Importing 1890's mfg Type 26 9mm japanese revolver

Couldn't get a good job chasing stray dogs then.

Back to our show. Canna recall exactly, but pretty certain I was just reading about the Type 26 in a gun mag that was at the folks place. The write-up said that it was chambered in a 9mm cartridge that was not used in any other arms. That info and some clear pictures of the dating marks (and probably a scan of the translation documentation) to the techs at the CFC and you can get an antique letter, and the mall cop can get bent.

This leaving aside the discussions about whether a letter is as good as being registered or not, but it would get it past that one.

Cheers
Trev
 
holly crap what a bunch of misinformation :p

You can import one no problem as long as the ser # is low under the cut off for 1898 .
The ones made before dec 31st 1897 are perscribed antiques end of story.

The ones made post dec 31st 1897 are restricted.

One thing you might not like there DA only they dont shoot great thats why i never bought one.
If you wanted one a good price would be $900 or so,
But just remember there DA only eh .
 
ShooterPHD said:
You are wrong. Plain and simple.

Pre 1898 is one of the factors, not the only one. If it was still in use after, or can still fire/chamber current "modern" ammunition it still requires RPAL and ATT for importation.

Its the same reason you cannot import an 1873 Colt single action in .45LC (without proper registration, ATT, RPAL, etc...)
Click to expand...

IIRC :redface: , the 2 "big" issues are (1) year of manufacture (as oppose to year of service) :yingyang: , and (2) calibre the firearm is presently chambered-for.....:)
 
dingus said:
holly crap what a bunch of misinformation :p

You can import one no problem as long as the ser # is low under the cut off for 1898 .
The ones made before dec 31st 1897 are perscribed antiques end of story.

The ones made post dec 31st 1897 are restricted.

One thing you might not like there DA only they dont shoot great thats why i never bought one.
If you wanted one a good price would be $900 or so,
But just remember there DA only eh .
Click to expand...

Thanks dingus, your always a help :).

I'm still very interested in them for some strange reason. I'll think on it for the night.
 
ShooterPHD said:
You are wrong. Plain and simple.

Pre 1898 is one of the factors, not the only one. If it was still in use after, or can still fire/chamber current "modern" ammunition it still requires RPAL and ATT for importation.

Its the same reason you cannot import an 1873 Colt single action in .45LC (without proper registration, ATT, RPAL, etc...)
Click to expand...

Sorry guy, you don't understand the antique rules.

Built before 1898?
Calibre not on verboten list?

Then it's an antique.
 
ShooterPHD said:
"On the other hand, antique firearms are not considered firearms for licensing and registration purposes. Antique firearms include:

any firearms manufactured before 1898 that are not originally designed or redesigned to discharge rim-fire or centre-fire ammunition;
long guns manufactured in 1898 or later that are reproductions of flintlock, wheel-lock, or matchlock firearms; and
firearms that are classified as antique by regulations."
Click to expand...

You've only quoted the first part of the regulation. If yOu read the rest of it, you will see why your original statement regarding "modern" ammo is incorrect. I have two friends who own converted Webley Mark I and II's like mine. Each of us has the antique letter from the RCMP identifying the gun by serial # and listing the caliber as 45acp. In fact when the letter for one of the guns was received with no caliber listed, he called them back and requested that they issue him a new letter with the caliber listed. He received it within a week.
 
41 Colt said:
Maybe this is where you are hung up. Pre 1898 refers to the serial number of the specific gun, not the model's production span.
Click to expand...


That IS where I F'd up... I didn't realize that it was confirmed 1898 manufacture date (and 9mm Jap). I guess I should have read the OP more carefully.

It's very refreshing to see that "LE" bashing is still going strong :)
 
Seeing as you work for the CBSA, and posted incorrect information in an antique firearm forum, you really did open yourself up to at least a little bashing. There are guys here who have invested 10's of thousands of $$ in their collections, who really need to know their stuff! One would hope that someone, in a position of power, would make an extra effort to understand the regulations, especially if they're going to be dispensing critical information with such conviction....
 
Shooting Bastard said:
Seeing as you work for the CBSA, and posted incorrect information in an antique firearm forum, you really did open yourself up to at least a little bashing. There are guys here who have invested 10's of thousands of $$ in their collections, who really need to know their stuff! One would hope that someone, in a position of power, would make an extra effort to understand the regulations, especially if they're going to be dispensing critical information with such conviction....
Click to expand...

Agreed. It is more dangerous to have a little knowledge on a subject than none at all.

Now I can understand ShooterPHD that not everyone knows the laws. Really they can be a gobbledegook of words and twists and turns. if only but not this but o.k. if etc etc.

No one is bashing you. But you were wrong, and admitted it, that's high to your credit and no harm no foul. Problem is solved and everyone is happy.
 
ShooterPHD said:
That IS where I F'd up... I didn't realize that it was confirmed 1898 manufacture date (and 9mm Jap). I guess I should have read the OP more carefully.

It's very refreshing to see that "LE" bashing is still going strong :)
Click to expand...

Confirmed 1898 manufacturing date would make the firearm modern and restricted.
Must be pre-1898.

Another poster referred to no harm, no foul.

Maybe.

Did you ever make a ruling rejecting importation of an antique firearm based on your misunderstanding of the law and regulations?
If you did, what would you do to undo any harm done?
 
ShooterPHD said:
That IS where I F'd up... I didn't realize that it was confirmed 1898 manufacture date (and 9mm Jap). I guess I should have read the OP more carefully.

It's very refreshing to see that "LE" bashing is still going strong :)
Click to expand...

Oy vey! Another thing you misunderstood.

No bashing of LE's. Just you. Your profile indicates that you are 'law enforcement'. That's how that got dragged into the fray.

Cheers
Trev
 
LE bashing? I was bashing someone who was uninformed and trying to educate everyone else. I had no idea ShooterPHD was LE, however maybe he should read the law completely before lecturing others seeing as it applys to his job..... ;)
 
The 9mm Japanese service cartridge can be made from .38 Special cases. Trim to .867. Thin rim from the front to .030". (Lathe). Load with conventional lead .38 revolver bullets; Donnelly suggests unsized.
 
tiriaq said:
The 9mm Japanese service cartridge can be made from .38 Special cases. Trim to .867. Thin rim from the front to .030". (Lathe). Load with conventional lead .38 revolver bullets; Donnelly suggests unsized.
Click to expand...


Quality info...:)...thanks !...:cool:


BTW and as a general message to interested parties :yingyang: , any firearm that requires the rims of "conventional brass" to be thinned/shortened prior to being useful.....:redface:....well, that just can't be considered "chambered for other ammo"....


Sorry, I just get a little tired of "techs" trying to say that firearms chambered for .320 "are really .32 ACP"....f:P:.....it just simply ain't true !
 
cyclone said:
Quality info...:)...thanks !...:cool:


BTW and as a general message to interested parties :yingyang: , any firearm that requires the rims of "conventional brass" to be thinned/shortened prior to being useful.....:redface:....well, that just can't be considered "chambered for other ammo"....


Sorry, I just get a little tired of "techs" trying to say that firearms chambered for .320 "are really .32 ACP"....f:P:.....it just simply ain't true !
Click to expand...

even if it was in .32 acp and pre 1898 its antique
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom