Clobbersauras
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Waaay out west.
Any news from our overloards at the FRT lab on this guys?
MSAR STG-556 Any News?
- Thread starter Dragonblade
- Start date
We were informed today that the MSAR rifles (both the STG and the MCS) have been classified as "Prohibited" and ruled to be "Variants" of the AUG.
I checked the FRT and they are now officially in the system as "Prohibited"
Mark
Clobbersauras
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Waaay out west.
Holy sweet son of jebus that is friken lame.
Like I said earlier, it doesn't matter how the RCMP classifies it, the State Department would never allow it to be exported.
..and Canadians spend their money elsewhere. In some cases, we end up buying Chinese or European, which aren't exactly pro-American. Would it not be best to keep those funds in North America, supporting American jobs? It's their choice, though.
ya you would think, with the situation down in the states they would sell to gihad just to get the economy going...
you know what .. i bet they dont even know where canada is.... you give a map of canada to an american he still wont be able to find us.
you know what .. i bet they dont even know where canada is.... you give a map of canada to an american he still wont be able to find us.
- Location
- Calgary, Alberta
My personal view is that sooner or later someone is going to sue the US Govt. for violating WTO rules.
Think about it, Steyr cannot import the AUG into the US because of 18 USC 925(d)(3) - but they can legally make it in the US and sell it to people who live there. But then they cannot export them from the US because of State Dept. guidelines.
That is protectionism pure and simple. How on Earth would ATF and the State Dept. argue otherwise?
S&W already tried doing the same thing in Brazil, but they gave up because of the money it would have taken.
Think about it, Steyr cannot import the AUG into the US because of 18 USC 925(d)(3) - but they can legally make it in the US and sell it to people who live there. But then they cannot export them from the US because of State Dept. guidelines.
That is protectionism pure and simple. How on Earth would ATF and the State Dept. argue otherwise?
S&W already tried doing the same thing in Brazil, but they gave up because of the money it would have taken.
I have thought about the WTO (world trade org.) or GATT (general agreement on trade and tariff) angle for while now.
I am sort of surprised that no manufacturer has complained. I guess they all still think they have a chance to sell to the police or military and don't want to piss off the government.
You are absolutely correct about protectionism. When there are 20 or 30 companies punching out AR15 clones within the USA, but they will not allow Dlask in BC to sell into the US, what else could it be?
(stand by for the standard anti-Dlask comment......)
I am sort of surprised that no manufacturer has complained. I guess they all still think they have a chance to sell to the police or military and don't want to piss off the government.
You are absolutely correct about protectionism. When there are 20 or 30 companies punching out AR15 clones within the USA, but they will not allow Dlask in BC to sell into the US, what else could it be?
(stand by for the standard anti-Dlask comment......)
dangertree
Business Rep
- Location
- NL/ON/FL/PL
How do you know manufacturers don't complain?
They actually complain enough the the DOS didn't send reps to the SHOT show this year because they didn't want to hear any more about it.
Why are things the way they are?
http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/offdocs/itar/p121.htm
Read Category I.
Last edited:
Just A Thought...
To what the previous posters have said, the problem is not with the U.S. firearms industry but with the U.S. governement, to be sure. The firearms industry is just starting to come out of its slumber and waking up to these restrictions down here and realizing the long term impact they will have. To be sure, this is not about a dislike of Canada or any other country, it's just another way for our government's lackeys to continue to justify their existence and export gun control at the same time. It is also an indirect way of squeezing the firearms industry in the U.S., something that the BATF has been trying to do hard for the last decade from all angles and now they have the State Dept. in on it at the behest of some extremely disparate interests and using the GWOT (global war on terror) and ITAR as the vehicles to do it.
Bear in mind that from 1989 onward the U.S. government started squeezing imports to the U.S. of anything deemed "non-sporting" and has tightened that up successively several times since then. Inadvertently this causes production of items that were in demand to be manufactured domestically where they could be legally. Now however those new manufacturers along with a lot of others are finding that any potential for foreign sales is all but non-existent because unless they are connected to the hilt the stuff they make is never leaving our borders. What do you think that does to their sales potential? What do you think that does to those considering jumping into the business when they realize that recouping the costs of tooling up by exporting some product is no longer viable? For example, you can't import things like AUGs or Kalashnikovs in their military form to name a few here. It has even gotten to the point where barrels for these guns are not being brought in. Market forces being what they are, eventually people step in to fill the void if there is enough money to be made. A big problem though is that our gun laws and the functional application of them, where there is room for interpretation by those doing the interpreting, continually make what is legal a proverbial moving target that becomes smaller and smaller with each pass because of more restrictions being imposed. So now you have manufacturer A, B and C that all tooled up to sell X, Y, and Z in the U.S., thinking they could also recoup some costs through export sales except with a few strokes of a pen the latter goes away because some people decide to change the rules. Aside from the impact it has on buyers abroad, what do you think that does to these companies here? How much more difficult do you think it makes it for them to recoup money invested in decent R&D? Do you think it might have the affect of discouraging people from getting into the business because they just won't be able to recover their costs with only being able to sell in just the U.S. market?
I'm sorry to hear all the problems that you guys are having up north due to our gov.org bull####. As always, at the end of the day it is the average shooter that is getting ####ed, in this case on both sides of the border. Most people just have not yet started to realize what is driving it and why. Unless something changes it is only likely to get worse, IMHO. I fully support and encourage everyone to spend their money with people who want it and will provide the product desired. Please understand that this is not about American companies not wanting to provide it but totally about bureaucrats exerting their will and advancing their agenda. Just some food for thought.
To what the previous posters have said, the problem is not with the U.S. firearms industry but with the U.S. governement, to be sure. The firearms industry is just starting to come out of its slumber and waking up to these restrictions down here and realizing the long term impact they will have. To be sure, this is not about a dislike of Canada or any other country, it's just another way for our government's lackeys to continue to justify their existence and export gun control at the same time. It is also an indirect way of squeezing the firearms industry in the U.S., something that the BATF has been trying to do hard for the last decade from all angles and now they have the State Dept. in on it at the behest of some extremely disparate interests and using the GWOT (global war on terror) and ITAR as the vehicles to do it.
Bear in mind that from 1989 onward the U.S. government started squeezing imports to the U.S. of anything deemed "non-sporting" and has tightened that up successively several times since then. Inadvertently this causes production of items that were in demand to be manufactured domestically where they could be legally. Now however those new manufacturers along with a lot of others are finding that any potential for foreign sales is all but non-existent because unless they are connected to the hilt the stuff they make is never leaving our borders. What do you think that does to their sales potential? What do you think that does to those considering jumping into the business when they realize that recouping the costs of tooling up by exporting some product is no longer viable? For example, you can't import things like AUGs or Kalashnikovs in their military form to name a few here. It has even gotten to the point where barrels for these guns are not being brought in. Market forces being what they are, eventually people step in to fill the void if there is enough money to be made. A big problem though is that our gun laws and the functional application of them, where there is room for interpretation by those doing the interpreting, continually make what is legal a proverbial moving target that becomes smaller and smaller with each pass because of more restrictions being imposed. So now you have manufacturer A, B and C that all tooled up to sell X, Y, and Z in the U.S., thinking they could also recoup some costs through export sales except with a few strokes of a pen the latter goes away because some people decide to change the rules. Aside from the impact it has on buyers abroad, what do you think that does to these companies here? How much more difficult do you think it makes it for them to recoup money invested in decent R&D? Do you think it might have the affect of discouraging people from getting into the business because they just won't be able to recover their costs with only being able to sell in just the U.S. market?
I'm sorry to hear all the problems that you guys are having up north due to our gov.org bull####. As always, at the end of the day it is the average shooter that is getting ####ed, in this case on both sides of the border. Most people just have not yet started to realize what is driving it and why. Unless something changes it is only likely to get worse, IMHO. I fully support and encourage everyone to spend their money with people who want it and will provide the product desired. Please understand that this is not about American companies not wanting to provide it but totally about bureaucrats exerting their will and advancing their agenda. Just some food for thought.
dangertree
Business Rep
- Location
- NL/ON/FL/PL
^Excellent post. 100% On.
To boot, the gov has dramatically ratcheted up the costs and expanded the regulatory requirements for US companies to be legally able to export at all.
Dept of Commerce mission is "to foster, promote, and develop the foreign and domestic commerce"
Dept of State mission is to "Create a more secure, democratic, and prosperous world for the benefit of the American people and the international community.".
Guess which one regulates rifle exports.
This could be written for export regulations as well. Add to it that these interpretations are often only definable through rejected or returned without action export applications, and even then previous interpretations are subject to change without notice.
To boot, the gov has dramatically ratcheted up the costs and expanded the regulatory requirements for US companies to be legally able to export at all.
Dept of Commerce mission is "to foster, promote, and develop the foreign and domestic commerce"
Dept of State mission is to "Create a more secure, democratic, and prosperous world for the benefit of the American people and the international community.".
Guess which one regulates rifle exports.
- Location
- Calgary, Alberta
Actually it was 1969, when they introduced the ban on imports of "non-sporting" handguns. Plus they banned the import of semi-auto rifles that had bayonet lugs or "grenade launchers". Bush just expanded that ban in 1989.
The problem is that US manufacturers actually quite like that law because it protects them (also because it banned the import of military surplus guns). Sam Cummings went ape#### because it stopped him from importing the Walther PPK and military surplus into the US, hence the PPK/S.
The NRA got the ban on military surplus long guns overturned in 1986, but the "non-sporting" ban is still there.
The ban on barrel imports also dates from 1969, originally it was designed to stop imports of barrels for "saturday night specials". I always wondered why ATF never banned the import of barrels for the military stuff banned from import, but eventually they woke up to it.
Exports of AR-15s and the like for civilian use is microscopic if you look at the State Dept. figures, even before they started cracking down on it, it's like a few hundred a year, sales to police units let alone foreign militaries dwarfs those figures.
Nobody in the US really gives a damn when the numbers are that small, the only way around it is to sue.
The problem is that US manufacturers actually quite like that law because it protects them (also because it banned the import of military surplus guns). Sam Cummings went ape#### because it stopped him from importing the Walther PPK and military surplus into the US, hence the PPK/S.
The NRA got the ban on military surplus long guns overturned in 1986, but the "non-sporting" ban is still there.
The ban on barrel imports also dates from 1969, originally it was designed to stop imports of barrels for "saturday night specials". I always wondered why ATF never banned the import of barrels for the military stuff banned from import, but eventually they woke up to it.
Exports of AR-15s and the like for civilian use is microscopic if you look at the State Dept. figures, even before they started cracking down on it, it's like a few hundred a year, sales to police units let alone foreign militaries dwarfs those figures.
Nobody in the US really gives a damn when the numbers are that small, the only way around it is to sue.
