Griz 870: Somewhat official word

K

kel1

Member
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
I've been reading the posts about the legality of Dlask's 8.5" shorty and the Grizzly 870 that I just bought, and with opinions and rumors abounding, I was wondering if anyone had actually called the CFC to see what the official word is. So I picked up the phone...

So after spending a few hours on the phone over the last week and getting bounced around almost half a dozen times throughout the CFC's various departments, I got to eventually speak with technician who works on the FRTs who should know something about the 12" Grizzly I just bought.
Reading off the FRT it clearly lists the shotgun as both non-restricted and restricted for the butt stock and pistol grip respectively. According to the Firearms table, with the pistol grip it is classed as a handgun (defying all logic, obviously).

Not satisfied with the answer, I waited on hold another half an hour and talked with a higher-up technician who confirmed that this is the interpretation of the law. She said that it is the pistol grip itself which makes it a "handgun" regardless of overall length and quoted the CC to me to *prove* it. I didn't have the CC reference in front of me, so I didn't push too hard on the issue, but she did say that *ANY* firearm with a pistol grip is therefore designated as a handgun regardless of overall length. Now I've got to go actually re-read the CC and Firearms act myself, but that just doesn't sound right to me. It sounded like she was just toting the company line, so I may call back and discuss this further.
She (and other people from previous departments) also said that once you change a firearm to make it fall under the classification, there is no returning it back to long gun status.

Anyone know how Dlask is making out with that phantom court settlement? The technicians didn't know anything about it.

-kelly
 
So by their interpretation of the law a 20" barreled shotgun with a pistol grip is restricted even if OAL is over 26" just because it has a pistol grip :confused:

And she quote CC to prove her point?

Ya right! ;)

.
 
Last edited:
on the contrary, it's the technicans you spoke to that don't know what they're talking about- ergo, the likes of wholesale sports et al would not be selling winchester defenders and other pistol gripped only shotguns as non restricted- it's more like" this guy is asking a question i don't know the answer to- what can i do to get him OFF THE PHONE?"
 
this is the section I think they must be talking about:

“handgun”

« arme de poing »
“handgun” means a firearm that is designed, altered or intended to be aimed and fired by the action of one hand, whether or not it has been redesigned or subsequently altered to be aimed and fired by the action of both hands;

note that it does not seem to say what they think it does...
 
the official word

kel1 said:
I've been reading the posts about the legality of Dlask's 8.5" shorty and the Grizzly 870 that I just bought, and with opinions and rumors abounding, I was wondering if anyone had actually called the CFC to see what the official word is. So I picked up the phone...

So after spending a few hours on the phone over the last week and getting bounced around almost half a dozen times throughout the CFC's various departments, I got to eventually speak with technician who works on the FRTs who should know something about the 12" Grizzly I just bought.
Reading off the FRT it clearly lists the shotgun as both non-restricted and restricted for the butt stock and pistol grip respectively. According to the Firearms table, with the pistol grip it is classed as a handgun (defying all logic, obviously).

Not satisfied with the answer, I waited on hold another half an hour and talked with a higher-up technician who confirmed that this is the interpretation of the law. She said that it is the pistol grip itself which makes it a "handgun" regardless of overall length and quoted the CC to me to *prove* it. I didn't have the CC reference in front of me, so I didn't push too hard on the issue, but she did say that *ANY* firearm with a pistol grip is therefore designated as a handgun regardless of overall length. Now I've got to go actually re-read the CC and Firearms act myself, but that just doesn't sound right to me. It sounded like she was just toting the company line, so I may call back and discuss this further.
She (and other people from previous departments) also said that once you change a firearm to make it fall under the classification, there is no returning it back to long gun status.

Anyone know how Dlask is making out with that phantom court settlement? The technicians didn't know anything about it.

-kelly
Click to expand...

I think we all thank you for your time and efforts trying to get the word settled and clear.

However, until I see that in writing from a named official with authority, that word is just another interpretation from a customer service rep in a tax-wasting office located in NB.

Transferred to a 'higher-up' person means transferred from office monkey A to bamboon B in the cubicle beside. :rolleyes:
 
I've heard nothing about the court action/legal challenge since D.A.T. passed.

Surely either Dlask or CanAm or the NFA can share something. Anything?

We're not waiting for a volunteer, I hope. (It won't be me.)
 
The only way those tech's aren't blowing smoke out their collective a$$e$! Is if there is some sort of secret memo we are unaware the designates any long gun with a pistol grip as restricted!!

I would think the dealers would know about it??!!?!
 
Absolute crap. The moment you were told it was sold as both non-restricted and restricted you should have realized the person you were talking to didn't have a clue.
 
give it a rest!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
do you not think when somthing new happens it will be posted hear!!
Really what new have you add to this issue!
bbb
 
Get out and Shoot!! I hear yah, just waiting for mine to arrive, it's like waiting for Christmas as a kid!!

I agree it's a pile of crap, I don't even believe I was told the truth with regards to "pistol grip=handgun". Just reporting what I was told by those who, one would hope, would know better.
With the "both restricted and non-restricted thing", it's important that it is specifically listed in the FRT as such, being as there is a lot of opinion and hearsay going on.
If you get stopped and the CO, LEO, whatever looks it up and they see "pistol grip Griz870=restricted" written in black and white, you can be sure that they're not going to sit down, pull out a pipe, and ponder and discuss the logic of the technicians and the legality of the interpretation of the legislation with you. To them, "It is written, therefore it is." They've got enough crap to deal with already.
You're looking at your basic confiscation and charges of unlawful possession of a restricted firearm and a loss of your license for 10 years, or whatever they're handing out for penalties these days. But at least that will give someone the opportunity to question said logic and definitions before a judge who may or may not decide in your favor.

Now, the question I ask is how does one go about challenging the definitions in the FRT without getting charged with a crime and going through the courts?
 
Last edited:
There is no way in hell the Grizz is labelled 'restricted' in the computer. Our certificates clearly state it is not and there is no means in the system to even have a firearm that meets this criteria. A firearm is either one or the other - period. Whoever you were talking to has no idea what it means obviously.
 
Man I wish you were right, it's such a pile of crap. But I had that confirmed by more than one department that read it right off the page.

"Griz with buttstock=non restricted, barrel 380mm, OAL 790mm
Griz with pistolgrip=restricted, barrel 380mm, etc"

One of the guys I was talking to was pretty cool about the whole thing and kept citing instances where the laws/FRT definitions made no sense.
I'm going to be making some calls and challenging their definition, I want to get confirmation for myself about something like maybe a folding stock. Maybe we can make some headway, Or at least add some pressure.
Citizens alone raising concerns can't hurt, but probably won't make much difference. I would imagine they're more inclined to 'bend an ear' to one of the manufacturers, or maybe the NFA if they wanted to start lobbying.

Really, call for yourselves, but make sure you've got a few hours set aside to do so. We seem to spend a lot of time in front of our computers dedicating a lot of energy to raising our concerns and letting our opinions be known here. It looks like (with obvious exceptions) that we've done a half decent job of informing ourselves, and we have a reasonable understanding of the legislation. Think of what might be accomplished if we took a some of that time and energy and focused it at the root of the problems. Respectfully, of course.
[/activist speech]

-kelly
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom