Swiss Arms rifles being examined for reclassification?

Status
Not open for further replies.
harbl_the_cat said:
Someone brought a Swiss Arms rifle to TSE that he originally bought from CSC. TSE thought it looked fishy and reported it to the RCMP.

TSE and CSC have a history of a hostile rivalry with one another (a bit an understatement) - so many in the community are lambasting both of them.

Personally, I don't blame either of them - I blame the RCMP and the government for having legislation and the infrastructure in place to deprive individuals of their property on the basis of an arbitrary edict.
Click to expand...

I knew one of you would give me a basic, concise edit of the situation...thanks mate! one more question, CSC and TSE are acronyms for....? I tried googling but neither acronym results in any retail stores..
 
harbl_the_cat said:
Someone brought a Swiss Arms rifle to TSE that he originally bought from CSC. TSE thought it looked fishy and reported it to the RCMP.

The RCMP, who already were looking for any excuse to prohibit large numbers of black guns hinted that they were going to do so with ALL Swiss Arms, potentially setting a precedent that any black guns are fair game for similar such treatment.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the explanation.
I should start to give my business somewhere else.
 
Last edited:
sheekster1977 said:
I knew one of you would give me a basic, concise edit of the situation...thanks mate! one more question, CSC and TSE are acronyms for....? I tried googling but neither acronym results in any retail stores..
Click to expand...


If your that lazy, and out of the loop, seriously, don't bother with this one.

It's all in the thread so consider reading it. The information is out there, as long as it hasn't been censored out, which seems to be happening a lot these days........
 
Not Long said:
Apparently it is that you are that lazy...

If you read the posts by JR and James from TSE and CSC you will get a good idea of what is going on.

As for your question, contact JR @ TSE and ask him yourself because nobody is going to be able to answer that one without a speculative bias.
Click to expand...

Reason i don't read through 470+ posts..
 
TSE/CSC:
I have supported both of your organizations over the last few years.

But today I am glaring disappointed with where this issue currently sits. Both vendors appear to be more interested in waging a vicious, ongoing battle between each other than working together to deliver a successful resolution.

Gentlemen: You owe just such a solution to the thousands of SAN owners you have provided these products to. You have made a lot of money selling products to the Canadian Firearms market and quite frankly your respective reputations are not the only interests at stake.

I'd like to ask you BOTH to refrain from further dispute on the forum and instead get on the same god damned page to get this thing fixed.

:Rant done:


Otherwise, I have some general thoughts:

1) The converted auto issue:

The RCMP would be making a huge mistake by imposing a blanket ban on this basis.
  • I inspected my swiss rifles, the last one being a CQB with a 553 style operating system purchased from CSC in 2012.
  • I'm comfortable stating that this particular rifle has a purpose built semi-auto only upper receiver
  • I'd imagine that most who recognize my posts from the Black rifle section will agree that I have owned enough of these rifles to have some idea in that regard.
  • I would immediately launch a legal challenge to any ruling that stated that the whole class was prohibited as they are converted autos.
  • I don't think that would be a very hard fight. The receiver either IS or ISN'T a converted auto receiver.
  • I'm of the opinion that the individuals who purchased prohibited receivers from ANY vendor should be reimbursed. To the last penny. Anything less goes against basic merchantability and the sale of goods that are not precisely as represented as it stinks of fraud.
  • While costly for some individual owners (who ought be compensated by whoever sold them a CA firearm) the CA issue itself is not a deal breaker for the whole class.

2) The 540/550 lineage question:

Where to even begin here?


