Gsg-16 legal status - public announcement

OK. Story makes sense now. I stopped dealing with IRG after they allowed my credit cards info to be stolen and gave total BS when I (and others) figured out the source of the breach (it was IRG). Apology? None.
 
I don't know if anyone here is the bad guy. Looks like one guy may have accused the other guy of being the bad guy, perhaps because they're often look at as a bad guy by the other guys?

We have a sweet looking new rifle coming in, I'm just going to focus on that now.
 
One the other hand, I hate "exclusive" monopolies as they tend to end up with "black NR premium", so importers help to keep prices at bay.
 
WhisperXBA said:
I don't know if anyone here is the bad guy. Looks like one guy may have accused the other guy of being the bad guy, perhaps because they're often look at as a bad guy by the other guys?

We have a sweet looking new rifle coming in, I'm just going to focus on that now.
Click to expand...

Yeah but IRG was still selling prohibs as NRs. That's pretty shady.
 
Blue Line Solutions said:
Actually, we didn't communicate with the FRT division over this issue at all. We were contacted by police officers who were inquiring about this matter. It is a misconception that anyone can influence the decision of the RCMP over the product classification. We can only apply for product classification, submit the technical information they ask for, and send a sample if they request.
If the requesting party is unhappy with their decision, they can challenge their decision in the court of law, which is what we did back in 2008 over the GSG-5 rifle.
Click to expand...

Yes, but your communication with the police essentially resulted in the FRT of the ATI version being changed to non-restricted, no? Or am I still not interpreting that correctly?
 
So good. BLS didnt make the call. They were called.

I dont see how IRG is the ###### I am not defending either of them. To me, this really sounds like the CFP is going on a fishing expedition trying to get something prohib. Be it BLS's version or the IRG's version.
 
sky52 said:
So good. BLS didnt make the call. They were called.

I dont see how IRG is the ###### I am not defending either of them. To me, this really sounds like the CFP is going on a fishing expedition trying to get something prohib. Be it BLS's version or the IRG's version.
Click to expand...

IRG basically indirectly claimed that BLS tried to have their version classified as prohibited (when in reality it appears BLS might have actually saved their asses and by extent the asses of those who purchased the rifle through IRG). If that wasn't their intent then they should have rephrased their post because that is how it comes across and was interpreted by many here. Perhaps it was just a miscommunication all around, but as it stands, it really shines a bad light on IRG in my eyes.
 
sky52 said:
So good. BLS didnt make the call. They were called.

I dont see how IRG is the ###### I am not defending either of them. To me, this really sounds like the CFP is going on a fishing expedition trying to get something prohib. Be it BLS's version or the IRG's version.
Click to expand...

Bl said they were contacted by the police but that they communicated with the bc cfo. Its ambigious if they called the bc cfo or not
We further stated to them as well as to the BC CFO, that all of our GSG products were coming directly from Germany, and provided them with the official Canadian GSG-16 Model Non-Restricted FRT number
Click to expand...
 
Kamikaze11 said:
Ok .... now i don’t understant sonething , the irungun screenshot is date 09 oct ... and is Nr

The bl one is date 11 oct and it prohib ?
Click to expand...
Blue Line's is September 9 = less then a month ago ATI version was prohibited

So, you can see why cops had questions about classification. I bet they caught someone plinking, looked up and it is prohibited, but the person screamed: "No, it is not! Blue Line said it is NR." Meanwhile IRG #### their pants and stayed quiet until now, pretending to be a winner when FRT is updated
 
Last edited:
Anyway,BL act like they are the victim for their long work with gsg to make the GSG 16,spending money time etc Manifacturer make a model,BL summit it to rcmp,please i want proof you spend money on the conception of that rifle ...

The rifle is being sold in USA for a certain period of time now,so BL is responsible of the creation of the GSG 16 ?
 
Danfizz said:
Anyway,BL act like they are the victim for their long work with gsg to make the GSG 16,spending money time etc Manifacturer make a model,BL summit it to rcmp,please i want proof you spend money on the conception of that rifle ...

The rifle is being sold in USA for a certain period of time now,so BL is responsible of the creation of the GSG 16 ?
Click to expand...

Its two different rifles man, you just dont seem to get it. Are they in essence the same? Yes. Are they technically two different guns? YES. There are differences between the ATI version and the Canadian GSG direct model. BL was responsible for the NR classification for the GSG 16.
 
Danfizz said:
Anyway,BL act like they are the victim for their long work with gsg to make the GSG 16,spending money time etc Manifacturer make a model,BL summit it to rcmp,please i want proof you spend money on the conception of that rifle ...

The rifle is being sold in USA for a certain period of time now,so BL is responsible of the creation of the GSG 16 ?
Click to expand...

How about you make Sig 522 non-restricted? It is wrongfully FRTed as prohibited. Sold in US for years. Spend your time, effort and money. If you get it, I will help you to get exclusivity. See how easy it is
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom