*** CZ 858 March Update ***

Status
Not open for further replies.
One of the problems with career bureaucrats is that they spend their careers living in fear of being wrong. Unfortunately, once a decision has been made it is very, very difficult to get it reversed as doing so would force them to admit that they had made a mistake.

Sort of a civil service version of "my mind is made up, don't confuse me with the facts"
 
honz said:
I feel that the above is critical and should be emphasis. Now that an FRT exists for a 'Spartan' model, the FRT classifies it as prohibited, and the end result would not play out in the owner's favour. I've said it before, it's been said by many others here - Irrespective of the legal ground one stands on, the Process is the Punishment.
Click to expand...

This poses an interesting question. If I own a CZ 858, I should be able to swap out the furniture or engrave anything on it I like. But if I were to specifically engrave the words "Spartan" or "Molon Labe" or add the image of the stylized Spartan helmet anywhere on the rifle, especially on the furniture or the bolt, have I now converted the rifle to prohib, per the FRT? Hmm...
 
Mr. Wolverine,
I have a spare set of beaver barf furniture and a spare CZ858 bolt carrier.
How's about I send you those, you put them on my CZ858 I have on order and send me a complete CZ 858 Tactical-2 P back?

:d

Just curious though, what is your next plan of action in regards to challenging this decision again? Or when may we be told what it is.
 
lucsergerie said:
- Trying to understand the RCMP it is like understanding a woman on her period it is impossible lol ( joke !) imagine if the text was written by a female officer on her period !
Click to expand...

Actually, it (C68) had the major input of male-hating fem-nazis from a number of groups.

Whether or not they were under hormonal influences at the time,i will leave that for y'all to speculate on. The result (C68/10) was a disaster re: effectiveness and resource wasting regardless.
 
There is no reason why they can't sell these off as parts. I would take everything except the wood stock set and then swap the bolt carrier with the one on my confirmed non restricted. Get a set of beaver barf furniture and I have two non restricted rifles. I still have my old reg card to confirm that the rifle isn't a prohib even if someone tries to claim it is.

Sell me the parts for a deal I can't say no to..
 
Tyler Durden said:
So, a dealer here could theoretically get Norinco to crank out some AK-47s, stamp them as "Valmet M78-x", then sell them here as non-restricted Valmet variants? If that what you're saying? (maybe I got it wrong). It would be cool, but I don't that happening.
Click to expand...

If the rcmp consider a few markings sufficient to create a new model and frt, I am pretty sure norinco made valmets would also be considered a newmodel and therefore NOT the actual Valmet that was named as exempt
 
Cameron SS said:
If the rcmp consider a few markings sufficient to create a new model and frt,
Click to expand...

Which is exactly what they did with the "CZ 858 Spartan"

Cameron SS said:
I am pretty sure norinco made valmets would also be considered a newmodel and therefore NOT the actual Valmet that was named as exempt
Click to expand...

So it seems you agree with me. I was responding to this comment which proposed the idea. Have a look, see what you think.
 
Wait did I read that last bit right? He spends a page accusing Mr. Wolverine of having a from the ground up firearm manufactured with accusing him that this is not a "model" of 858 because he marketed it as the "Spartan". Meaning that it did not meet the regulations of being the same FRT # previously assigned to the 2P, 2V and 4P respectively.

But then states that this from the ground up manufactured firearm is in fact a converted auto. Well which is it? Is this a previously existing 2P, 2V, 4P or a from the ground up manufacture? That he spend at least a full page detailing the life cycle of the marketing campaign to bring to bear a new firearm to market not really mean anything? I would have thought that someone in the position of Mr. Smith whom Manages a department that gets funding based on its crucial to public safety basis; would be able to put forward the most relevant arguments for said safety. If the firearm is indeed a converted automatic, then there is no conversation, it would be deemed a prohibited device under the Canadian Firearms Act. All parties here can agree to that fact. However, what I don't agree with is the claim that the firearm was converted; definitely not if I am to believe that Mr. Smith's office did in fact did inform Mr. Wolverine that advertising a NEW model has consequences. It is contrary to his own claim for this to be a "new" model designed for the Canadian market based on the advertising "scheme" but then toss willy nilly the claim of converted auto at the end.


Also I don't understand the chatter in the earlier letters about the AR15 port dust cover. That kind of escaped me; is this just the suggestion that cross compatible parts now require new FRT for firearms? I mean does that suggest AR parts on shotguns and rifles using adapters mean your typical 870 and Mossbergs need new FRT? Or was it the suggestion that a port dust cover is a controlled or should be controlled item?
 
nof60 said:
Nope. your wrong. If you cash the cheque you support what your masters are doing. Its that simple.
Click to expand...

You're suggesting that if he works for the RCMP, even if he just joe-mountie, driving the roads of BC or Nova Scotia, handing out speeding tickets, that he therefore fully supports the improprieties and political agenda of the forces management and the firearms division?

That is quite a brush to paint with. I believe there are officers in most, if not all, the police services across Canada that fully support progressive gun rights. These guys are "cashing their paycheques" to pay their mortgages and feed and clothe their children, not to make a point. The CFP makes a bad decision and these guys are supposed to just quit and go sell shoes or something, just to take a stand? That's silly. It's good to have these guys on the inside; 'change from within', and all that...
 
XLNC said:
Mr. Wolverine,
I have a spare set of beaver barf furniture and a spare CZ858 bolt carrier.
How's about I send you those, you put them on my CZ858 I have on order and send me a complete CZ 858 Tactical-2 P back?

:d

Just curious though, what is your next plan of action in regards to challenging this decision again? Or when may we be told what it is.
Click to expand...

Right now I am considering all my options and taking legal advice, when I make a decision I will announce it here. Thanks for your patience.
 
Tyler Durden said:
You're suggesting that if he works for the RCMP, even if he just joe-mountie, driving the roads of BC or Nova Scotia, handing out speeding tickets, that he therefore fully supports the improprieties and political agenda of the forces management and the firearms division?

That is quite a brush to paint with. I believe there are officers in most, if not all, the police services across Canada that fully support progressive gun rights. These guys are "cashing their paycheques" to pay their mortgages and feed and clothe their children, not to make a point. The CFP makes a bad decision and these guys are supposed to just quit and go sell shoes or something, just to take a stand? That's silly. It's good to have these guys on the inside; 'change from within', and all that...
Click to expand...
Pretty much this. I think most cops have the sense to realize the laws don't do much other than give more to stick to criminals already breaking laws.
The issue is purely political. Majority of Canadians could give two farts about guns and of course the only time you hear about it is when there is some big shootup in the states which starts them thinking and they don't have a vested interest. Plus the tendency for politicians to make laws just for the optics that they are "working for you"it's no wonder we are in the situation we are.

Easiest solution: sign EVERY SINGLE petition involving firearms you can even if it doesn't impact you. The numbers will help in conveying to parliament that there are a lot of us and they will be forced to change their view if they still want to have a career in politics. The results of E111 would not have gone that way if all legal owners had signed and the Mounties would have thought twice before prohibiting the large capacity 22 magazines as they would have had Parliament breathing down their neck.
 
If the Directive which led to the exemptions has now been cancelled, does that mean that the CZ858's which had been exempted by it are no longer exempted? (very bad news for those owners)
 
Rescue85 said:
If the Directive which led to the exemptions has now been cancelled, does that mean that the CZ858's which had been exempted by it are no longer exempted? (very bad news for those owners)
Click to expand...

I was thinking about that too... Then they have to show some kinf of "resignation order" or something like that... Cant be an e-mail saying "btw its cancelled!"
 
Tyler Durden said:
You're suggesting that if he works for the RCMP, even if he just joe-mountie, driving the roads of BC or Nova Scotia, handing out speeding tickets, that he therefore fully supports the improprieties and political agenda of the forces management and the firearms division?

That is quite a brush to paint with. I believe there are officers in most, if not all, the police services across Canada that fully support progressive gun rights. These guys are "cashing their paycheques" to pay their mortgages and feed and clothe their children, not to make a point. The CFP makes a bad decision and these guys are supposed to just quit and go sell shoes or something, just to take a stand? That's silly. It's good to have these guys on the inside; 'change from within', and all that...
Click to expand...

Well said. After nearly 10 years in law enforcement, I can tell you that in my experience, the majority of frontline LEO's in Canada are pro-gun and are gun owners themselves. They realize that armed civilians are not the problem. They may not like certain laws, but they don't make them, and they are obligated to enforce them. We don't want to live in a country where the police at any level make laws or may choose to ignore certain ones with impunity. Also, bear in mind that the upper levels rarely, if ever, listen to the front line.

A situation where upper level bureaucrats are playing fast and loose with, or in some cases making decisions that are totally contrary to the law is very bad and needs to be changed. Best of luck to Mr. Wolverine with his appeal.
 
This Threads gone of the rails again. Remember CZ 858 not a RCMP bashing thread

Whether you love them or hate them matters not. I just want updates on the rifle situation.
 
Last edited:
nof60 said:
Nope. your wrong. If you cash the cheque you support what your masters are doing. Its that simple.
Click to expand...

They do not support or object, they are just paid to do their job. Which is to enforce the government's will upon its subjects via use of violence.

As long as police does what government tells them to do, they are in the right, that's when they start their personal crusades, as this Firearms Program manager, they overstep their mandate and need to be put back in place.

Unless "tightening the screws common sense be damned" is exactly what Goodale wants.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom