Swiss Arms rifles being examined for reclassification?

[jdman]

Just a little precision for the un-aware, about this picture:

I suppose that what is to be noticed is the grossly patched/riveted third notch on the safety selector. Or is there other details to notice ?

um.....wow. that is pretty obvious whats happened there, andi havenever even seen one of these rifles before.

ALthough,
rivets are just fine for limiting mags though, so why not automatic guns too?

 

[Ar180shooter]

Just a little precision for the un-aware, about this picture:

I suppose that what is to be noticed is the grossly patched/riveted third notch on the safety selector. Or is there other details to notice ?

Aren't the fire selector switches on most VZ58 clones similar to that?



The root cause of this issue isn't two businesses having a falling out and going after each other.

The root cause is the entire classification, registration, and licensing system is designed to prohibit firearms ownership. Fullstop.

This is not the first time this has happened - take the T97A fiasco. How was that scenario any different? No one was in conflict with one another.

The RCMP classified a gun as non-restricted. Millions of dollars were spent bringing them into the country, then on a whim, poof - it's reclassified as prohibited. Do not pass go, do not collect $200.

How many times does this have to happen before people wake up to realize the root of the issue!

For reference, here's a pic of my CG carbine that isn't C/A (I also checked the upper, and it is definitely a purpose built semi-only).

 

[TV-PressPass]

As of the last time I checked, the FRT #'s for Swiss Arms rifles are still in place as non-restricted or restricted, respective to barrel length.

While I think it is great that you guys are writing letters to your MP's about this, you must make sure the letters are factually accurate.

Ahem, this thread is moving too fast for all of us. When was the last time you checked?

Here's some news. Has anyone tried to transfer a restricted Swiss Arms recently?

The RCMP has replied to one of my question submissions from earlier in the week.

1) Can you confirm that the Canadian Firearms Program inspected 3 SAN rifles with the serial numbers ESF9116, ESF74361, and ESF73096?

"The CFP can confirm that it is examining the Swiss Arms PE Classic Green rifle."


2) Can you confirm the date that the Canadian Firearms Lab took possession of these rifles?

"The CFP can confirm that it is examining the Swiss Arms PE Classic Green rifle."


3) Can you briefly explain the findings from the Firearms Lab in regards to each of those serial numbers?

"The Swiss Arms PE Classic Green rifle is currently under review."


4) Can you offer a brief explanation of the documentation that would be necessary to ascertain the lineage of these firearms?

"All documentation from the manufacturer identifying the antecedents of the firearm and its components is helpful"


5) Is there a deadline for such documentation? Have you received any from either Canadian or Swiss businesses?

"There is no deadline for this documentation"


It's worth noting that my first question was ignored:

For the record, can you confirm the current status of the series of rifles known as Swiss Arms? Namely FRT entries:

a) FRT # 129006 - Swiss Arms Black Special Carbine
b) FRT # 119587 - Swiss Arms Black Special
c) FRT # 119482 - Swiss Arms Classic Green
d) FRT # 124216 - Swiss Arms Classic Green Carbine
e) FRT # 124218 - Swiss Arms Classic Green CQB
f) FRT # 119588 - Swiss Arms Heavy Metal
g) FRT # 119485 - Swiss Arms Red Devil
h) FRT # 119484 - Swiss Arms Edition

 

[Ar180shooter]

I checked right before I posted.

Ahem, this thread is moving too fast for all of us. When was the last time you checked?

Here's some news. Has anyone tried to transfer a restricted Swiss Arms recently?

The RCMP has replied to one of my question submissions from earlier in the week.

1) Can you confirm that the Canadian Firearms Program inspected 3 SAN rifles with the serial numbers ESF9116, ESF74361, and ESF73096?

"The CFP can confirm that it is examining the Swiss Arms PE Classic Green rifle."


2) Can you confirm the date that the Canadian Firearms Lab took possession of these rifles?

"The CFP can confirm that it is examining the Swiss Arms PE Classic Green rifle."


3) Can you briefly explain the findings from the Firearms Lab in regards to each of those serial numbers?

"The Swiss Arms PE Classic Green rifle is currently under review."


4) Can you offer a brief explanation of the documentation that would be necessary to ascertain the lineage of these firearms?

"All documentation from the manufacturer identifying the antecedents of the firearm and its components is helpful"


5) Is there a deadline for such documentation? Have you received any from either Canadian or Swiss businesses?

"There is no deadline for this documentation"


It's worth noting that my first question was ignored:

For the record, can you confirm the current status of the series of rifles known as Swiss Arms? Namely FRT entries:

a) FRT # 129006 - Swiss Arms Black Special Carbine
b) FRT # 119587 - Swiss Arms Black Special
c) FRT # 119482 - Swiss Arms Classic Green
d) FRT # 124216 - Swiss Arms Classic Green Carbine
e) FRT # 124218 - Swiss Arms Classic Green CQB
f) FRT # 119588 - Swiss Arms Heavy Metal
g) FRT # 119485 - Swiss Arms Red Devil
h) FRT # 119484 - Swiss Arms Edition

 

[TV-PressPass]

I checked right before I posted.

Can't ask for more than that then!

RCMP is not exactly forthcoming when you go through the media dept

 

[Ar180shooter]

As of 05/06/2013 at 3:54pm EST

a) FRT # 129006 - Swiss Arms Black Special Carbine - R or NR
b) FRT # 119587 - Swiss Arms Black Special - R or NR (apparently someone modded a NR black special with a CQB barrel)
c) FRT # 119482 - Swiss Arms Classic Green - NR
d) FRT # 124216 - Swiss Arms Classic Green Carbine - R or NR
e) FRT # 124218 - Swiss Arms Classic Green CQB - R or NR
f) FRT # 119588 - Swiss Arms Heavy Metal - NR
g) FRT # 119485 - Swiss Arms Red Devil - NR
h) FRT # 119484 - Swiss Arms Edition - NR

You also forgot the Blue Star FRT# 118907 - NR

 

[greentips]

Just a little precision for the un-aware, about this picture:

I suppose that what is to be noticed is the grossly patched/riveted third notch on the safety selector. Or is there other details to notice ?

The receiver of a Swiss Arms is the upper receiver. The lower is just a component.

Think of it this way. The receiver of an AR15 is the lower. The upper is just a component. Sticking a "full auto" upper ( no one thinks of AR15 upper as full auto upper anyways....) on a semi auto lower will not make a full auto firearm, and it won't be fully automatic either

By the same token, sticking a full auto lower on a semi auto upper of a swiss arms will not make it fully automatic, and it wont' be a full auto firearm either.

 

[abbynormal]

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:



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



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.

Yep - this is an excellent summery of our position now ....

Personally, I don't think the RCMP are 'headhunting' for the SAN family - given the years these firearms have been available with no issues forthcoming. I believe that if the manufacturer / distributor come up with something reasonable connecting our rifles with the 540, they'd be more than happen to keep the status quo.

I don't believe all is lost, in fact I think we have a pretty good chance of all of us keeping our beloved rifles (yep - I have two of these beauties) BECAUSE:

1. The RCMP say they have both the 550 and the 540 AND they obviously have a Classic Green (Black Special, etc.)
2. Clearly they have all of these firearms laying on a table and they're saying to themselves - "jeez Bill, these look pretty similar ...."

WHO CARES WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE ?!!! Haven't we all see two people who look the same but are from different families? (i.e. Brad Pitt and myself - heh, heh - sorry, sorry ....)

So SAN made a F/A assault rifle for the Swiss Military - Great! But after the Swiss army contract was completed, CLEARLY the designers at SAN went back to their drawing boards (i.e. the 540) to design a civilian rifle. Sure the 550 and the Classic Green look similar (why wouldn't they - they came from the same genus!) - BUT they are entirely different:

1. Receiver is stamped differently
2. Only half the moving bits of the 550 trigger group
3. Machining on the bolt omitted

I mean, how much MORE different could they be??!! (the answer, of course is non more....)

