 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
And yet again you are building a scenario on assumption and no facts.Originally Posted by fenceline
From your post " If they built the same model reusing parts from a full auto (ie trunnions) it would trigger a new parent frt parent entry...."
Do you realise that "if" is just your assumption ?
Cheers
NON SERVIAM
Pretty sure fenceline was just explaining a scenerio for those saying the 1 year clause makes it untouchable and he is not saying that's what they did do. If it was made the same as the lab sample there should be no issues.
Sisu - The will of the Finnish people to overcome against impossible odds.
It's not an assumption. It's a scenario. It would happen if built that way.
CQB, 3 Gun, ISSAC and Service Rifle Shooter.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ - 1* - SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM - HAN SHOT FIRST - YOUR FREEDOM IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY
The only known facts are:
- rifles were manufactured to specs and randomly inspected.
- they are shipped as complying with the current FRT.
Unless you were present in the factory during the manufacturing and got some evidence of non compliance, everything else are baseless speculations and imaginary scenarios.
Lets wait and see what the reality is without puting so much effort exploring "if"s
Cheers
NON SERVIAM
Tell that to the other type 81 importer that were deemed converted auto for the exact scenario I've given.
I'm not saying one or any of this batch will be reclassified.
I'm saying the current frt for semi autos won't need to be altered if they find one built on full auto trunnions. They'll make a new parent entry to reflect that different action. Like they did in the 1919s by tnw.
The "locked after one year" frt entry doesn't offer any safety. Can't change it, but nothing says they won't or can't add a new, different parent entry for a converted auto.
Fact... FRT Legal Comments for the Type 81 "semi auto" sample from the competition...
"1) The TYPE 81, Receiver/Frame is considered to be comprised of four parts/components:
a) the Front Trunnion/Rear Sight Block;
b) the Ejector Block;
c) the Rear Trunnion/Return Spring Catch; and,
d) the stamped steel rectangular channel portion to which the other receiver/frame components are permanently affixed by rivet and/or weld.
2) For regulatory purposes, when the receiver/frame is further disassembled, the receiver/frame component known as the Front Trunion/Rear Sight Block, where the manufacturer information and serial number are found, is used to establish the description for the purpose of firearms registration.
3) When the receiver/frame is further disassembled and reduced to its four components, the component that bears the serial number, model and factory number, (the Front Trunnion/Rear Sight Block), will be considered the Receiver/Frame.
4) The classification of this firearm as a semi-automatic firearm is based on the presumption that none of the original four (4) receiver components were reused. This is what was understood to be the meaning of the claim by the manufacturer that the firearm is a "newly manufactured semi-automatic firearm".
5) The Criminal Code PART III, Section 84 para (c) definition - prohibited firearm means, "an automatic firearm, whether or not it has been altered to discharge only one projectile with one pressure of the trigger. "
As long as every gun is built with new parts, they are all fine. And TI say they have been. If they aren't, and one comes in, that specific gun will be considered C/A, and a new frt with the same make, model and manufacture with be generated by the RCMP, and a new parent FRT entry made for the C/A action. They won't modify the semi auto FRT, and their won't be a mass reclassification. It would be gun specific, depending on construction.
Last edited by fenceline; 08-15-2017 at 09:23 PM.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ - 1* - SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM - HAN SHOT FIRST - YOUR FREEDOM IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY
This thread is going to be another gong show like the last type 81 thread. I really hope TI locks it.
TI has done a lot of leg work. They are aware of the pitfalls faced by others and have taken steps to ensure they don't happen with these builds.
Things will be fine.
But knowing how others failed, and why, isn't a bad thing. People would do well to have a better understanding of the processes at hand.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ - 1* - SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM - HAN SHOT FIRST - YOUR FREEDOM IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY
Yup. TI stayed true to their word and we know they're on the way. Close it.
No. They can't do it like that for the Type 81. What you are talking about is the cz858 which was prohibited as a converted auto. It is still considered a converted auto, but now an OIC exists stating specific versions of the 858, with very specific model names in the oic are exempt from prohibition because of their converted auto status. 858 Spartan was not on the oic list and as still considered a converted auto, it is prohibited without the oic coverage.
No oic is needed for the type 81. Especially not an OIC for a different gun, the 858.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ - 1* - SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM - HAN SHOT FIRST - YOUR FREEDOM IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY
Wow that is disgusting lol
Sharing is Caring.....
Posting Permissions
