]

Based on what you've said so far it would seem to be a fair assumption. Either way why you as a police officer would post about it online is beyond me.

Where in my posts do I say I'm in possession of 'classified' information regarding the t97? I'll make it easy, all my posts are right here for you.

You're right, no one wants to hear it, since it doesn't fit with their preconceived notions of what really happened. With the attitude of many on this site towards police, and especially the rcmp, of course they will refuse to believe anything of the sort.

Case in point.


Along with all the other reasons given in the thread such as it being cheap, using AR mags, non-restricted, the 'switch goes to full-auto' (what ever that means), etc.




When did you visit the lab to see this full machine shop and dozen weapon techs?

I never said you hate the rcmp. Try and understand what's typed.

And while the ability to convert it easily may be old news, it sure doesn't stop the usual crap from being posted.

As far as hasselwander, I don't know enough about it to have an opinion one way or the other. So what do you mean by agree with it 'as well'? As well as what?

You said everything I was thinking of posting.

How would you how well informed he, or anyone else in this thread is?

I had a great day today how bout you?

I suggest that you and p.m. are the ones misinformed, and your posts should be removed for misleading the gun owners on cgn.

And for you to say I, or anyone else, is misinformed is laughable. The rest of your post above is just plain wrong.

Nope. Never suggested anything of the sort.

Your problem is your last sentence, "I'm assuming..."

Look I don't have an anti RCMP agenda, in fact my best friend is an RCMP member.

That reminds me of when people say "I'm black, my best friend is black, it dont matter Im coming to confiscate all your guns anyways!"

 

[suprathepeg]

I don't accept your statement that the information is a "National Security" issue or "classified" as you indicate above. The RCMP may not be giving it out freely and may be withholding it from their evidenciary disclosures (made to date), however, I will again restate what I said previously, that I have direct knowledge of at least 1 person outside of the RCMP who was given these details.

If some law was broken by doing so then so be it, but it doesn't change the fact that it happened.

Just because you don't like what I say doesn't mean that I'm "ill informed". Get over it.

Mark

Fine you have the word of one person why don't you now compare that to what has been revealed in court and the known facts of the case. This whole scenario is full of contradictory information that has come from direct sources, a little homework will flesh that out for you.

 

[Deckard]

"I know, he knows, my friend knows, you don't know!!!" How about those affected by the reclassification and had to go to court? Probably they will never, ever know, which suits some 'officials' fine. There is no accountability then. What's the fall out? Everything is now a 'national security secret' if some bureaucrat says so.

 

[tiriaq]

I know nothing about any reference hearings.
I know nothing about how the RCMP were able to convert a T97 to full auto.
I do not know what CSSA/NFA did or did not do to support those individuals who filed for reference hearings.
I do know that anyone who went into a reference hearing without having studied the mechanism to determine how it could be converted was making a grievous error, and setting the stage for failure. Maybe the conversion is as easy as the RCM Police claim. Maybe not. But knowing how it could be done prior to a hearing would be essential. How could the RCM Police's postion be challenged from a basis of ignorance?

 

[Questar]

Fine you have the word of one person why don't you now compare that to what has been revealed in court and the known facts of the case. This whole scenario is full of contradictory information that has come from direct sources, a little homework will flesh that out for you.

Let me make this really simple for you because apparently you just don't get it from what has been said already... when I said that I know of at least 1 person who was given the details and when I said that I know this to be true, the reason is that the person who was given the information is me... it was I who was given the information and it came directly from within the RCMP section involved in the reclassification. Is that clear enough for you?

There was never any suggestion or hint that the details were "classified" as you phrased it... I was simply asked to keep the details confidential and I've kept that confidence.

Who is it you want me to "now compare that to what has been revealed in court and the known facts of the case"? Apparently from what has been posted in this thread the "known facts" so far revealed in court have been quite limited and restricted... nothing really to "compare to".

I am very confident that the info I have is reliable and accurate... given that it came right from the source and direct to me personally... can you say the same thing? What is it that you really know? How sure are you that you know everything and can't learn something new... that the information you've been given so far isn't either wrong or incomplete?

You accuse me of being "ill informed" when in fact I have first hand knowledge... so be it. As I said in my original post, I expected many people would dismiss what I said simply because they didn't like it and it wasn't what they wanted to be told... it didn't fit with the information that they believed to be true. I stand by my statements... you believe whatever you like.

Mark

 

[USP]

So you are suggesting that you have been given classified information from sources you know to be involved in the reclassification of the T97 despite the fact that it would be illegal to do so? Or are you suggesting that you are involved with the process and are now posting on open forum despite the fact that this is currently a national security issue? I'm assuming that being an RCMP officer yourself either of these options could be true.

You seem to be missing the point here. Apparently from what I gather there are two different versions of T97s. The originals which were sold and the new shipment where the manufacturer apparently changed the trigger pact on the gun for unknown reasons effectively making it a converted auto.

The law has been made clear about converted autos and they are listed as prohibited firearms.

I believe the court case on T97 issue is still ongoing and there hasnt been an update posted in awhile.

Its unfortunate the way the whole issue was handled but I personally believe the T97 is disimilar to other guns in the reason why they made it prohibited

No you cant bring it on a plane...


Meanwhile...
We should focus on supporting the current case that is before the courts and also lobbying to have the laws changed in regards to 12x type guns.

 

[suprathepeg]

I know nothing about any reference hearings.
I know nothing about how the RCMP were able to convert a T97 to full auto.

Thats the point.. the RCMP refused to offer any details on the conversion, all details are now classified

I do not know what CSSA/NFA did or did not do to support those individuals who filed for reference hearings.

This one's like pulling teeth so I"ll let it go.

I do know that anyone who went into a reference hearing without having studied the mechanism to determine how it could be converted was making a grievous error, and setting the stage for failure.

This is a loaded comment, even if you were to figure out a way how would you present it in court? Better yet considering the RCMP have flatly refused to produce any documentation on how it was done how would you compare?

Maybe the conversion is as easy as the RCM Police claim. Maybe not. But knowing how it could be done prior to a hearing would be essential. How could the RCM Police's postion be challenged from a basis of ignorance?

So far the RCMP has not in court addressed the actual conversion. Their position is that a third party did the original assessment and then they were unhappy with the results so they arbitrarily reassessed the rifle and changed its classification. This was certainly not the expected avenue of attack expected from the crown. As you can see this is a very weak argument and one would probably not be wrong in assuming that they were avoiding the real issue.

Yes we absolutely need to support the current efforts being made by Canam.


Questar I sent you a personal email with more details that I'm not willing to post here.

Anyone who wants to dispute that all details of the conversion are now classified and have been for a while can do a freedom of information request for themselves in fact we should all do one. If you have been following this from the beginning you'll find that there have been multiple vetted sources who I believe to have honestly conveyed what they were told, the problem is none of the stories match, I personally have been told everything from it took weeks to it took 5 minutes to they manufactured new parts to it was premeditated and purposeful... all coming from vetted sources that I don't believe would make them up and are close to the situation in one way or another. I'm highly suspect of anything, no matter who the source at this point, not to mention that ITS CLASSIFIED.

There have been actual court proceedings that you can review if you like that will give a better picture of whats going on then the conjecture in this thread.

I'm not suggesting you take my word for it I am only suggesting that people do their homework before supporting the RCMP's position. There is a lot more to this case then is apparent on the surface and most of it stinks.