I think we're gonna be OK here as long as SAN supplies something to bear out the connection between the 540 and the Classic Green, i.e. a blueprint of a 540 with a note scribbled on the bottom:
"Hey Sven - let's change this nob and call it a Classic Green"

What say you guys - a possible solution to this mess?

 

[harbl_the_cat]

The receiver of a Swiss Arms is the upper receiver. The lower is just a component.

Think of it this way. The receiver of an AR15 is the lower. The upper is just a component. Sticking a "full auto" upper ( no one thinks of AR15 upper as full auto upper anyways....) on a semi auto lower will not make a full auto firearm, and it won't be fully automatic either

By the same token, sticking a full auto lower on a semi auto upper of a swiss arms will not make it fully automatic, and it wont' be a full auto firearm either.

Ahh, thanks for clarifying GT.

 

[r_taylor]

Just a little precision for the un-aware, about this picture:

I suppose that what is to be noticed is the grossly patched/riveted third notch on the safety selector. Or is there other details to notice ?

FWIW the RCMP only care about the upper receiver. The trigger housing is a part like the bolt carrier in an AR15 and can be from a F/A gun as long as it does not make the gun fire F/A.

I can't help but point out however that the gun shown fails the JR test of "real" Classic Green based on this:

]

Why was it suspected to be counterfeit or converted?

1) The 4 digit serial number was wrong for a ‘civilian’ firearm
2) Furniture colour and texture predated anything known for retail/commercial sale
3) There was no Swiss Arms factory marking;
4) There was no commercial production marking;
5) It was missing the internal parts added to retail/commercial rifles to further prevent C/A conversions;
6) The Upper and lower very mismatched colours, indicating either re-working, or a change-out with another rifle; and
7) The spacing of the serial numbers was too large

 

[Steve Janes]

It's been addressed, the LOWER's Are not the issue guys.

These converted auto lowers are completely legal and legit....It's the uppers they are worried about

 

[Ar180shooter]

It's been addressed but the LOWER's Are not the issue guys.

These converted auto lowers are completely legal and legit....It's the uppers

It was my understanding that the C/A lowers were part of the issue. The CG rifles were being imported with converted F/A Sig 550 lowers (with matching serial no's), and these rifles were said to be mechanically identical to the CG rifles. This is what brought the lineage of the Classic Green rifles in to question, no?

 

[harbl_the_cat]

It's been addressed but the LOWER's Are not the issue guys.

These converted auto lowers are completely legal and legit....It's the uppers

Rookie mistake on my part

Sigh - I apologize everyone. I guess I'm getting worked up over nothing (for now) and inciting a panic.

I suppose a lot of us are worried about the implications of what this could all mean, but what's the point?

"can any one of you by worrying add a single hour to your life?"
"do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own"

 

[Recce21]

"can any one of you by worrying add a single hour to your life?"
"do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own"

Matthew 6: 25-34

However, complacency is not what we need right now.

 

[max_freddy]

Yep - this is an excellent summery of our position now ....

Personally, I don't think the RCMP are 'headhunting' for the SAN family - given the years these firearms have been available with no issues forthcoming. I believe that if the manufacturer / distributor come up with something reasonable connecting our rifles with the 540, they'd be more than happen to keep the status quo.

I don't believe all is lost, in fact I think we have a pretty good chance of all of us keeping our beloved rifles (yep - I have two of these beauties) BECAUSE:

1. The RCMP say they have both the 550 and the 540 AND they obviously have a Classic Green (Black Special, etc.)
2. Clearly they have all of these firearms laying on a table and they're saying to themselves - "jeez Bill, these look pretty similar ...."

WHO CARES WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE ?!!! Haven't we all see two people who look the same but are from different families? (i.e. Brad Pitt and myself - heh, heh - sorry, sorry ....)

So SAN made a F/A assault rifle for the Swiss Military - Great! But after the Swiss army contract was completed, CLEARLY the designers at SAN went back to their drawing boards (i.e. the 540) to design a civilian rifle. Sure the 550 and the Classic Green look similar (why wouldn't they - they came from the same genus!) - BUT they are entirely different:

1. Receiver is stamped differently
2. Only half the moving bits of the 550 trigger group
3. Machining on the bolt omitted

I mean, how much MORE different could they be??!! (the answer, of course is non more....)