  • These rifles appear nearly identical to 55x series firearms.
  • Appearances aside, the broadly accepted notion is that they were released into Canada on the importer's (and possibly SAN's?) declaration that they are 540 derivatives.
  • These rifles may or may not have been inspected by the RCMP.
  • Frankly. I really dont care how cursory their inspection was. The RCMP don't face ANY form of scandal on this. They will simply say the importer conspired with a foreign arms manufacturer to commit a gross act of fraud -- one that has now become evident because of their careful control measures. It will likely be a useful means to obtain funding to review many more models currently available.
  • I do care about who made the initial claim, and about who has profited from their sale over the last decade plus from their sale. If you are making money off a product you know is entering the country on a fraudulent basis, then you are knowingly endangering your customers: whether financially, legally or both is a point I will leave to the courts to clarify
  • If the 540/550 lineage question is not successfully resolved, their is little hope that any of these rifles will survive regardless of the CA issue.
 
Last edited:
Korporal said:
This all started years ago, really, with the banning/prohibiting of converted auto's. All of a sudden the ability to make a full-auto weapon became more important than common sense.

The law should be simple. Own a full auto illegally, go to jail. Own something that could be full auto, do not go to jail. The law should be black and white, no grey. We all know (or should know) most guns can be given a fun switch if enough time and money is sunk into them.

This is politics, not common sense, pure and simple.
Click to expand...


Or even better, no such thing as an illegal gun, means no jail time for simply owning any gun period. Unless you use it to commit a crime, that is.
 
infidel29 said:
Or even better, no such thing as an illegal gun, means no jail time for simply owning any gun period. Unless you use it to commit a crime, that is.
Click to expand...

Stop with the common sense - its not common you know...

I'm appalled at what is posted in this thread. As a former Canadian Gun Owner, I think this thing stinks to high heaven.

TSE - JR I am not even going to discuss what my opinion is of your actions.

However the folks who want it broken down for them, and "don't" have time to read this thru, wake up call, your whats wrong with Canadian Gun Owners, you could not be bothered to take 5, 10, 15min or even an hour and find out about an issue that has monumental consequences on your sport/hobby/life? I spit on you, as your not doing anything positive to stop this.

Write your MP, the RCMP should NOT be allowed to re-invent the wheel. The only ISSUE that should be legally allowed bases on the facts as they are shown here (and in the RCMP and NWEST info, at least that I am privy too) should be the issue is if some of the SAN/SIG guns are C/A.
Sorry you issued an FRT for a Semi-Auto gun. Thats done, did not inspect it thoroughly, well sorry, #### happens, live with it RCMP, and also IF this is true that it was not properly inspected, I would argue that whomever the Tech was as the Lab, he should be fired.

More people die in drunk driving incidents than firearms incidents. Heck more kids die in pools than from guns, maybe your MP should be banning pools and cars.
The RCMP should be licensing pool owners, after all its for the children.

/rant
 
sprint said:
  • Appearances aside, the broadly accepted notion is that they were released into Canada on the importer's (and possibly SAN's?) declaration that they are 540 derivatives.
  • If the 540/550 lineage question is not successfully resolved, their is little hope that any of these rifles will survive regardless of the CA issue.
Click to expand...


All I'll say is that the C/A issue is nothing comparatively in the grand scheme of things...
 
Sprint, well said.

The attempt to reinterpret the lineage is the problem.
The RCMP themselves stated that they went out of their way to get a Sg540, a 542 and a 550 in order to compare.
Too bad, they should have done their work twelve years ago.

Does this mean that they are ready to hand over an FRT for the 540 and 542 or will we have to wait years for those too?

Get writing your MPs and the government folks.
 
Steve Janes said:
There is NO process.......If you did not have a Prohib license before a certain date which has LONG since passed, then getting a prohib license is impossible.
Click to expand...

Can a friend with qualifying 12(?) endorsements take possession of my SA rifle while I challenge reclassification and/or sue the government for damages or sell the rifle and/or parts? I was thinking of setting myself up a SA personal trust with a qualified 12(?) holder as trustee.
 
promac said:
Can a friend with qualifying 12(?) endorsements take possession of my SA rifle while I challenge reclassification and/or sue the government for damages or sell the rifle and/or parts? I was thinking of setting myself up a SA personal trust with a qualified 12(?) holder as trustee.
Click to expand...

Ship all Swiss Rifles to someone holding a prohibited license? Interesting idea but we might as well write some letters first.
 
promac said:
Can a friend with qualifying 12(?) endorsements take possession of my SA rifle while I challenge reclassification and/or sue the government for damages or sell the rifle and/or parts? I was thinking of setting myself up a SA personal trust with a qualified 12(?) holder as trustee.
Click to expand...

I don't see why not.
 
Class action? Pool our resources with Soloman or someone like that?
promac said:
Can a friend with qualifying 12(?) endorsements take possession of my SA rifle while I challenge reclassification and/or sue the government for damages or sell the rifle and/or parts? I was thinking of setting myself up a SA personal trust with a qualified 12(?) holder as trustee.
Click to expand...

Also, does anyone know how the SAN is a "child" of the 540, and not the 55X family?

The 55X is from the 541 which is from the 540....sooooo.....wouldn't the SAN be a 540 variant regardless since the 55X series is as well but is a named prohib?
 
sprint said:
2) The 540/550 lineage question:

Where to even begin here?


  • These rifles appear nearly identical to 55x series firearms.
  • Appearances aside, the broadly accepted notion is that they were released into Canada on the importer's (and possibly SAN's?) declaration that they are 540 derivatives.
  • These rifles may or may not have been inspected by the RCMP.
  • Frankly. I really dont care how cursory their inspection was. The RCMP don't face ANY form of scandal on this. They will simply say the importer conspired with a foreign arms manufacturer to commit a gross act of fraud -- one that has now become evident because of their careful control measures. It will likely be a useful means to obtain funding to review many more models currently available.
  • I do care about who made the initial claim, and about who has profited from their sale over the last decade plus from their sale. If you are making money off a product you know is entering the country on a fraudulent basis, then you are knowingly endangering your customers: whether financially, legally or both is a point I will leave to the courts to clarify
  • If the 540/550 lineage question is not successfully resolved, their is little hope that any of these rifles will survive regardless of the CA issue.
Click to expand...

Excellent synopsis, sprint. The CA issue really is almost trivial, and as you say, quite easy to lay to rest simply be inspecting the upper. The lineage question is the one that concerns me most as a responsible firearms owner who wants to have the freedom to one day own a SAN or similar rifle, and gets to the heart of the matter from the RCMP's initial assessment:

CONCLUSIONS

9. a) The most generous interpretation of our research would be that all the firearms in the list appended to paragraph 2 are prohibited variant or modified versions of the SG 550 rifle or SG551 Carbine as found in the Criminal Code Regulations appended to CC PART III, Section 84 (1), PROHIBITED FIREARMS paragraph 83.
Click to expand...

The RCMP's belief that the SAN rifles in question are derivatives of the SG550 is pretty clear:

All of the following firearms are strongly suspected to be variant or modified versions of the SG 550 rifle or SG551 carbine as found in the Criminal Code Regulations appended to CC PART III, Section 84, Part 1, PROHIBITED FIREARMS paragraph 83 (1).
Click to expand...

The focus really needs to be on what TSE, CSC, MD Charlton and SAN are doing to produce indisputable evidence that the SAN rifles are really derived from the SG 540. At this point, I've only read that SAN is tracking down the origin of the CA receivers, and there's been no (re)confirmation that engineering drawings etc. proving the SG 540 lineage exist and are forthcoming. I would really like to get some assurance that SAN et al believe they have the proof necessary to counter the RCMP's lineage findings.
 
Stormchaser said:
Ship all Swiss Rifles to someone holding a prohibited license? Interesting idea but we might as well write some letters first.
Click to expand...

How is it an interesting idea? You'd still need a valid prohib reg cert to do that, and none of those will be issued. All that post does is tell me people here still don't understand how the firearms act works.

If the RCMP determines that the SAN rifles we have are in fact 550 variants, the only possible solution that avoids the rifles being confiscated is political.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom