T97 News.. not good.

Status
Not open for further replies.
My main concern is that even if the T-97 makes it through this round of scrutiny as a non-restricted, it will probably be in danger of being seized on some other "because we feel like it" BS.

Not trying to speculate ,I'm just trying to find where to best spend my money on a semi i'll actually be able to keep and / or shoot for years to come, although they may all be in danger it seems.
 
forestguy said:
My main concern is that even if the T-97 makes it through this round of scrutiny as a non-restricted, it will probably be in danger of being seized on some other "because we feel like it" BS.

Not trying to speculate ,I'm just trying to find where to best spend my money on a semi i'll actually be able to keep and / or shoot for years to come, although they may all be in danger it seems.
Click to expand...

This is exactly why we must voice our concerns now. "because we feel like it" bullsh!t should never be an option for them. Don't go looking for another semi, fight for the one you're entitled to.
 
Leg said:
There was a rather lengthy thread when Marstar first started bringing in the VZ 58's where someone basically accused him of selling prohibs disguised as semi's.

IIRC John set the record straight and said that if it never contained FA parts than it's not a prohib.

Case in point would be the Colt RO634. The receiver is milled and drilled to accept an autosear but it left the Colt factory as a semi-automatic (it wasn't marke auto either). Their are a few of these registered in Canada and they are treated no different than any other semi AR15, yet in the US where the rifle originated, it is considered a "machine gun" by the BATF because it can accept the autosear. Two different countries with two very different sets of rules.

I wouldn't be surprised if someone was confusing the two, it wouldn't be the first time that someone tried to pass of American requirements as our own.
Click to expand...

You are correct if however the RCMP have changed thier test and requirement protocols this is going to get ugly real quick as it puts in jeopardy many firearms of reclassifaction
 
But can they just change their testing protocols? If so, it doesn't matter what laws we have, they can always change their tests to fit whatever they're trying to enforce.
 
Throttle_monkey1 said:
But can they just change their testing protocols? If so, it doesn't matter what laws we have, they can always change their tests to fit whatever they're trying to enforce.
Click to expand...

I can only surmise that the RCMP who are now the gatekeepers of the CFC do not want to lose control over the Long gun registry.That these recent events have the ear mark of an attempt by the RCMP to clean up and hide there incompetence in previous testing and requirement protocols . Although as hard as they try they keep kicking over another can of worms of incompetence and bungling

All one has to do is look at the Walther G22 ,The rifle is OK but the stock is prohibited :eek: which the G22 owners are still in possession of does that make any sense. I mean really how can one really shoot the rifle when it's hay wired together really now is that safe ?.Did any one from the RCMP Firearms Lab actually inspect a sample of the rifle or was it done over the Phone :rolleyes: as I suspect it was and only afterwards was a sample sent to the RCMP Lab.
It is the same thing that has happened to Lever Arms and there T 97's great you can import them but wait there are more that have entered Canada these need to be inspected we need a sample to test
The only real litmus test will be held in a court of law which is rather expensive possibly this may be the only way to expose the testing protocols and the RCMP's own policy towards firearms imports and the business that run them
 
Excuse my ignorance, if and when they get rid of the long gun registry along with it goes the list of all the non restricted guns that were previously registered?
Going forward, with no long gun registry when you purchase a non restricted firearm you still need a PAL but do you still need to register it?
 
Nope, but both the buyer and the seller have to call in to their provincial CFOs to see if both the partie's PAL are valid for that specific firearm .... Which in essence means that C301 is all smoke and mirrors and in reality does NOT make the registry go away in anything but name ....

Mr.4x4 said:
Excuse my ignorance, if and when they get rid of the long gun registry along with it goes the list of all the non restricted guns that were previously registered?
Going forward, with no long gun registry when you purchase a non restricted firearm you still need a PAL but do you still need to register it?
Click to expand...
 
recieved a reply from MR VAN LOANs office regarding my email an aide said "MR VAN LOAN WILL REPLY TO YOU VIA CANADA POST" so I stopped by his Holland Landing office to inquire if I could expect this reply early next week and to make sure that my mailing address is absolutley correct The place is a hornets nest of activity . They are swamped so lets keep calling writitng and emailing and then follow up with more calling and writing to make sure they recived our previous inquirys ROB
 
Next week the bill will be past 2nd reading and beyond anyone's input .... Call me a pessimist but I smell stalling tactics, again.

Rob 22 said:
recieved a reply from MR VAN LOANs office regarding my email an aide said "MR VAN LOAN WILL REPLY TO YOU VIA CANADA POST" so I stopped by his Holland Landing office to inquire if I could expect this reply early next week and to make sure that my mailing address is absolutley correct The place is a hornets nest of activity . They are swamped so lets keep calling writitng and emailing and then follow up with more calling and writing to make sure they recived our previous inquirys ROB
Click to expand...
 
First restricted, then prohib, then under review and then back again.

What's going on?

If someone in the Bureaucracy is playing a joke, then I would like to be the first to let them know that it isn't funny.
 
Last edited:
SCDL said:
That doesn't work on bullpups, unfortunately. Reversible, bottom ejection or forward ejection only...
Click to expand...

I disagree. As a southpaw I wouldn't buy one if I wasn't that sure. It might not even be needed if you are careful.

NEMO97.jpg
 
Hey sorry to ask a dumb question what is the Norinco Type-97 a knock off of originally? EVERY Norinco is a knock-off.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom