Type 97 Classification Issues - PART TWO

Mr.4x4 said:
I think on the grounds of your shorty remaining restricted the RCMP are looking for a reason to make the non rest. T97 restricted.

Cant the ease of making somthing FA be grounds for it to be prohib?
Click to expand...

There is no legal mechanism for the RCMP to make a non-restricted into a restricted (other than OIC), so all they can do is make it prohib.

Armedsask said:
Since when was conversion to full-auto grounds for prohibition?

All guns can be converted to full-auto.
Click to expand...

Of course any gun can be converted to an auto, that is exactly how bolt actions EVOLVED into autos (semi and full). Parts were added to a manually operated bolt to make it self operated.
 
Last edited:
The issue of the ease of the conversion of a firearm from Semi Automatic to a Select Fire or Fully Automatic Firearm is a non issue. If that were the case then all AR 15's would have been banned . Because the fact that a device exists that can change your AR 15 from a strictly dedicated a Semi Auto to 12.2 in a matter of 5-10 sec. This device is Prohibited by Law as are other devices that change the firearms discharge rates. Most if not all conversions using Military S/F fire control parts require a a detail Strip of the Trigger Group to be performed before the new Fire Control can be parts installed .This process can be relatively easy to quite difficult depending on the manufacture or type of firearm this work being performed on .

So the "ease of Conversion" Argument is groundless and with out precedence it is like saying all Motor Vehicles can exceed the speed limit, That all people cheat on there taxes ,That all people are Mass Murders ,###ual Offenders or Criminals .These arguments are extremely Vague and if one were to take it all in the context of what the RCMP are declaring well all cars would be banned and we would all be locked up in Jail. What separates us from this under the law is our intent, If we have no intent to break the Law we are in fact breaking the Law NO ,The RCMP "ease of Conversion" description it appears that they have gone past the intent straight into Criminal activity if one were to purchase of the Rifle.However because only after a detailed criminal and exhaustive back ground check can a Firearm's License be issued I thought that was to prevent known criminals fron being able to purchase firearms .Oh wait the RCMP and the Government see us as the Criminals and that is why they put more more teeth into C68 when dealing with Licensed Firearms Owners like stiffer jail sentences for Paper Violations of the Act than Criminals do for the same offenses under C68
The Problem exists that unlike the US where F/A parts are illegal to posses unless you are a licensed individual or business.Here in Canada we are able to Import ,Buy and Sell all the parts except devices listed as prohibited under the Law .
 
Cardio-vascular surgery is "easy" for a cardio-vascular surgeon. I don't think the "average" man would be too adept at it though!

Easy should be definable as to a man with little to no specialized training being able to perform a specific task. Could the average man perform a full auto conversion? I seriously doubt it.
 
Last edited:
"Easy" could mean that a skilled machinist could do the conversion with the proper machine tools, or it could mean a skilled handyman could do it with simple tools, or it could mean some average guy with no mechanical experience can do it with common household items.
 
I have to agree with savage. All of my guns could "easily" be converted to full capacity magazines, but my un-willingness to do this is what makes me a law abiding canadian, regardless of the stupidity of the law. The opportunity to commit crimes does not make one a criminal, nor should the ability to modify firearms in an illeagle and prohibited manner, make the firearm prohibited.I think there is logical grounds for us to appeal these judgements, but to do so we have to expose the weekness of other restrictions, leaving the door open to pose yet more restrictions.
 
Throttle_monkey1 said:
Clobb- that's what they're using to their advantage. There is no definition for "easily".
They grind, hack and file until they get the desired results. It can only be argued in court after, which of course suits them fine. You have to pay, not them.

It would be nice if this country was like the US and these tards had to use their own funds in court, and not be covered by the state like in kanuckistan.
Click to expand...

Be careful what you wish for, you just may get it.
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=31857

And for a real eye opener, try Googling: BATF shoe lace machine gun.
Edit, did it for you.
http://www.mp5.net/info/ATF_Ruling_2004-09-30_String_Trick.pdf
 
Last edited:
I'd like to see you full auto a single shot, bolt action :p
Click to expand...

You ever hear of a Pederson Device?

http://www.odcmp.com/Services/Rifles/pipsqueak_pistol.htm
Click to expand...

See the problem with making a smart remark when you are not aware of the history of what you are speaking is you may just end up looking like a fool.

When people post here that ANY firearm can be made into a full auto, they are not being obtuse or talking out of their ass. Because the fact is that ANY firearm can be made into a full auto. In the same way that a car contains enough metal and parts to assemble a machine gun or two out of, if you know what you are doing.

Browing converted a lever action rifle into a full auto with just a few bits of metal and a few hours of his time. His conversion did not affect the normal operation of the rifle.
 
tootall said:
Be careful what you wish for, you just may get it.
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=31857

And for a real eye opener, try Googling: BATF shoe lace machine gun.
Edit, did it for you.
http://www.mp5.net/info/ATF_Ruling_2004-09-30_String_Trick.pdf
Click to expand...

Tootall- im familiar with that case and other batf rulings, thanks to arfcom. the batf is as f**king useless as the cfc/rcmp firearms department.

At least in the us, if a government official is sued/charged they have to pay their own defence. Unlike here.
 
Here's the bad part - SCC decision.... Depends on your interpretation of what is considered "easy"...

It is obvious from the evidence with some minor work on the plate that the obstruction could be removed, however, I am more influenced by the fact that the entire trigger mechanism can be quite easily removed and replaced by a fully automatic trigger mechanism and I am also influenced by the evidence that the trigger mechanism from the replica weapon could be attached to the weapon and it would fire in a fully automatic mode. This aspect of the matter makes control in itself almost impossible as there is no control over the sale of replica weapons. Constable Soley's evidence also indicated that alternate parts were readily available from various sources and notwithstanding the restricted aspect of some manufacturers parts supplies it does appear that the adaptability of fully automatic parts to this weapon remains an easy exercise.

Here, in the Mini-Uzi instance, it was much easier to source out an auto trigger group, and install it than messing with your own modificiations...With respect to the T97... new trigger groups are definitely not easily available...so a drop in would be nearly impossible to source out...

Then they speak to the purpose of an automatic weapon...

.The Purpose and Goals of the Provisions Pertaining to Prohibited Weapons



Let us consider for a moment the nature of automatic weapons, that is to say, those weapons that are capable of firing rounds in rapid succession during one pressure of the trigger. These guns are designed to kill and maim a large number of people rapidly and effectively. They serve no other purpose. They are not designed for hunting any animal but man. They are not designed to test the skill and accuracy of a marksman. Their sole function is to kill people. These weapons are of no value for the hunter, or the marksman. They should then be used only by the Armed Forces and, in some circumstances, by the police forces. There can be no doubt that they pose such a threat that they constitute a real and present danger to all Canadians. There is good reason to prohibit their use in light of the threat which they pose and the limited use to which they can be put. Their prohibition ensures a safer society.

Well, the T97 that CanadaAmmo is importing is completely unlike the Mini-Uzi... it is superior in terms of long range accuracy, and is a completely viable hunting rifle for all form of small to medium size game.

Here's the ugly end...

Thus it appears that in the majority of the decided cases the courts have properly considered the purpose of the legislation. That purpose is to protect the public from these dangerous weapons that are designed specifically to kill or maim people. Where a weapon can be quickly and readily converted to automatic status, then that weapon must fall within the definition of "prohibited weapon". To come to any other conclusion would undermine the very purpose of the legislation.

So.... is the T97 civilian sporter rifle specifically designed to kill or maim people?...does it have value for the hunter or marksman? Is it so easily converted? (this one I can't answer, cause I've never touched the trigger group).

Again this is the Supreme Court of Canada that interprets the Criminal Code... it ain't going to go higher than that for the decision...In respect of the T97, it is nothing like the Mini-Uzi... It can be easily argued that this long barrel sporter version is designed specifically for target shooters, and hunters... we'll just have to wait and see what works it's way out in the wash...
 
You guys need to get this through your head:

1. The only proof that will ever come out of the CFC will be in the form of an OIC. Once that happens then we can call the battle lost if not the war.

2. There has over the last year been a shuffling of positions withing the CFC moving people who believe in freedom out and putting people who just do what they are told in place. This has culminated in the appointment of Mr Mole as Assistant Commissioner.

3. The CFC/RCMP can hold up reviews, legal proceedings, revoke licenses of dealers all without a judge or politician ever knowing. They regularly investigate CGNers, often without their knowledge.

4. Note #1 and understand that we need to win battles in the public eye. I am very grateful for CSSA's efforts but they have been completely negligent when it comes to exposing what is going on within the CFC to the public or politicians at large.

5. It is highly unlikely that anything the CFC is doing would stand up in a court of law so they are threatening dealers, messing with the laws and prepping for a major shift. If the Liberals win the next election there will be OICs, many and they will happen so soon after the election that you will be utterly shocked and sickened. This is because the CFC has been prepping the OICs all along.

You need to start doing a little digging and I bet you will find that no CPC politician knows what is going on within the CFC. The CFC isn't briefing them, they don't want to and in some cases it seems they may be hiding details of their actions.
 
Don't mean to start anything.
With the recent gangland shooting in Vancouver,
Is the RCMP trying to stop these weapons falling into the wrong hands? Curiously, Tavor is a similar rifle.
How come it's Okay.
 
Stevo said:
And only Cabinet can issue one, so there is absolutely no way for an OIC to "come out of the CFC."
Click to expand...

No you are completely right. The role the certain CFC personel are currently playing is to review and prepare to review semis so that once they have a friendly government the FRTs can be changed.

Listen even if we have a CPC government remains in power for another two full terms the CFC can just continue to place more and more rifles under review. All they will say is oops we made a mistake before. You need to understand that what has been happening over the last year is A MAJOR SHIFT in the way the law has been interpreted since it was written.

This isn't something I dreamed up after a date with the meth pipe, it is something that is confirmed by more and more people the more I dig. These people are scared. You all need to dig too and you need to ask why nobody is taking this public.
 
Damn! I just finished today's round of emails and faxes to Van Loan and Harper...do you think they will mix up mines to those from the gang members concerning their gun rights!?:runaway:
 
suprathepeg said:
Order In Counsel it is what is needed to change an FRT among other things.
Click to expand...

Who says? The FRT is constantly being amended, updated and changed by the RCMP/CFC. There is no need for any OIC to do that.

Let's take a hypothetical situation...

A new (never before imported to Canada firearm) is submitted to the CFC/FRT Section for classification. The importer has a verifier submit the new import registration form and asks for a new FRT to be created. The gun is described as a non-restricted firearm and supporting documentation from the manufacturer supports that conclusion. In many cases no sample is submitted to CFC/FRT Section for inspection.

Based on the various documentation and materials the CFC/FRT Section issues an FRT # and classification of Non-Restricted firearm.

Now sometime later the FRT Section for whatever reason decides to review that previous classification and in it's 'wisdom' decides that an 'error' has been made and that the correct classification of said firearm is in fact 'Prohibited'. The reason for this amended classification is the contention that the gun was not as previously described. This could be because it is now felt the receiver was not a semi-auto receiver (as originally stated by the manufacturer) but that it is instead a modified version of a full-auto receiver and thus by Canadian standards it's a "converted-auto". If in fact it is a converted-auto then it should have been classified as a "Prohibited Firearm" from the start and this error is now being corrected.

Such a decision by the FRT Section would be their interpretation... they have the authority, based on that interpretation, to amend the FRT accordingly and at the very least to put that particular FRT # "on hold" pending the outcome of their review.

In order to overturn their interpretation one would have to get a court to overturn their decision and that's a much harder task than at first glance would seem to be the case. It is also a lengthly and costly procedure.

If the court agrees... then the change to the FRT is confirmed. If it never gets to court then the change to the FRT still stands... no OIC is ever needed. In any case it could take years of court fights to reach a conclusion and in the meantime the FRT # is held pending the final court ruling. All transfers are held in limbo... nothing can be imported... everything is effectively on hold.

Look at the G22... to this day it's never been 'ruled on' by a court. There are still guns here in Canada that are 'stuck in limbo'.
 
Questar said:
In order to overturn their interpretation one would have to get a court to overturn their decision and that's a much harder task than at first glance would seem to be the case. It is also a lengthly and costly procedure.

If the court agrees... then the change to the FRT is confirmed. If it never gets to court then the change to the FRT still stands... no OIC is ever needed. In any case it could take years of court fights to reach a conclusion and in the meantime the FRT # is held pending the final court ruling. All transfers are held in limbo... nothing can be imported... everything is effectively on hold.
Click to expand...

Exactly and by the time you win it won't matter cause an OIC will likely have been issued during your court battle and now its law. Understand the RCMP will avoid a court case at all costs so they will drag it out for as long as possible bleeding you dry of cash. Take away your licences etc etc etc. This is Canam's situation right now whether they know it or not (I'm guessing its becoming clear though) so their choices are limited.

In the case of the T97 there has already been FRTs and rifles existing in Canada.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom