New ruling of Illegal guns by RCMP

[enfield303t]

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.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Badger]

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.

Regards,
Badger

[lamarpye]

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.

[duggaboy]

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.

[lamarpye]

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.

[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??

[enfield303t]

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??

[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.

[enfield303t]

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!

[tiriaq]

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.