Importing Valmet?

As Valmet are non-restricted by name, Norinco can made some, call-it Valmet and sell the rifle here. I will buy one or 2. One in .308, another in .223 and maybe something in the middle like 7.62x39 or 243...If the rifle is in the same quality as the Norinco 1911, M-305 and the newly NQ 5.56 (M-4), it will be good.
 
P0WERWAGON said:
the MANUFACTURER is Valmet. if norinco made it, guess who the manufacturer would be?

nice try.
Click to expand...

BUT... If Norinco (or someone else) made a "copy" of the Valmet M78 and showed that it was in fact a copy (clone) then by the RCMP's own definition that copy would be a variant of the Valmet M78 and NOT a variant of the various AK47's out there.

Remember that things cut both ways... a variant of a named Prohibited can be deemed a Prohib and by the same reasoning a variant of a specifically named non-prohib like the Valmet would (in theory) be immune from being called a Prohibited AK "Variant".

But who's going to make a small quantity run just for Canada and just to get around our stupid laws? Norinco isn't going to make a few hundred of these just for Canada... and no-one else out there is going to want a Valmet clone that's built to comply with our laws.

Mark
 
The Valmet exemption does not include variants. They are, in themselves, exempted variants of the AK. So by extension a variant of the Valmet would be a non-exempted variant of the AK.
 
Last edited:
CanAm said:
The Valmet exemption does not include variants. They are, in themselves, exempted variants of the AK. So by extension a variant of the Valmet would be a non-exempted variant of the AK.
Click to expand...

Interesting... since the "Valmet" is the "Make" but the actual "Manufacturer" is listed (now) as SAKO since they acquired the VALMET name after the original release of the Hunter and the M78 (approximately 1987). The FRT recognizes the Valmet Hunter (manufactured by SAKO) as a non-restricted firearm.

Again, I would argue that a copy made by another manufacturer would be classified the same as the firearm which it is copied from... I don't think RCMP could get a court to accept an RCMP ruling that the "copy" was a variant when the original is not classified as such. But that's just my opinion and I don't think it much matters. I don't see anyone making a clone just for the small number of sales that might take place in Canada.

Beretta now owns the VALMET name having acquired SAKO back in the 1990's... all of this is outlined in the FRT.
 
olegs69 said:
Wild absurdity at its finest. The kicker is that the Velmet is pretty much like any other semiauto AK.
Click to expand...

Absolutely... the FRT clearly says it's a "variant" of the AK but...

- this model specifically exempt from the Prohibited Firearms Regulations under former Prohibited Weapons Order No 13.
Canada Gazette Part II, Vol 132, No 20,
SOR 98-462 dated 30/9/98.

So according to CFC it's the "model" that is specifically exempted... in theory the maker is not the issue or at the very least a good legal arguement could be made to that effect (in theory ;)).

The FRT goes on to state:

- Variant of the Kalashnikov rifle as manufactured in Finland.
- as it left the factory this model had a wooden sporting style butt-stock without a pistol-grip, wooden hand-guards and the front sight block and flash eliminator have been removed.
- Common in Northern communities where it was at one time supplied by the Federal Government.
 
Simple to test, just submit a clone of the valmet for FRT assignment.

Here is how it usually goes with the RCMP lab: No, it's a variant/too easy to convert to FA.

Since there no system of arbitration/resolution, other than the courts, it usually ends there.
 
Last edited:
Questar said:
Absolutely... the FRT clearly says it's a "variant" of the AK but...

- this model specifically exempt from the Prohibited Firearms Regulations under former Prohibited Weapons Order No 13.
Canada Gazette Part II, Vol 132, No 20,
SOR 98-462 dated 30/9/98.

So according to CFC it's the "model" that is specifically exempted... in theory the maker is not the issue or at the very least a good legal arguement could be made to that effect (in theory ;)).

The FRT goes on to state:

- Variant of the Kalashnikov rifle as manufactured in Finland.
- as it left the factory this model had a wooden sporting style butt-stock without a pistol-grip, wooden hand-guards and the front sight block and flash eliminator have been removed.
- Common in Northern communities where it was at one time supplied by the Federal Government.
Click to expand...

Holy crap! It actually does have some truth to it. I have heard this explanation for several years and always thought it was bogus.
How about that.
 
Come to think of it, why couldn't they give the FN's instead! Much better rifles the them Valmets...:( And that would have made them non-restricted. :D
 
Questar said:
The FRT goes on to state:

- Variant of the Kalashnikov rifle as manufactured in Finland.
- as it left the factory this model had a wooden sporting style butt-stock without a pistol-grip, wooden hand-guards and the front sight block and flash eliminator have been removed.
- Common in Northern communities where it was at one time supplied by the Federal Government.
Click to expand...

I wonder how many guns it takes before it becomes "common"?

Anybody knows how many Valmet Hunter were imported in Canada? Seems like the registry is only listing +/- 42
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom