Cz 858-2

Robert777 said:
Maybe there is hope when people say enough we are not cooperating....we won't be handing our property in.
Only FUDDS would be running to hand their firearms in.
Click to expand...

Hey man, if I owned one, no ####ing WAY I would be handing it over to anyone, but I do not own one and the fact it is going to be reclassified totally turns me off from buying one. I would just go buy an AK off the streets if I wanted something prohibited. Someone can't just say "#### it, I am taking it out shooting like I used to" Well have fun, because there is going to be NO ONE standing behind that person and protecting them from the cops or wardens , it is just going to be taken away and if its publicly known that its prohib, expect a much bigger #### storm (And even if they are not a FUDD , they are up #### creek). That said, if its the gun itself they like so much, just buy a CSA? Then they don't have to hide it in their safe for the rest of time.

So let me be clear on one thing, I did not for one second say that people who own them, should hand them in, I am curious why people suddenly want it so badly now that its just going to be a safe queen when you can buy an identical platform that is NR.
 
sillymike said:
This might sound like a silly idea... but wouldn't this be a good opportunity to push back the RCMP (and government) a bit?

As in, unless 'they' can provide empirical data showing how these so-call new prohibited firearms are <more> dangerous than the regular restricted/non-restricted variant of said gun... the whole 12(3)/12(4)/12(5) firearm classification doesn't any meaningful purpose, therefore it should be done away with... Right?
Click to expand...

Sadly, it would go the opposite way.
 
BCshooterFMJ said:
Sadly, it would go the opposite way.
Click to expand...

I'm inclined to agree. I think it would be more their style to say 'Oh, so you're saying these NR rifles are no different than these restricted/prohib rifles? We better go ahead and add those NR's to the prohib list!" That's the kind of backwards logic we've come to expect from our government concerning the regulation of firearms.
 
write your MP's... part of that vote we lost 477-500 was to do away with prohib status.... not just enshrine gun rights....

we just need to get the pressure on, 13 votes is close
 
easysauce said:
write your MP's... part of that vote we lost 477-500 was to do away with prohib status.... not just enshrine gun rights....

we just need to get the pressure on, 13 votes is close
Click to expand...

Even if we got all the votes for the bill we still have the fudd loving harper in charge things are not going to get better unless a more pro gun is head of the conservatives
 
ghostie said:
Hello guys,

I'm a lawyer in Vancouver who is working on this issue along with the NFA, both on behalf of individual clients, and generally.

The CZ 858 Tactical 2, FRT# 123599-1, is listed as a non-restricted semi-automatic firearm. That is the 19" barrel model (483mm).

The 15.5" barrel model (394mm) continues to be listed as restricted (FRT#123599-3).

Thre are many other names and FRT# however.

Yes, the RCMP have seized some firearms and claimed that they are prohibited. What they have handed out is a copy of the printout for FRT# 142362-2, the "CZ 858 Tactical 2 P". The "2P" is listed as a "Full Automatic" firearm, saying in the notes "can be converted to a full automatic firearm in a relatively short period of time with relative ease."

The problem with all this is that the FRT description for the "Tactical 2" (the non-res) says " "CZ 858 TACTICAL - 2 P" or CZ 858 TACTICAL -2 V" is marked on the left side of the reciever/frame. "P" denotes a factory installed fixed buttstock, and "V" denotes a factory installed folding buttstock." The FRT notes for FRT# 142362-2 (the prohib) say something very similar (minus the stuff about the "V" folding stock).

So, what I am trying to determine right now is... which firearms are prohibited and which are not, and what - precisely - causes a firearm to fall within one FRT description or another. Clearly, being marked "2 P" or "2 V" is not determinative of anything.

I'm hopefully going to be able to work with the importers and other in the firearms industry to get to the bottom of this, because, yes, some people have had firearms seized and have been threatened with prosecution. I personally feel that there is no risk of that as, at this point, how would anybody know what they have or don't have? You have to knowingly possess a prohibited firearm in order to be guilty of anything. But that is not the point. The RCMP have created a hell of a mess here, and it is going to be left to the courts and/or the government to clean this up.
Click to expand...



cp220 said:
There are several FRT's listed for 858's.

The CZ 858 Tactical 2 is listed as non-restricted.

There are also FRT's for CZ 858's (Tactical 2P, Tactical 2V, Tactical 4P) that lists them as prohibited (converted auto). The notes indicate the firearm is a full auto VZ58 altered to fire semi only, and the original receiver markings were removed and replaced with CZ 858 Tactical 2 P (or Tactical 2V, or Tactical 4P).

I have no idea what will come of all this, but that's the info on the FRT currently.

The CSA rifles all look the same as NR.
Click to expand...



CanAm said:
Bingo. I was not informed by the RCMP. We heard of these changes and my staff checked the FRT for the guns we had at the shop, listed for sale. Of the three in stock, 2 used and one new, 2 were made prohib. We are still working on sorting all this out, as Ghostie is. So stay tuned.

For reference, from the other thread:

cz858_zps9ef95d60.jpg


One thing to note is that new FRTs begin with 14, the old ones begin with 12
Click to expand...

Someone please tell me that the V and P designations weren't the only reason that the RCMP inspectors seized 2 of Wolverine's shipments!
 
easysauce said:
write your MP's... part of that vote we lost 477-500 was to do away with prohib status.... not just enshrine gun rights....

we just need to get the pressure on, 13 votes is close
Click to expand...

Absolutely we need to keep writing and contacting our MPs.

That's a pretty damn close vote given what would have come of it, so keep it up guys.
 
Robert777 said:
Alot of people don't remember 1992 and Kim Campbell, banning stuff without compensation. I do....and I remember a lot of gun owners did not register their AKs at the time from non-restricted to restricted because they believed those firearms would be banned outright once they were in a registry. And in 1995 Allan Rock did ban them (they were grandfathered). And I am sure there are a lot of AKs hidden away by the public. Maybe there is hope when people say enough we are not cooperating....we won't be handing our property in.
Only FUDDS would be running to hand their firearms in.
Click to expand...

Could have sworn I've seen some very rough numbers from some companies that imported and sold a ton of AK's back when we had more rights than we do now. The numbers of ones imported and sold is much, much higher than the number on the registry. Those statist cowards thought that banning a gun meant they waved their magic wand and the guns went away. Of course, what it really means is that it gives the government an excuse to initiate force on you (using guns!) for for doing harm to nobody, and for the 'crime' of owning an object that the Fuhrer of the day doesn't approve of.

I predict compliance with the next gun ban will be leagues lower than the last gun ban in '95, and despite what Alan Rock and the RCMP say, it was pretty fvcking low last time. I was only three in 1995, but I'm old enough to fight for my rights now. With the power of the internet, there will be even more people who will be less inclined to comply with the next round of draconian legislation. Good.

Also, I sold my 858. Guy had a PAL and I don't remember his name, have a good day.
 
Last edited:
Maybe you should ask our Convervative PM to reign in the RCMP. With a majority government and a knack for riding through omnibus bills, why hasn't Bill C51 been struck down as unconstitutional. Better yet include C-17 and C-150.

GreenSummerTrees said:
It's sad that some entity within the RCMP can so easily makes a decision that so painfully hurts law abiding gun owners (I know it's politically motivated). Then the onus is on us to try prove that it's a bad decision through time, great effort and expense (Thank you NFA and others) .
Click to expand...
 
It sucks that I live in Quebec, since mine is registered it won't take long for them to find it, at least yours are no longer registered (but I bet they kept some records somewhere).
 
The problem I see is that the RCMP answer to no one. They are the gestapo, and this should not be tolerated. We need a civilian oversite committee of non politicians to oversee this snafu we call the rcmp. Or so help us they will keep giving guns the ok one minute then the next make them prohibited. There can't be this back and forth, the FA is stupid to begin with but with the royal canadian mounted gestapo running this we are al ####ed.
 
We got our bread and circuses with the scrapping of the LGR, as much of a letdown as that is.


9mmGunGuy said:
Maybe you should ask our Convervative PM to reign in the RCMP. With a majority government and a knack for riding through omnibus bills, why hasn't Bill C51 been struck down as unconstitutional. Better yet include C-17 and C-150.
Click to expand...
 
ghostie said:
I'm working on it guys. I'll try to have some answers by next week. I just got retained on this file on Monday afternoon.

It may be as simple as... there are reams of firearms which fall under 123599-1, and therefore remain non-restricted as they always were, but certain RCMP members have confused the issue by introducing the idea of the 142362-2 firearms. Since there are no registration certificates anymore, it is something of a Brave New World when dealing which each CZ-858 a police officer comes across. I am going to take a wild guess and suggest that 142362-2 firearms are substantially more rare, and that the police don't have the information or training to differentiate the two - so they err on the side of caution. Based on the descrption in the FRT, there would need to be something in the physical characteristics of the firearm which allow it to be "converted to a full automatic firearm in a relatively short period of time with relative ease" to fall into the 142362-2 description. Generally that is going to be something pretty dramatic, like the presence of a full-auto sear. But, as I say, I'm working on it.

Ultimately, we are going to have to find out how the serial number of a particular firearm links it to one description or the other - or how the physical characteristics of a particular firearm link it to one description or another... because right now, looking at the two FRT printouts, I can certainly see how Joe Constable in the patrol car could confuse the two. For 123599-1 (the non-res) it mentions under the "Also known as" section "CZ 858 Tactical - 2 P", along with a whole slew of others.

Don't start to panic just yet. I think there is an answer to all this confusion.
Click to expand...

Would carrying the old registration and proper FRT number do us any good?
 
SamuraiK001 said:
And Finally.... We must remember that in order to re-classify a firearm it has to be done by an act of Parliament, because it will change the law, and only the politicians can do that. As much as the RCMP might want them Prohib, they are not the law, they only enforce it.
Click to expand...

Bahahahahahahahahahahahaha

You have no idea how these things work, do you?

The RCMP can, will, and have done just what you are talking about without any parliamentary approval!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom