Reactivation?

[iain.quayle]

Hi all, this is a theoretical thread as I have neither the means nor time (currently) to take on something of the follow. This may be seen as more of a legal thread and can be moved as such, but I though it related to milsurps the most.

Ignoring all problems and hardships with the actual mechanical reactivation of a firearm, is there any legal problems with doing so? Now reactivating say and old bolt gun I am sure poses no legal hurdles, but say you got a maxim, were able to take it apart, and then rework the insides enough that it may be seen as "very difficult to convert to full auto", would it still be automatically classified as a 12.x?
Now if it had been an operable 12.x maxim before the switch it would be considered a converted auto, but since it was a legal deactivation and by the word of the law (correct if wrong) no longer a firearm, is it now considered a newly manufactured firearm?

In the US they get all the fancy parts kits they could every want but it seems all you ever see here are dewats.

I understand that most dewats would be near impossible to every get running again with out severe and extensive damage to them, if you could ever get them running at all.

Thanks for any replies.

 

[Dyspnea]

Basically its monopoly rules, do not pass go, do not collect $200, go directly to jail.

Illegal to reactivate, it would still remain a 12.x class even if you did. You would need a completely New manufactured receiver (semi auto) to avoid these problems.

 

[JP]

You would need to design and build a completly new receiver and trigger mechanism. Getting it approved is another story.

 

[lanshoka]

I've seen one BREN gun that was deactivated many years ago (1950's or 1960's) by completely cutting the frame in half with a torch. Although it was sloppily done it was still later reactivated and registered as a 12(2) full automatic before the January 1st, 1978 deadline.

Ernie Blake of London (long deceased) had it as part of his inventory back in the early 1990's until it sold.

There are a couple of well done YouTube videos that show a gunsmith in the USA take a welded up German MP-18 and restore it to full firing status. It's legal down there for most states as dewats must be registered but the owner still has to pay the BATF $200 tax after receiving approval.

 

[iain.quayle]

Thats a real shame, its no longer a firearms... but it is... cuz reasons.
Thanks for the responses.

 

[Milspectacles]

What would be the legality of using internal parts from said 12.2 or 12.3 firearm if inside of a new semi-only receiver like a TNW one? Could you use the bolt from an original MG34, M2HB, 1919, etc or other parts?

 

[tigrr]

Back in the late 90's I was asked to dewat 3 guns. You would not ever get them to fire today. A hole drilled and a rod welded through the action and another drilled and welded through the chamber and a rod welded down the barrel.
That is what was required to hang them on the fire place. They are a club not a gun today.
After they were reblued they didn't look to bad.

 

[iain.quayle]

Back in the late 90's I was asked to dewat 3 guns. You would not ever get them to fire today. A hole drilled and a rod welded through the action and another drilled and welded through the chamber and a rod welded down the barrel.
That is what was required to hang them on the fire place. They are a club not a gun today.
After they were reblued they didn't look to bad.

Ya, real shame how much you have to butcher them, especially now. I've heard of some old dewats where they just essential blocked the chamber and that was it, whether that is the full story was unlikely but hopeful.

 

[ponymusic]

Back in the late 90's I was asked to dewat 3 guns. You would not ever get them to fire today. A hole drilled and a rod welded through the action and another drilled and welded through the chamber and a rod welded down the barrel.
That is what was required to hang them on the fire place. They are a club not a gun today.
After they were reblued they didn't look to bad.

Did you cry while committing those horrible atrocities?

 

[iain.quayle]

What would be the legality of using internal parts from said 12.2 or 12.3 firearm if inside of a new semi-only receiver like a TNW one? Could you use the bolt from an original MG34, M2HB, 1919, etc or other parts?

I thought generally the new receivers where designed to only take modified guts so dropping in the originals would take a lot of work, could be wrong though. The parts themselves are not regulated but a receiver that could take them would probably be 12.

 

[ShawnC6]

What would be the legality of using internal parts from said 12.2 or 12.3 firearm if inside of a new semi-only receiver like a TNW one? Could you use the bolt from an original MG34, M2HB, 1919, etc or other parts?

The only part considered the firearm is the receiver. All parts are unregulated. Except some unique circumstances like short pistol barrels, trigger cranks etc.

 

[tiriaq]

With respect to a Maxim... The receiver has to be new. The original cannot be remanufactured to functional condition.
The mechanism would have to be unquestionably semi auto only, and not convertible within the Hasselwander standard.
There is a US ATF approved semi auto mechanism for Maxim type guns. ATF doesn't approve superficial semi mechanisms, so there is a possibility that the US system would pass SFSS inspection, should the gun fall into their hands.
There is no legal requirement that a personal firearm be approved by SFSS. But something that looks like a Maxim gun is sure to attract attention, and should the thing be sent to them for evaluation, the SFSS is going to do its best to get it to fire a burst. An inspection could take years. If a determination is made that the thing is easily convertible (and there is no hard and fast definition of that), at the very least it will be confiscated; at worst there could be charges.
The title for this thread is "Reactivation?" You cannot reactivate.

 

[stencollector]

What would be the legality of using internal parts from said 12.2 or 12.3 firearm if inside of a new semi-only receiver like a TNW one? Could you use the bolt from an original MG34, M2HB, 1919, etc or other parts?

The new TNW right sideplate is made thicker internally so that you cannot install a regular M1919 or M2HB bolt. The bolts that they do supply have been machined to fit inside those new receivers, and also have the slot machined wider for the sear. The full auto trigger bar won't work with the semi auto sear, and vise versa.

 

[iain.quayle]

The title for this thread is "Reactivation?" You cannot reactivate.

Perhaps a little simplified, better stated as "Is a deactivated gun by Canadian standards legally seen as "not a firearm" and equivalent to a "destroyed firearm", thus deeming reactivation instead as "newly manufactured" and making a slim chance that with enough modification it is not automatically a 12.x?"

Which by the sounds of all the answers is a straight to jail card

 

[gaff]

You only get straight to Jail if the firearm is used in a criminal offence. everything else you get, do not pass go, 7 years of death by lawyer bills , and neighbours and relatives all thinking your a nut job.
oh , they will also search your house 2 or 3 times , to really piss of your wife so she hates your guts and wants a divorce .

 

[762mm]

You only get straight to Jail if the firearm is used in a criminal offence. everything else you get, do not pass go, 7 years of death by lawyer bills , and neighbours and relatives all thinking your a nut job.
oh , they will also search your house 2 or 3 times , to really piss of your wife so she hates your guts and wants a divorce .

Don't forget that "they" will also sell his children to a caravan of traveling gypsies for $1 and piss in his corn flakes every morning before he wakes up... true story brah, I read it on the internets!




To the OP: your question can only be answered by a lawyer who specializes in firearms law. From a legal standpoint, your reasoning is right: a block of steel deemed "not to be a firearm" should not be judged by what it formerly was, should one decide to make a new firearm out of said block of steel. Either the dewat block of steel is a firearm or it isn't - it can't be both at once!

The only person who could answer whether or not our screwed up Firearms Act will see it as such is someone who successfully defended his share of clients on (often bogus) firearms charges, not internet doom and gloom types who triple trigger-lock their Lee Enfields inside their gun safes from fear of "safe storage inspecting" black helicopters flying overhead...

As I've said before, there will never be an NRA-like organization in Canada, because their current socially-engineered membership is too afraid to even ask the right questions. You, on the other hand, did ask a good question though and for that I commend you! (even though lots of legwork still needs to be done to get the right answer)

 

[Mike Webb]

Ya, real shame how much you have to butcher them, especially now. I've heard of some old dewats where they just essential blocked the chamber and that was it, whether that is the full story was unlikely but hopeful.

It is a shame but compared to the alternative of having them put through a scrap shredder not so bad. Here in the Maritimes I have been told that firearms seized by the RCMP and ordered destroyed are taken once a year to an auto salvage outfit in Nova Scotia. I was told they fill an old car with firearms(some really nice long guns, old Winchesters etc.) and run it through the shredder. I don't know why the long guns and restricted firearms couldn't be sold at auction to legitimate owners in Canada? Perhaps it sits better with the leadership of the RCMP that a few more "evil" guns are out of the picture. Might even make sense economically.

 

[FIGMO]

Although I am not a lawyer, I recommend taking the following into consideration (challenges of "reactivating" a properly deactivated firearm notwithstanding):

- the receiver/frame of a firearm is defined as being the firearm under the Criminal Code of Canada, therefore any "reactivation" using that receiver/frame that causes the end result to meet the Criminal Code definition of a firearm...

firearm means a barrelled weapon from which any shot, bullet or other projectile can be discharged and that is capable of causing serious bodily injury or death to a person, and includes any frame or receiver of such a barrelled weapon and anything that can be adapted for use as a firearm; (arme à feu)

... causes that receiver/frame to be the firearm. If that receiver/frame was that of a prohibited firearm, reactivation means it is a prohibited firearm once again. In contrast, using a newly manufactured receiver/frame that was not previously a firearm may change things somewhat (so long as the replacement receiver/frame in question is neither full-automatic nor prohibited by design). Bear in mind that if the receiver/frame is that of a prohibited firearm that has been deactivated, even if it was grandfathered at one time, it cannot ever again be eligible for 'grandfathering' whether or not the owner has a PAL with the appropriate class, and is therefore off limits to all but a business firearms license holder with the required privileges. Example: an individual with 12:5 may own a grandfathered Kalashnikov, but even if they owned, then had deactivated, a particular Kalashnikov in their possession to hang on their wall, because it was deregistered upon deactivation that particular deactivated firearm has permanently lost its grandfathered status.

This is similar to the difference between buying a factory made short-barrelled shotgun versus modifying a previously long-barrelled shotgun into a short-barrelled shotgun: the end result may appear the same however could be regarded very differently under the Criminal Code ("OK' versus "jail" in extreme cases). Another example is the Czech Small Arms (CSA) VZ58 type firearms, which are non-restricted or restricted based on barrel length because they employ newly manufactured receiver/frames that were never selective fire or converted automatic firearms as defined by the Criminal Code, meet the 'R. vs. Hasselwander' criteria, and are not prohibited by design.

TL;DR: the most straightforward means of constructing (not 'manufacturing') a firearm you'd like that is not otherwise available commercially or via special order from a boutique manufacturer is by sourcing a new receiver/frame and a 'parts kit less receiver' through a licensed dealer. This approach has its own challenges especially when the subject is a full-automatic or selective fire design (the requirement to meet the R. vs. Hasselwander criteria, among others) however as others have pointed out, this is likely less troublesome than starting with a new receiver/frame and deactivated firearm because the latter is little more than a welded up 'mystery box' much of the contents of which are more than likely butchered beyond repair.

Hope this helps!

 

[iain.quayle]

Although I am not a lawyer, I recommend taking the following into consideration (challenges of "reactivating" a properly deactivated firearm notwithstanding):

- the receiver/frame of a firearm is defined as being the firearm under the Criminal Code of Canada, therefore any "reactivation" using that receiver/frame that causes the end result to meet the Criminal Code definition of a firearm...

firearm means a barrelled weapon from which any shot, bullet or other projectile can be discharged and that is capable of causing serious bodily injury or death to a person, and includes any frame or receiver of such a barrelled weapon and anything that can be adapted for use as a firearm; (arme à feu)

... causes that receiver/frame to be the firearm. If that receiver/frame was that of a prohibited firearm, reactivation means it is a prohibited firearm once again. In contrast, using a newly manufactured receiver/frame that was not previously a firearm may change things somewhat (so long as the replacement receiver/frame in question is neither full-automatic nor prohibited by design). Bear in mind that if the receiver/frame is that of a prohibited firearm that has been deactivated, even if it was grandfathered at one time, it cannot ever again be eligible for 'grandfathering' whether or not the owner has a PAL with the appropriate class, and is therefore off limits to all but a business firearms license holder with the required privileges. Example: an individual with 12:5 may own a grandfathered Kalashnikov, but even if they owned, then had deactivated, a particular Kalashnikov in their possession to hang on their wall, because it was deregistered upon deactivation that particular deactivated firearm has permanently lost its grandfathered status.

This is similar to the difference between buying a factory made short-barrelled shotgun versus modifying a previously long-barrelled shotgun into a short-barrelled shotgun: the end result may appear the same however could be regarded very differently under the Criminal Code ("OK' versus "jail" in extreme cases). Another example is the Czech Small Arms (CSA) VZ58 type firearms, which are non-restricted or restricted based on barrel length because they employ newly manufactured receiver/frames that were never selective fire or converted automatic firearms as defined by the Criminal Code, meet the 'R. vs. Hasselwander' criteria, and are not prohibited by design.

TL;DR: the most straightforward means of constructing (not 'manufacturing') a firearm you'd like that is not otherwise available commercially or via special order from a boutique manufacturer is by sourcing a new receiver/frame and a 'parts kit less receiver' through a licensed dealer. This approach has its own challenges especially when the subject is a full-automatic or selective fire design (the requirement to meet the R. vs. Hasselwander criteria, among others) however as others have pointed out, this is likely less troublesome than starting with a new receiver/frame and deactivated firearm because the latter is little more than a welded up 'mystery box' much of the contents of which are more than likely butchered beyond repair.

Hope this helps!

The thing is that it is a case of whether the government can suck and blow at the same time. Now'd I'd dare say that they can and would, but the idea revolves around whether deactivation is the same as destroyed.

The firearm part of a firearm is the receiver, and you absolutely must hold a licence to own one, doesn't matter if there are any guts in it or a barrel attached. However upon deactivation, you no longer need to hold a licence to own it, which should mean that it is no longer considered a receiver but instead a piece of inert metal. Its is the same idea as some of the people in the US who re-weld destroyed receivers and are then able to brand them newly manufactured, and can build them as new semi autos.

As we agree on though, life would suck after trying to do that. They really dilute the meaning of "capable" in that case.


@mike definitely agree on both points. It could even help balance the budget if they actually auctioned them off.
@762mm Exactly! ya NRA like org would not have an overly warm welcome in Canada

 

[sawmillcreek]

With respect to a Maxim... The receiver has to be new. The original cannot be remanufactured to functional condition.
The mechanism would have to be unquestionably semi auto only, and not convertible within the Hasselwander standard.
There is a US ATF approved semi auto mechanism for Maxim type guns. ATF doesn't approve superficial semi mechanisms, so there is a possibility that the US system would pass SFSS inspection, should the gun fall into their hands.
There is no legal requirement that a personal firearm be approved by SFSS. But something that looks like a Maxim gun is sure to attract attention, and should the thing be sent to them for evaluation, the SFSS is going to do its best to get it to fire a burst. An inspection could take years. If a determination is made that the thing is easily convertible (and there is no hard and fast definition of that), at the very least it will be confiscated; at worst there could be charges.
The title for this thread is "Reactivation?" You cannot reactivate.

the firearm lab only has 180 business days to render decisions on submitted firearms, ive always wondered where this rumour of 'itll be over a year before we ever see it again' come from