Type 97 Classification Issues - PART TWO

Please do not speculate on what we have or have not done in the courts. It just causes confusion on the board. Paul, if you wish to discuss, please give me a call.
Click to expand...

I'm not speculating on what you ARE or ARE NOT doing. I'm merely pointing out what you CAN do. You are, of course, at liberty to choose to do or not do, whatever you like.

You CAN file to compel them to make a decision one way or the other. Whether or not you choose to do so, or have already done so, does not change my point. I am merely pointing out an option.

Further to this point, I'd offer my services as a legal researcher pro-bono *IF* you choose to take any legal actions open to you on this issue. (You would need an actual lawyer, but I can do some of the research).

As for Hasselwander, it establishes that a firearm is prohibited if:

a) It can be converted relatively quickly to full automatic fire
b) with relative ease

The decision in Hasselwander rested on two factors:
1) The parts were widely available
2) The adaptation was 'an easy exercise'.

In R. v. Sinclair, the Alberta Court of the Queen's bench involved whether 4 firearms which had been deactivated fit the conditions expressed in Hasselwander.

The first, a Smith and Wesson pistol, had been deactivated by having the slide welded to the frame. The RCMP testified the weld would take 11 to 15 minutes to remove, and then once a new barrel and slide were obtained (which they did from their store of parts), it would fire. The RCMP also testified that the slide and barrel which had been welded could have been repaired, and this would take some skill but he expected he could do it in 1-3 hours, though he wasn't quite sure.

The Court therefore held:

"As Mr. Mitchell took only 10 or 11 minutes to activate the Smith and Wesson it has been suggested that this repair was "quick and easy". I conclude however, that it was quick only because he had access to the RCMP's gun collection which allowed him to obtain a replacement slide and barrel in circumstances much more quickly and easily than someone who was not a firearms expert in the employ of the RCMP. For these reasons I have concluded that the Smith and Wesson pistol, the transfer of which gave rise to count one in the Indictment was not capable of conversion into an operating weapon with relative ease, in a relatively short period of time."

On all three other firearms which had been deactivated, the Court found the same way, and he was acquitted on all four counts.

All of the cases in which charges have been upheld involved relatively simple and quick re-activations: R. v. Hasselwander (3 ways to accomplish full auto, 10 minutes for any of them) R. v. Barnes (10 minutes), R. v. Cairns (15-20 minutes), R. v. Global Armaments ("a matter of minutes"). Any charges involving parts which were difficult to obtain or took longer than a few minutes (ie. took hours), were not upheld.

It should also be noted that most of these cases involved attempted or actual deactivations, and not factory built semi-automatic firearms, on the basis that firearms which were designed to be fully automatic, but were converted to fire only semi-automatic are prohibited by specific orders in council, making the case of the VZ's and T-97's somewhat unique.

The RCMP may contend that they are acting in line with their interpretation of Hasselwander, but they should be forced by an action in court to demonstrate that the firearms are convertable with relative ease, and with relative speed. Otherwise, they are using the SCC precedent improperly.
 
I would guess that they are (if they are not) no longer reviewing the old shipments to get themselves out of a pickle for allowing them in the first place. They will then only prohib the current ones as no one yet owns them.
They are simply trying to get out of a corner.
 
GIXXER said:
I would guess that they are (if they are not) no longer reviewing the old shipments to get themselves out of a pickle for allowing them in the first place. They will then only prohib the current ones as no one yet owns them.
They are simply trying to get out of a corner.
Click to expand...

If they only prohibit the new shipment would that allow people to transfer the restricted versions? Would that also open the door for the rifles sitting in inventory at Leaver’s to be sold? :runaway:. . . Just a thought! . . . I want a T97 Shorty! . . . One can only dream at this point!
 
Last edited:
I think another flaw in the "easily converted" argument lies not in the actual time it takes to perform the mechanical transformation from semi to F/A, but in the hours of research, tinkering, trial and error required before the sleeves are rolled up, and the tools are on the bench.

I believe, without a doubt, that if you took your everyday average "firearms enthusiast", and stuffed them at one of the inspection technicians work stations - tools galore, they couldn't "easily" perform a conversion... Add up all the man / woman / person hours involved in research and practice, and there isn't quick way to do it... Just my 2c.
 
stormtrooper1015 said:
i think another flaw in the "easily converted" argument lies not in the actual time it takes to perform the mechanical transformation from semi to f/a, but in the hours of research, tinkering, trial and error required before the sleeves are rolled up, and the tools are on the bench.

I believe, without a doubt, that if you took your everyday average "firearms enthusiast", and stuffed them at one of the inspection technicians work stations - tools galore, they couldn't "easily" perform a conversion... Add up all the man / woman / person hours involved in research and practice, and there isn't quick way to do it... Just my 2c.
Click to expand...
x2..
 
LOL that is what happened now there are no t97a's to sell they are all scrap metal but they got it right on the last one.

just a joke I would really like mine as i have wanted a 223 to go gopher shooting but never felt comfortable with the mini14 just does not feel right to me
 
cereal killer said:
Just goes to show... conservatives being just as useless as liberals. Granted, not as aggressive, but just as useless :mad: And I don't buy the whole minority thing...
Click to expand...

From what I hear the CPC and some Liberal/NDP MPs are quite pissed about what the RCMP has been doing and change is in the air.

Don't give up on our democratic republic yet. :D
 
suprathepeg said:
From what I hear the CPC and some Liberal/NDP MPs are quite pissed about what the RCMP has been doing and change is in the air.

Don't give up on our democratic republic yet. :D
Click to expand...

Suprathepeg, this would be good news! I hope someone (the powers that be) are kicking some RCMP a$$ all around the room on this one!

Cheers
Jay
 
I think that that since a government agency has started the tribunal procces it would be unwise for them to withdraw there application . It leaves them exposed to lawsuits and that would mean that someone's ass is hanging out there for it to be punted out of a job
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom