Tnw m2/m3hb eta

stencollector said:
It is a fair bit higher than 40. Seems to me that when I looked at the online FRT that the Ottawa sun posted, there were some 37 of the 30-06 M1919s still in stock at Marstar. Marstar also claimed some time ago that they imported 10 of the M2s, but I could only find 3 of them on the Ottawa sun site.

The RCMP have re-classified smaller batches of guns before, and it did not seem to bother them. The BD3008 and BD38s are examples. What I suspect is that the conservatives have put pressure on the RCMP over the re classifications, because it stirs up #### with the conservative support base (ie: us). But under a different government, or at another time, it will be the turn of the TNWs.
Click to expand...

Marstar only has full auto 1919's in stock. your confusing full auto with semi auto 1919's. The number of semi auto 1919's is tiny. The other semi auto 1919's manufactures that have FRT numbers approved for Canada are Valkyrie Arms, Ohio Rapid Fire and Northern Arms Imports.

Again your just fear mongering.


stencollector said:
Sure, we can leave it at that. That should buy us a couple years.
Click to expand...

And more fear mongering. Nothing's gonna happen. You hoping someone's just gonna bail on there 1919 for a song so you can buy it or something.
 
mildcustom2 said:
It's a stupid BS law that they use to justify there position. You take a full auto 1919 or M2HB and remove the right side plate and install a semi auto one, machine the bolt etc for semi auto and it would be no different than a approved semi auto version. Again its just BS crap laws of this a$$ backwards country.
Click to expand...

I completely agree.



Also to add, US Ordnance Inc. also have FRT#s for their semi-1919. One for 30-06 and one for 7.62 Nato. :)


mildcustom2 said:
Also as I stated the existing TNW 1919's were made from new old stock USGI surplus parts kits. This means they were never assembled into a complete firearm. Therefore they do not fall under converted auto, they are brand new manufactured firearms. The reason TNW has discontinued production of the 1919 is because they ran out of surplus NOS parts kits. It's on the firearms lab to prove they weren't made from new parts at this point as they already issued the FRT report and number.
Click to expand...

I highly doubt they were made from NOS parts kits, but that is just me. Everyone that owns a TNW 1919 should just sent it to me so I can inspect it for myself... HEHE
 
Last edited:
Beezer said:
I highly doubt they were made from NOS parts kits, but that is just me. HEHE
Click to expand...

NOS 1919 parts kits were extremely common until the past 5 years. The US military was auctioning of butt loads of them to clear out warehouse space. In fact if you knew what they cost back then it would make you sick. TNW bought up a huge auction lot to manufacture there 1919's.

How do you think the Israelis ended up with all there 1919's? They were sold surplus NOS parts kits to manufacture them from.

I still see the odd NOS parts kit for sale but they are very pricey now.
 
mildcustom2 said:
Marstar only has full auto 1919's in stock. your confusing full auto with semi auto 1919's. The number of semi auto 1919's is tiny. The other semi auto 1919's manufactures that have FRT numbers approved for Canada are Valkyrie Arms, Ohio Rapid Fire and Northern Arms Imports.

Again your just fear mongering.

And more fear mongering. Nothing's gonna happen. You hoping someone's just gonna bail on there 1919 for a song so you can buy it or something.
Click to expand...
First of all, the online registry data that the Ottawa Sun posted was not live, but rather data captured thru freedom of information requests around 2006 or so. I just checked the site, and am not able to bring up any data from it, so you will have to take my word for it, or not....your choice. I do know the difference between full auto, converted auto, and TNW commercial version when I pick categories though.

Already have mine, thanks. Had it for almost 8 years now. Kind of want to keep it that way. We have all seen this crap with the RCMP enough times over the last few years. It does not usually turn out in our favor.

All that said, I have no beef with you, so lets cut this now and see what happens. I am still anxious to get my m2/m3 hybrid some day. Hopefully North Sylva can make this work out.
 
Well I guess we have gone abit off topic, as far as the original poster's question is concerned and that may be my fault for bringing up the issue in his thread, instead of starting a new one under the "Legalease" section. Especially since the issue does not have to deal with North Sylva directly. For that I applogize to gutinater for highjacking his thread, when all he really wanted to know is the status of the TNW M2 he put a deposit on. So let's just get back to the original topic and hopefully the other stuff will sort itself out in time. :)
 
Macdefinc said:
I have ran into a gentleman who is building three M2/m3hb semi autos. He has brand new parts and it will be built under the non restricted frt. would there still be guys interested?
Click to expand...

Always interested in new toys, but would need to know who, when, how much, you get the picture I'm Shure.
 
A manufacturer can't build a gun using another manufactures FRT for classification.

New manufacturer, new FRT entry. Always how it works. The RCMP would want to examine the rifle to make sure it abides by the Firearm Act classifications, before the licenced manufacturer could obtain an FRT entry.
 
stencollector said:
If it had a TNW serialised sideplate, would it not be a TNW? After all, that is what North Sylva was trying to do.
Click to expand...

If it was a TNW serialized side plate, and had the other walls all made from new, then yes. Unless the TNW sideplate had been obtained from a converted auto build of theirs, then it would be from a converted auto receiver, and make the other 4 walls added to it part of a converted auto build.

Fun laws eh???
 
Unfortunately the debate would be in court and would be surrounding the difference of opinion held by the rcmp and the accused.

The rcmp lab have secured "expert opinion status" with the courts. How do you think that would go?

Can you convert the receiver of a converted auto gun to a legal non restricted of restricted receiver? No. So if a tnw gun is deemed prohibited as a converted auto, would taking one of the walls from that receiver then be usable in building a non restricted or restricted gun? Nope.

Once a prohibited CA or FA receiver, always one.

There are two frt entries for tnw guns. One as nr. The other as prohibited.

If you sourced a newly made tnw side plate, or sourced one from a gun that was deemed NR and then used that plate to build a receiver with 4 other new sides, you'd be fine.

If the tnw side plate came from a prohibited CA gun, it would still be prohibited as a CA receiver wall. The serial number is on that plate. If it was registered as prohib, it would never change.

Of course if one never knew the origin of the side plate, one would never be able to say either way for sure. And doubt always goes in favor of the accused.
 
stencollector said:
I think that would be debatable. The RCMP knew full well that the early imports recycled the parts.....read an older FRT description where it states the receiver uses surplus parts. It was the sudden prospect of both both Sylva's guns coming onto the market along with those from Alberta Tactical that had them re-think their previous ruling and play like they never knew. Even their current description of a TNW is somewhat convoluted. Apparently all 5 sides of the box make the receiver, but the right side plate is the registered part. What of the rivets? What of the feed guides? How far does the stupidity go?

At present, the FRT entry and classification is over a year old, so under the previous safety minister's rule, the RCMP can't change it. So, at present, any sideplate off a TNW build (with the possible exception of one that used a Cdn Arsenals LongBranch top plate) is a sideplate off a non-restricted gun. That will fall onto the advisory/classification committee or the new government to decide.
Click to expand...

Your statement is not correct.

The original TNW 1919's were made from unassembled new old stock parts kits therefore were never a complete firearm and could not be considered converted auto. They purchased a huge surplus lot of these unassembled parts kits. When they were all gone they started using demilled Israeli parts kits like just about everyone else. Due to the guns assembled from demilled parts kits they considered them converted auto.

This same logic applies to the M2HB's. If it was made from a NOS unassembled Kit it's ok and if it was made from a demilled Israeli kit which has markings on the parts to prove it then it's a converted auto.

Now what none of you are probably aware of is that the U.S. state department is working in conjunction with the RCMP and will not issue permits for any 1919 or M2HB to leave the U.S. Unless it can be proven 100% that the receiver is made entirely of new parts. This is why our favourite gun runner can't get them into Canada anymore and have a couple sitting down in the U.S.

So aside from someone getting their hands on drawings and building from scratch in Canada the RCMP have figured out a way to get rid of some that are in Canada already and stop the flow of them into the country.

Welcome to the RCMP political agenda.
 
mildcustom2 said:
Your statement is not correct.

The original TNW 1919's were made from unassembled new old stock parts kits therefore were never a complete firearm and could not be considered converted auto. They purchased a huge surplus lot of these unassembled parts kits. When they were all gone they started using demilled Israeli parts kits like just about everyone else. Due to the guns assembled from demilled parts kits they considered them converted auto.

This same logic applies to the M2HB's. If it was made from a NOS unassembled Kit it's ok and if it was made from a demilled Israeli kit which has markings on the parts to prove it then it's a converted auto.

Now what none of you are probably aware of is that the U.S. state department is working in conjunction with the RCMP and will not issue permits for any 1919 or M2HB to leave the U.S. Unless it can be proven 100% that the receiver is made entirely of new parts. This is why our favourite gun runner can't get them into Canada anymore and have a couple sitting down in the U.S.

So aside from someone getting their hands on drawings and building from scratch in Canada the RCMP have figured out a way to get rid of some that are in Canada already and stop the flow of them into the country.

Welcome to the RCMP political agenda.
Click to expand...


The cz858 receivers that were deemed prohibited after the fact by the lab were never assembled into complete guns. The were never actually built into full auto firing guns. However they were modified before their first assembly into semi autos. Some would say that means they were complete initially as semi auto guns.

The rcmp does not follow this line of thinking. They believe the dividing line is during manufacture of the receiver, and what the receiver was originally intended to be. In the rcmp mind those cz858 receiver were conceived to be full auto, so that made them full auto from the first pour of the metal into the mold. Thus, the modification was a conversion of a full auto receiver, even though the receiver was never made into a complete and functional full auto gun.
 
fenceline said:
The cz858 receivers that were deemed prohibited after the fact by the lab were never assembled into complete guns. The were never actually built into full auto firing guns. However they were modified before their first assembly into semi autos. Some would say that means they were complete initially as semi auto guns.

The rcmp does not follow this line of thinking. They believe the dividing line is during manufacture of the receiver, and what the receiver was originally intended to be. In the rcmp mind those cz858 receiver were conceived to be full auto, so that made them full auto from the first pour of the metal into the mold. Thus, the modification was a conversion of a full auto receiver, even though the receiver was never made into a complete and functional full auto gun.
Click to expand...

My statement is about the reality of what will turn out to be a process of eliminating all the guns in civilian ownership. It's only a matter of time before they are all reclassified. They are just whittling it down bit by bit.

However given that the left side plate, trunion and top and bottom plate for a semi auto gun is no different in shape or design than a full auto gun this kogic you are using would not apply. I am unfamiliar with the CZ design however if it stamped steel receiver was of one or two pieces and was full auto then modified during production it explains the logic for reclassification as you have described.

I think it's all BS myself
 
mildcustom2 said:
My statement is about the reality of what will turn out to be a process of eliminating all the guns in civilian ownership. It's only a matter of time before they are all reclassified. They are just whittling it down bit by bit.
Click to expand...

My statement is about how a gun receiver doesn't need to have ever been assembled or fired full auto, for it to be considered a full auto receiver.

For them to be all reclassified, the law would need to change. I'm sure the liberals have ideas on how to do that.

Currently however, the RCMP do not, and never have, had that ability or power on their own outside of the interpretations of the firearms act, which is politician controlled.

The rcmp are the messenger, the firearms act is the message, politicians are the author.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom