Is there a "Section 74 hearing for dummies" anywhere on CGN?
Swiss Arms rifles being examined for reclassification?
- Thread starter prairieguy
- Start date
- Status
Here's a page on how to either mail, email, phone or fax the prime minister..
http://canadaonline.about.com/od/conservativeparty/a/writeconsleader.htm
http://canadaonline.about.com/od/conservativeparty/a/writeconsleader.htm
No, the RCMP are doing what they are doing entirely within the letter of the law, as it is written. As supported in some cases by case law precedents. As unfortunate as their rulings are, they are in compliance with the law and court decisions.
The letter of the law allows 10 round magazines in some semi auto centerfire rifles.
The solution is political/legislative.
This is why contacting legislators is so important.
- Location
- West Quebec
Good explaination..thanks for posting
Great letter lawn gnome! I think you meant to use the word "moot" and not "mute"? It definitely has an edge to it but I think people are justified in being annoyed at these potential actions to come.
Is there any preparations for legal challenges, class actions, etc. for when (not if) this thing goes sour on us? I haven't heard anything from the CSSA, NFA or anyone else on this. I'd gladly initiate membership and donate towards legal funding if I thought it would make a difference.
The facts seem to be that the RCMP failed in their due diligence, were remiss in their responsibility initially in not inspecting the firearms, now after 12 some-odd years of bad information, being hoodwinked by the original distributor and ex-SAN ownership themselves apparently, and years of poor or no oversight want to all of a sudden criminalize our as of yet legally-owned property on a name-on-paper technicality? This situation would be utterly comical if not for the real life ramifications and consequences for law-abiding sportsmen.
As I've said I understand the RCMP are simply acting on the written law in this case and any blame cannot be necessarily leveled at them for what's transpiring but that's the problem. There is a daisy chain of nonsense that is governing a population of highly responsible and law-abiding people that ultimately get victimized for following "law" and "regulation". It's all such nonsense it takes too much energy being wound about it.
Is there any preparations for legal challenges, class actions, etc. for when (not if) this thing goes sour on us? I haven't heard anything from the CSSA, NFA or anyone else on this. I'd gladly initiate membership and donate towards legal funding if I thought it would make a difference.
The facts seem to be that the RCMP failed in their due diligence, were remiss in their responsibility initially in not inspecting the firearms, now after 12 some-odd years of bad information, being hoodwinked by the original distributor and ex-SAN ownership themselves apparently, and years of poor or no oversight want to all of a sudden criminalize our as of yet legally-owned property on a name-on-paper technicality? This situation would be utterly comical if not for the real life ramifications and consequences for law-abiding sportsmen.
As I've said I understand the RCMP are simply acting on the written law in this case and any blame cannot be necessarily leveled at them for what's transpiring but that's the problem. There is a daisy chain of nonsense that is governing a population of highly responsible and law-abiding people that ultimately get victimized for following "law" and "regulation". It's all such nonsense it takes too much energy being wound about it.
Last edited:
I sure as #### would like to hear from the CSSA and NFA on this. I would like to see a plan formulated for a class action by Soloman to reign in this bull####.
I would like to see the Conservatives actually do something for once other than muzzle their back benchers and let their own Senators act like douche nozzles.
They seem fine with giving the Left more ammo with ethics scandals but are wary to help out their base when it comes to firearms.
They are no friends of ours. All these confiscations are coming under a Conservative Government. We don't need the Liberals or NDP to take our guns, the COnservatives are doing just fine by maintaining the status quo.
I would like to see the Conservatives actually do something for once other than muzzle their back benchers and let their own Senators act like douche nozzles.
They seem fine with giving the Left more ammo with ethics scandals but are wary to help out their base when it comes to firearms.
They are no friends of ours. All these confiscations are coming under a Conservative Government. We don't need the Liberals or NDP to take our guns, the COnservatives are doing just fine by maintaining the status quo.
If you notice the RCMP letter on the BD-38, if you think the Tech guys are trying to bone Canadian Gun Owners your wrong. Most of those guys are gun guys, you don't work with guns your entire life if its not interesting to you.
Yes some parts of the RCMP are not friends to the law abiding Canadian Gun owner, but you will see the issue started with the importation of effectively a Machine Gun.
Yes some parts of the RCMP are not friends to the law abiding Canadian Gun owner, but you will see the issue started with the importation of effectively a Machine Gun.
IMO, it's terms like "variant", where undefined, can be higly subjective/ambiguous and pose a danger to us all. IIRC, an OCA judge said that the Firearms Act was dangerous and convoluted - and this is a prime example of why. That said, it's seems clear that the CDN versions of SAN's rifles were derived from the SIG 540, but are not, IMO, a variant. A variant to either would have subtle differences like furniture, colour, model name, but share all the same components & functionality - ie a variant of either would have to have select fire. If I were soliciting bids for LE or Mil, I'd be pretty pissed if SAN attempted to pass off some semi-only version as a variant of a SIG 550. It follows logically that variant cover functionality and not cosmetic similarities because of the test for converted auto. It demonstrates that "variant" is limited to functionality.
http://nfa.ca/news/rcmp-reclassification-ssd-model-bd38-carbine
Oh wait, it's not regarding the Swiss Arms rifle...disregard.
So teh RCMP actually recommended something to HELP us and the Conservatives ignored it?
Wow.
#### them.
Wow.
#### them.
What are possible legislation changes could be made rapidly to fix this problem that will create the least negative press for the government?
Exempt the classic green like the valmets?
Change the legislation so 12.5 licenses can be issued again? This one would not have any negative blow back with the press. I think.
Exempt the classic green like the valmets?
Change the legislation so 12.5 licenses can be issued again? This one would not have any negative blow back with the press. I think.
Just because someone works with firearms because they're interested in them, doesn't mean their intelligent about the subject... Just saying.
TDC
Ar180shooter
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Ottawa, ON
If they are determined to be 550 variants, this is likely the most reasonable solution for both parties (us and the government). It keeps our guns legal and in our hands, the RCMP won't have to pay out millions in compensation, and the government can save face (as these guns have been legal for years, so they're really just maintaining the status quo, albeit through a series of muck-ups). The best solution would be to simply remove the 550 from the prohibited list, but I find that unlikely.
Ar180shooter
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Ottawa, ON
blaxsun
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
The law is fairly clear on converted autos, and we can't exactly fault them for doing their job when we literally dump examples in their lap and say "Here, deal with this." In fact, one could argue that importing firearms that obviously deviated from the specifications provided to the RCMP upon where the FRT was approved (T97, BD38, Swiss Arms) led to this mess in the first place.
The SAN has always been a grey area, and the prevailing opinion has always been to let sleeping dogs lie. The question begs to be asked why someone thought it would be a good idea to stir the hornet's nest. There is only one party responsible for this fiasco, and there was nothing honorable with the way they went about it.
You're kidding, right? The RCMP is sitting on two examples of previously imported "semi-auto" SANs that have been identified as being CA. So how pray tell did these end up in the country? They didn't swim and migrate across the Atlantic on their own...
If I understand whats going on from reading all 678 posts, as much as I hate to say it in this case and not applying to any of the other reclassification's of other firearms in the past I don't think the RCMP are going back on their decision from 12 years ago, they are not making new laws on their own, and they are not trying to take away our legally owned rifles. They think they are correcting an error they made because think they were fed inaccurate information about the rifles lineage in the first place 12 years ago due to the fact that TSE supplied them with 2 C/A "control" rifles claiming they were the standard issue rifles being imported into Canada. Now all rifles are under scrutiny. I would like to know where TSE got these other 2 rifles from and why they were submitted rather than 2 freshly imported rifles that were know to be the proper variant for Canadian import. This almost seems like an intentional undermining of the entire Swiss Arms line in Canada by TSE. I can't for the life of me imagine why they would do that or where they managed to dig up the rifles in question but something isn't adding up.
And I say again. WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO BE GRANDFATHERED INTO SOME STUPID 12.WHATEVER CLASS? I like shooting my rifles. I don't want to own something I can't take out and enjoy. The only reason I spent over $3000 on this rifle was the non restricted designation. Even if they made it restricted I would sell it. I love the rifle but if I can only play with it at the range I'll just take one of my AR's.
I to would also like to hear something from NFA or CSSA. I can only guess that they are preparing their case and can't be bothered to waste time getting caught up in our finger pointing and tinfoil hat conspiracy theory speculation.
And welcome back Blaxsun, I'm loving that 300BLK upper I got from you and just found a matching lower for it
And I say again. WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO BE GRANDFATHERED INTO SOME STUPID 12.WHATEVER CLASS? I like shooting my rifles. I don't want to own something I can't take out and enjoy. The only reason I spent over $3000 on this rifle was the non restricted designation. Even if they made it restricted I would sell it. I love the rifle but if I can only play with it at the range I'll just take one of my AR's.
I to would also like to hear something from NFA or CSSA. I can only guess that they are preparing their case and can't be bothered to waste time getting caught up in our finger pointing and tinfoil hat conspiracy theory speculation.
And welcome back Blaxsun, I'm loving that 300BLK upper I got from you and just found a matching lower for it
Last edited:
- Status