I think we're gonna be OK here as long as SAN supplies something to bear out the connection between the 540 and the Classic Green, i.e. a blueprint of a 540 with a note scribbled on the bottom:
"Hey Sven - let's change this nob and call it a Classic Green"

What say you guys - a possible solution to this mess?

I like the sound of this.

It's positive. I am going to leave this thread on this note, and hope for the best. This issue is just too damn depressing to me. I want a CQB one day.

 

[Steve Janes]

WHO CARES WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE ?!!!

i.e. a blueprint of a 540 with a note scribbled on the bottom:
"Hey Sven - let's change this nob and call it a Classic Green"

You and I may not care, but The RCMP and the LAW care, because they are 550 variants and prohib by name...According to the RCMP.

And your suggestion of messing with blueprints so that they indicate the guns came from 540's.....That's what the importer did 12 years ago, and now the RCMP have realized they were lied too.....We cannot make the same claim again. The CEO who did the scribble at the bottom of the page 12 years ago is long gone, and the new CEO doesn't understand any of this nonsense.

 

[KevinB]

Steve - I don't think he is saying that.
I read it more like he was saying SAN needs to produce their documents to show how the Canadian rifles came to be.

I unfortunately know WAY to much about this whole debacle, and never even owned one.

 

[harbl_the_cat]

Matthew 6: 25-34

However, complacency is not what we need right now.

There's three things you can do right now:
-be complacent and do nothing,
-sit in front of your computer worrying incessantly that the government is coming for all your guns, ranting like a lunatic, and
-taking real, meaningful action to secure yourself personally.

I think the last is what is called for right now. My apology was for doing a bit too much of the second and none of the third.

 

[SIGNUT]

Let's try to keep the facts that we know straight. The "spurious" Swiss Arms rifle that came from CSC and was submitted under suspicion by TSE turned out to not be a CA. Ironically, and to the detriment of long time SAN owners, the CA receivers were the ones submitted by TSE as reference samples of "proper" Swiss Arms rifles.

the UPPER reviver was allegedly re purposed by SAN. it is not C/A now, but it was F/A in its lifetime is the allegation. this looks to be grey to me as you are not to remove/replace a serial number nor can something go from a prohib receiver to NR. This is odd though as a manufacture allegedly did this. i still claim this should have been run by the RC.

 

[stickhunter]

... CLEARLY the designers at SAN went back to their drawing boards (i.e. the 540) to design a civilian rifle. Sure the 550 and the Classic Green look similar (why wouldn't they - they came from the same genus!) - BUT they are entirely different:

1. Receiver is stamped differently
2. Only half the moving bits of the 550 trigger group
3. Machining on the bolt omitted

I mean, how much MORE different could they be??!! (the answer, of course is non more....)

Not having handled or studied the internals of the SG 540 or SG 550, I'm not familiar with the aforementioned list of differences; do you have any pictures that show them? From what I understand, the RCMP have SG 540, SG 550, and Classic Green samples, and I'm sure they compared them side-by-side before drawing their initial finding that (I'm assuming based on appearance), the Classic Green is likely a variant of the SG 550. Appearance alone isn't sufficient proof that the Classic Green is a variant of the SG 550 since the Classic Green could have initially evolved from the SG 540 and then encorporated some of the characteristics of the SG 550 --- only SAN can really prove the later, though.

Taking a step back, since I believe the SG 550 already existed when the Classic Green was introduced, what would have been SAN's rationale for basing the Classic Green off the older SG 540? It seems unlikely to me that this would have been a decision made solely to satisfy our absurd Canadian gun laws. I'm not trying to provide justification for the RCMP's assessment, but rather trying to consider how we can defend ourselves and support the original SG 540 derivative claim. Is there anything in the design of the current incarnation of the Classic Green that can be pointed to as being in the SG 540 and not the SG 550? I'd love if someone here who has a deep knowledge of the SAN rifles could point us to some pictures.