New ruling of Illegal guns by RCMP

I was forwarded a email by a friend that the RCMP have designated the High Standard Model 10b's and Norinco Type 97's to be illegal and apparently three owners, according to the email in Alberta, have been told to turn them in immediately for destruction. No mention of compensation or why this was done? Has anyone else heard about this. The email that was forwarded to me by a friend and is from a legit source in Alberta I was told?
Has anyone else heard about this??
This is a serious matter if the RCMP can at their discretion just ban any gun they want. Appears this is a very slippery slope.:confused:

I had heard something similar that this action was on the horizon as a ban that was potentially coming, but I had not heard that they were in the process of actual confiscation. :ugh:

Regards,
Badger

I'm amazed that police and politicians can decide to ban something that was legally purchased and demand it then be turned in with no compensation. Their reasoning defies all logic.......
Hopefully the long gun registry fades into oblivion soon.

you poor SOB's in Canarama. Could this happen in the USA? Sure. I thinks it is coming. Bye the way, where are your' attornies and the court system.? Can't this thing be taken to court and decided? You all now see the writing on the wall. You are not free.

liberal judges call the shots up here and thats a fact. I envy the freedom that you guys down south have for the time being.

It sounds a bit fishey to me. I checked the internet to see what these were and the specs on them. The Standard 10b is a bit scary looking, but it is only a 4 shot semi auto shotgun, 20" barrel, which should fall into the limitation of a 5 shot limit for Canada. The Norinco 97 is just a copy of the Winchester 97 pump that has been used for years. Funny thing, the site I checked was located in Canada called Marstar, they had a whole bunch of such type shotguns with no shipments to the USA, no mention of restriction on Canadian sales. Has anyone called the powers to be to verify this restriction??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garra

It sounds a bit fishey to me. I checked the internet to see what these were and the specs on them. The Standard 10b is a bit scary looking, but it is only a 4 shot semi auto shotgun, 20" barrel, which should fall into the limitation of a 5 shot limit for Canada. The Norinco 97 is just a copy of the Winchester 97 pump that has been used for years. Funny thing, the site I checked was located in Canada called Marstar, they had a whole bunch of such type shotguns with no shipments to the USA, no mention of restriction on Canadian sales. Has anyone called the powers to be to verify this restriction??

---

Garra, no I haven't checked to see if this is legit, but please understand that "common sense" in gun laws here in Canada went the way of the passenger pigeon...extinct.. many years ago. I have always been told when the "authorities" made the new laws they put alot of "mean looking" guns on the prohib list just for that, they looked dangerous. Another funny thing is when they moved the gun registry a few years ago they literally lost a few hundred thousand registrations. I personally know of a guy that has all his guns registered (with the paperwork) who has been told he has no registrations, he gave up trying to convince them he had them?? Go figure??
I forwarded a copy of the email I rec'd to Badger just to prove it was legit??

You should have ALL seen this coming from the UK experience. Our laws have a little clause inserted to the effect that '......the Home Secretary can, upon advice, at any time, ban any weapon that he considers specifically dangerous................'

How loose a law is that little catch-all. Politicians....., I wouldn't urinate on one even if he was on fire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

You should have ALL seen this coming from the UK experience. Our laws have a little clause inserted to the effect that '......the Home Secretary can, upon advice, at any time, ban any weapon that he considers specifically dangerous................'

How loose a law is that little catch-all. Politicians....., I wouldn't urinate on one even if he was on fire.

---

Thanks Peter your point on Poiliticans is well taken. Right now here in Canada the RCMP seem to be the problem. The party in power right now (Conservatives) is trying to end the long gun registry. The scary part is what damage the RCMP will do before that legislation is passed..hopefully!

The Type 97 which has been ruled to be prohibited on the basis of ease of conversion to full auto is a 5.56 auto rifle of "bullpup" configuration. It is not the Norinco clone of the Winchester shotgun. Never having seen one, I have no idea what the degree of difficulty of full auto conversion is. There is a Supreme Court ruling defining ease of conversion.
The rifles were imported without inspection by the RCMP lab. in Ottawa. The problem started when they were inspected. Less than 40 had been sold. Another larger shipment by another importer has been in limbo.
In Canada, bullpup firearms are not, per se, prohibited. But, bullpup stocks are. Think of the sleazy aftermarket bullpup conversion stocks made for SKS and 10/22 rifles. The rule of thumb is that if a bullpup firearm has a barrelled action which is functional when the stock is separated, the stock is prohibited. If the stock is a functional part of the mechanism, as in the Israeli Tavor, the stock and the firearm are legal. Apparently it has been determined that the High Standard 10A and 10B firearms are basically conventional High Standard autoloading shotguns with bullpup stocks, and there is consequently a problem. Because of barrel length, they had been classified as restricted firearms, ownership and use being subject to permit.
Whether or not these two prohibitions are the tip of an RCMP iceberg remains to be seen. In both cases, the RCMP determinations may be correct, based on the law as written and interpreted. There will, no doubt, be references to the courts to determine the legitimacy of the RCMP's actions.

There is currently much speculation regarding why the T97 rifles were "deemed prohibited, and the matter has been discussed at lenght on another board.

What is so far, which comes directly from the first company to attempt to import a large shipment of these rifles (this company, as well as another one succesfully imported small sample batches prior to the aforementioned large shipment).

Upon landing in the country the RCMP grabbed a "sample" from the shipment and took it appart, at which point they noticed some "unusual" tool/file/cutting marks, which gave them an excuse to declare those "converted automatics".

Why the previously imported rifles were subsequently declared "prohibited" also is not confirmed at this time.

It would seem that the situation with respect to the two different batches differs.

With respect to the 30-odd Lever guns, the revocation notices are out, and some owners, at least, are filing for reference hearings. This will at least clarify the situation as far as this lot is concerned. If ease of conversion is the issue, this will be established in court.

The situation respecting the larger, more recent importation is unclear. If these were finished, selective fire guns that the Chinese altered to semi only, it would be pretty hard to argue that the guns are not converted autos.

There is the established precedent that a never-previously-assembled-into-a-firearm-full-auto-receiver can be reworked for semi only, and the resulting firearm will not be a converted auto.

Yes, but that precedent (I'm assuming that you're referring to the VZ-58 here) involves receivers that have been permanently altered in such a way that they can't accept f/a parts prior to assembly.

As for the T97's, considering the variable quality of Chinese manufacture, it is entirely possible that these are parts that either A) were taken from the assembly line and modified prior to installation or B) that the Chinese just didn't bother putting much effort in the finish of internal parts, leaving a bunch of tool marks that could be interpreted as a conversion.

In any case, the point is moot unless the receiver itself is incapable of accepting an F/A trigger groups without modification.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tiriaq

There is the established precedent that a never-previously-assembled-into-a-firearm-full-auto-receiver can be reworked for semi only, and the resulting firearm will not be a converted auto.

---

I have never seen a T97. It would be interesting to examine one, and determine how conversion could be achieved.
Once a reference hearing makes it to court, the specifics should become public.
It is possible that the conversion to auto is as simple as has been rumoured. If this is the case, it is hard to imagine that a court reference will be successful.
Anyone owning one of these firearms would be well advised to have the mechanism examined in detail by a knowledgable individual, before going to court.
Depending on how a mechanism is designed, conversion to auto can be extremely simple.
One design last year was condemned because all that was necessary to effect auto fire was to limit movement of the trigger. For the disconnect function to occur, the trigger had to move fully to the rear; insert an improvised block between the trigger and the guard, and the gun would reliably fire bursts. No disassembly, alteration, or substitution of parts was required.

Interesting on all the talk on firearms being full automatic. Many years ago I had a fully auto 9mm Schmeisser registered with a pretty lax carrying permit. I remember a good friend and collector ran the crime lab for the RCMP in Regina and told me as of then (the 60's) no person that had a legally registered fully automatic weapon had ever committed a crime with one in recorded history in Canada. The object of his comment was that people who had them knew they were fortunate and never abused the priviledge of ownership. Today I would venture it would be the same if they were as common as they were then. Prohibiting these weapons from ownership by law abiding Canadians is not solving any problem on the streets, like the gun registry it has been a black hole of money vanishing with no true accomplishments.

Possibly the RCMP in Saskatchewan issued me such a lax carrying permit because the "force" based in Moose Jaw relied on me to furnish them with adequate firearms for certain situations seeing as they were so poorly equipped.

You are correct - there was never a crime of violence committed with a legally owned machinegun by its legal owner.
I believe that in the US there was one such crime - and the individual was also a LEO.
Legal owners of machineguns were/are just about the most law-abiding citizens around.
None of this is relevant, of course.

My point is why is the RCMP wanting to ban these guns? It can't be for safety as should they be deemed to be restricted or prohibited and properly registered they by all evidence are not going to pose any problem for Canadians.
Why not issue the present owners of these firearms with the proper licence and that would solve the problem. If they do not qualify for a licence upgrade to a prohib. then allow them to dispose of these to a person that can legally own them.
My understanding is the Norinco was legally imported into Canada and the RCMP have now told a judge it was "easy" to convert it to full automatic. My understanding also is the RCMP did not disclose how they converted this rifle to full auto. If 1 or 2% of firearms owners are able to do this conversion being skilled machinists does this constitute it being "easy"? What if 99.9% of owners no matter how skilled are unable to do it, does this still make it easy. By not disclosing how they did it the RCMP have set of my alarm bells and they will continue to ring loud and clear. I think it is only proper to FULLY disclose how this gun was made full auto. Did they get a new full auto trigger group from Norinco and after alot of milling drop it in? There are books available to every Canadian that can read describing how to make fully auto many common rifles, are we about to see all of them classified prohibited? I agree Legal full auto owners are some of the best citizens in Canada, it is unfortunate their legally owned firearms are being targeted for no Safety reason what so ever. I await full disclosure by the RCMP before "turning off" my alarm bells.

Some of the bullpup single shot, straight pull versions of the UK Cadet Force SA80 rifles that are in private hands in the UK started out their life in Canada so far as I am aware. In fact I've got one! They were returned shortly prior to being outlawed in Canada in the early 90's. Is this a fact or weren't they in fact outlawed after all under a blanket bull-pup ban?

Just interested, that's all as I still have copies of the Canadian re-export papers for mine

There is no blanket bullpup ban, per se. But when the law changed, most bullpups then available were prohibited by name. These were generally "grandfathered", and could be retained, bought and sold by indivivuals who were grandfathered owners. The individuals drafting the legislation went through a popular firearms annual, and circled the scary looking guns. Firearms introduced more recently may or may not be restricted or prohibited.
Recent changes have made it impossible to obtain permission to take grandfathered longarms to ranges.
I recall seeing a SA80 at a service eifle shoot at CFB Borden.
There were a few imported prior to the change in the law.
The current situation is the result of the RCMP allowing the importation and sale of T97 rifles and then changing its mind.

Again my main point is there is no logical reason to ban these type of weapons after you have allowed them to be legally imported. The RCMP have created a myth along with others that f/a weapons are dangerous in the hands of legitimate shooters/collectors. Again no evidence shows this and the facts show just the opposite when responsible citizens legally own these firearms. To say something such as it was "easy" to convert without proof is not the way things should be done in our country. We are now going to see citizens have their firearms confistcated and destroyed as the RCMP use our money to fight "us". The only hope these owners have is a Judge that will ask for full disclosure from the RCMP and then make a informed decision. The RCMP's motto "Maintines le droit" ... whose "droit"?

Actually, the whole process is very logical, if the objective is to systematically remove firearms from society. Start with the scary, nasty, concealable, not suitable for sporting use ones, and then keep nibbling around the edges. The 12(x) classification system affects hundreds of thousands of firearms which will eventually be forfeit, without the pesky need to pay compensation either to owners or their estates.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tiriaq

Actually, the whole process is very logical, if the objective is to systematically remove firearms from society. Start with the scary, nasty, concealable, not suitable for sporting use ones, and then keep nibbling around the edges. The 12(x) classification system affects hundreds of thousands of firearms which will eventually be forfeit, without the pesky need to pay compensation either to owners or their estates.

---

I agree, but it is time for a change, my take on all actions by the RCMP here in the west, not just on firearms, are that many people are totally fed-up with the organization. We need to voice loudly our objection on everything we dislike, the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

tiriaq and enfield303t, you both seem to be on the same page as to the reasons for such prohibititions.
tiriaq is giving the grounds on which the RCMP are making their decisions and how they "legally" get away with it.

Enfield303t, I suspect tiriaq agrees with your reasoning wholeheartedly but is trying to clarify the situation for our compatriots in other countries.

Many of the present laws, pertaining to firearms, are UN and G8 induced. Canada may not have signed on to the agreements but under the tutelage of a far left, Liberal party that was on a run away streak for control, we actually adopted many of the clauses of the agreement into our own laws.

The whole system had no real rhyme or reason, other than the eventual elimination of all civilian firearms ownership. That is the crux of what enfield303t is getting at. I'm sure we all agree, the rulings could very well be bogus and that the people making them are being over zealous, because they can.

The real problem with this whole thing is current law. Not easily changed law either. Once you empower people, it's almost impossible to take that empowerment away, without a fight. As most people in Canada, including shooters, are blase' about the whole thing and mostly unconcerned and non committal, the T97 issue will be repeated over and over.

Orders in Council, made all of this possible in the first place. That's the root cause for the RCMP's ability to enact this farce in the first place. It's a political nightmare as it stands and firearm owners are in the middle of it all.

Another problem that has led to this situation, was the creation of huge bureaucracies, that want to be perpetual and powerful. These bureaucracies were intentionally staffed with anti firearm members as well and the repercussions are inevitable. We need to pull their teeth. I really wonder if the special unit, overseeing these issues is really necessary. Look what has happened to our southern neighbours, You started with the FBI and then created spin off organisations, BATF, Homeland Security, NSA,DEA, to
name a few. Each are lawmakers and enforcers unto themselves. Large, well funded and powerful. Really, they aren't accountable to anyone, other than themselves. They make a show of being accountable to the government and therefore the people but we all know that in reality they are shadow governments within themselves.

I may be wrong but what enfield303t is getting at is that the RCMP are enforcers of esisting law, not creators of new law. If the T97 is to be banned, it should be done by parliament, not some administrator in the RCMP that has a hard on for evil looking firearms or in reality, just hates them all.