PDA

View Full Version : Full RCMP Report on the Swiss Arms



TV-PressPass
08-05-2014, 11:31 AM
From my blog:

http://tv-presspass.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Swiss_arms_complete_rcmp_report_banner-1038x300.jpg (http://tv-presspass.com/swiss-arms-classic-green-full-rcmp-report/)

Kudos to reddit user Adipose Fin on getting all this!

Now that a basic amnesty is in place and a new Common Sense Firearms Act is in its infancy, the RCMP have responded to a Freedom of Information Request and published over 200 pages of information relating to their investigation and reclassification of the SAN rifles.

Both William Etter and Murray A. Smith from the RCMP have documents in the report, which paint a picture of their investigations into the history of SAN and how the initial import of Classic Green rifles happened. There are also details from the request to investigate, although they are marginally redacted.

The conclusion is quite damning. As we’ve heard before:


Physical inspection of the sample “genuine” Classic Green rifles and “bogus” Classic Green rifles revealed no significant differences and established both kinds of rifles as following the SG550 design, and not the SG540 design.

If you’re looking for the full text, complete with historical articles from US publications, internal SAN documents, and an entire distributor catalog, you can find it right here:

RCMP Full Swiss Arms Classic Green Investigation (http://tv-presspass.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Swiss_Arms_Classic_Green_RCMP_Report.pdf)

Strewth
08-05-2014, 11:51 AM
Sooo....a dozen years ago the RCMP firearms lab screwed up?

At any rate, hopefully irrelevant. Variants and "what if" clauses are smoke and mirrors resulting from murky laws set out by the Liberals that under the surface concentrate on disarmament.

ilikemoose
08-05-2014, 09:49 PM
Page 3 section 8 makes it clear that this whole debacle was caused by a Judas in the firearms community.

Gaidheal
08-06-2014, 07:42 AM
I can't get the PDF file.

TV-PressPass
08-06-2014, 08:53 AM
It's biiiig. Are you getting some kind of error? There was a drop box link floating around too . . . .

RangeBob
08-06-2014, 09:45 AM
There was a drop box link floating around too . . . .

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8luh7iut2hadbys/Swiss_Arms_Classic_Green_RCMP_Report.pdf
33,985,323 bytes

Gaidheal
08-06-2014, 11:11 AM
It's biiiig. Are you getting some kind of error? There was a drop box link floating around too . . . .

The connection was reset







The connection to the server was reset while the page was loading.





The site could be temporarily unavailable or too busy. Try again in a few
moments.
If you are unable to load any pages, check your computer's network
connection.
If your computer or network is protected by a firewall or proxy, make sure
that Firefox is permitted to access the Web.

Got the dropbox one.

Thanks!

CSC
08-06-2014, 01:41 PM
In light of what has been said by JR in the past this is quite damning. Note that the investigation was not only initiated but directed and that the allegations were "selling of prohibited firearms", yet JR claimed he never accused CSC of anything illegal.
Note also that one of the "real" rifles submitted as a control sample by JR had an auto sear slot cut, and the "bogus" one was a purpose built semi auto, yet JR accused CSC of selling "old ex military guns".
There are reams of documents including SAN production diagrams that make it quite clear that all Classic Green rifles are PE 90s, and of course page 45 neatly disposes of the "magic mandrel" theory that was going to vindicate JR.


Dear GOC members: I write to respond to the allegations leveled by CSC against TSE.

What happened?

In early 2013 an individual walked into TSE with a rifle that appeared to the experienced eye to be either a counterfeit of the Swiss Arms “classic green”, or possibly a converted prohibited rifle.
CGN members and Swiss Arms’ owners should know that later, at IWA 2013, a Swiss Arms employee stated an owner of one of TSE’s competitors was going around Switzerland buying up rifles at auction and from ex-service members, bringing them into Swiss Arms’ factory in “batches” to be refurbished. The CEO of Swiss Arms was present at this meeting, and stated he had no knowledge of this.

Our inspection of the rifle brought to our store supported what Swiss Arms told us.

With the knowledge of these facts, the spectre was raised that Canadians may have unknowingly purchased rifles that were or are prohibited - no responsible firearms retailer could avoid contacting the RCMP, who we are sure, will clarify what the complete facts are and what is relevant.

Why was it suspected to be counterfeit or converted?

1) The 4 digit serial number was wrong for a ‘civilian’ firearm;
2) Furniture colour and texture predated anything known for retail/commercial sale
3) There was no Swiss Arms factory marking;
4) There was no commercial production marking;
5) It was missing the internal parts added to retail/commercial rifles to further prevent C/A conversions;
6) The Upper and lower very mismatched colours, indicating either re-working, or a change-out with another rifle; and
7) The spacing of the serial numbers was too large.

Basically, any experienced owner would see this was a VERY old rifle, that it appeared someone refinished the upper, and changed the serial number and name. It doesn’t matter why this was done – it looked like a Classic Green civilian accessible firearm, but may have not been intended for use in Canada.

Swiss Arms’ Practices

As a responsible gun owner and retailer, we question the soundness of Swiss Arms’ practice, but recognized Swiss Arms doesn’t “control the commercial market” in Canada. Ultimately, given the RCMP were already aware of this issue, Swiss Arms should re-think its policy, but it is not up to TSE to control imports into Canada – that is the RCMP’s and Border Control’s job. But TSE would not stand by watching Canadians inadvertently purchase rifles that may turn out later to be inappropriate for import.

Swiss Arms’ policy raises questions, and we believe Canadians are entitled to answers:

1) If the rifles are otherwise acceptable under Canadian law, why change serial numbers?
2) If the rifles are acceptable, why change the name / designation?
3) If the rifles are acceptable for sale in Canada, why were other importers not offered these firearms?

The Real Issue

In my opinion as a gun retailer with many years’ experience, CSC’s concerns are misplaced: the whole issue of whether it is “C/A or not” is a red herring. The RCMP will quickly sort this out so it is not of primary concern. Moreover, these receivers are not easy to convert. There have simply been production changes over the years that make the internals look a bit different.

The real issue comes down to the lineage of the rifles, and all Swiss Arms owners should be concerned with the possibility that old PE90s and old issued, demilled military rifles may have been brought into Canada inappropriately, or without the knowledge of their true lineage. Potentially, this could screw up the ability of everyone to enjoy the actual Classic Greens.
Clarity

The Calgary Shooting Centre claims this is just a misunderstanding. TSE is glad to hear there is an explanation, and is confident our competitors are cooperating with the RCMP.
Ultimately, the RCMP will determine whether there is any responsibility for any incorrect import or sale of firearms, and if so where that responsibility lies. TSE has no role in the investigation.
CSC claims TSE has acted wrongly, and has accused CSC of acting illegally. To be perfectly crystal clear, our understanding is that no Swiss laws were broken by anyone doing any of these things. Further, TSE has no information that CSC has broken any laws, nor has TSE ever accused CSC of doing so.
All that has happened is TSE has reported to the RCMP that certain firearms of questionable legitimacy are in Canada posing as Classic Greens, and re-finishing used military firearms for the purpose of importing them into Canada.
At the end of the day, Swiss Arms stands by their decision to sell the rifles in Canada. They have done so, however, without full regard for purchasers in the Canadian market. Purely as opinion, TSE suggests Swiss Arms has in effect thrown the Canadian market under the bus (probably inadvertently) by stating the refinished rifles are “mechanically identical” to civilian accessible rifles.

It is for this reason, and due to Swiss Arms’ comments, we believe, that the RCMP is concerned with the entire lineage of these rifles.

What happens now?

At present, TSE is trying to show the RCMP there is no real harm from the non-prohibited line of rifles. While the RCMP may have recently become aware of new facts due to TSE’s being a good corporate citizen, it is Swiss Arms’ comments that gave rise to the RCMP’s scrutiny over the larger class of rifles.

Further, the RCMP previously obtained an SG540 and SG542 and were in the process of looking at the SAPR. So, their scrutiny over the Swiss Arms’ products wasn’t due to TSE’s report alone.
In a nutshell, the facts are that an organization bought old rifles that may be prohibited, renamed them, changed the history and serial numbers and then allowed them to be brought into Canada to sell as “Classic Green” civilian accessible firearms.

In our opinion, TSE did the right thing to prevent further crackdowns by the RCMP and further pressure against owners and importers of foreign rifles; if a foreign company has acted to make the RCMP scrutinize a larger class of rifles more closely, that is the RCMP’s prerogative and the foreign company’s issue

To further complicate this, the RCMP, in order to investigate the SAPR, rounded up an SG540 and SG542 and were in the process of looking at the SAPR.
The RCMP firearms officials stated during a conversation at CANSEC that now they possessed an example of the SG540, they were looking at the entire SAN family as the rifles had never been inspected at the time the FRT was issued. This was just another file on the pile, but this investigation pushed it to the forefront.

Yes, the issue is a mess. While CSC is trying to spin this as a gaffe resulting from blind hatred of CSC, the facts don’t support that. What remains the truth is that the concerns of all Swiss Arms’ owners were and still are legitimate. TSE stands by as a corporate citizen willing to assist gun-owners and the authorities for a resolution of this issue.

http://www.gunownersofcanada.ca/showthread.php?8154-Swiss-Arms-Discussion/page10

And to be sure more information will soon be released which will further clarify what actually happened.

bettercallsaul
08-06-2014, 02:14 PM
The bottom line to me is that the RCMP has no business legislating by fiat whatever they deem "too dangerous" for us pleebs to own, it's their job to enforce it. The politicians legislate.

Foxer
08-06-2014, 04:21 PM
The politicians legislate. True, but someone has to interpret the legislation and that's where we run into problems.

TSE JR
08-06-2014, 04:37 PM
In light of what has been said by JR in the past this is quite damning. Note that the investigation was not only initiated but directed and that the allegations were "selling of prohibited firearms", yet JR claimed he never accused CSC of anything illegal.
Note also that one of the "real" rifles submitted as a control sample by JR had an auto sear slot cut, and the "bogus" one was a purpose built semi auto, yet JR accused CSC of selling "old ex military guns".
There are reams of documents including SAN production diagrams that make it quite clear that all Classic Green rifles are PE 90s, and of course page 45 neatly disposes of the "magic mandrel" theory that was going to vindicate JR.



http://www.gunownersofcanada.ca/showthread.php?8154-Swiss-Arms-Discussion/page10

And to be sure more information will soon be released which will further clarify what actually happened.

I looked through the documents and I roll my eyes. The comments I see are based on notes and opinions. I also do not see anywhere in the documents where the RCMP lab used or even acknowledged the pile of papers provided by Interpol, the factory or ourselves.

Also, simply because the lab changes its mind on what the litmus test is from what is was (page 45) hardly provides some smoking gun.

Regardless, the outcome of this whole mess, will be, if the politicians come through, a huge stride in all of our favours.

JR

CSC
08-07-2014, 11:50 AM
I looked through the documents and I roll my eyes. The comments I see are based on notes and opinions. I also do not see anywhere in the documents where the RCMP lab used or even acknowledged the pile of papers provided by Interpol, the factory or ourselves.

Also, simply because the lab changes its mind on what the litmus test is from what is was (page 45) hardly provides some smoking gun.

Regardless, the outcome of this whole mess, will be, if the politicians come through, a huge stride in all of our favours.

JR

It must be contagious because now my eye are rolling too!
Are you still suggesting you never alleged CSC did anything illegal (see your quote above) in spite of some pretty clear statements to the contrary in the report ?

The documents lay out a pretty solid case that the Classic Green is and always has been a PE90. This is supported by catalogues, advertising literature, and production documents (page 11), not notes and opinion. I am not sure what else they required to make the case but I am sure they will make short work of whatever other important documents you can generate. Of course if these documents are as important as you claim it might help if they were made public.
It is also rather ironic that you have repeatedly and publicly claimed that the CSC rifle was missing features of the "correct" semi auto rifles and could even have been an "ex military rifle" when your control gun had a slot cut in the right rail for an auto sear. You really are not looking like much of an expert here.

As for page 45, there is no litmus test change nor changing of anyone's mind. The lab has very succinctly put to rest your repeated BS that one gun can be identical to another but different because it was hit with a magic mandrel, "it is the nature of the final product not the manufacturing process employed to create it" that matters.

I would also ad that this report also makes the RCMP forensics lab look pretty bad too. They claim there was not enough data available at the time the FRT was first created, yet include a pile of documents that pre date it.

TSE JR
08-07-2014, 02:04 PM
CSC,

I think EVERYONE involved in this looks bad.

Enough said...

JR

CSC
08-07-2014, 02:28 PM
JR, we accept that as an admission of guilt, but not as an apology.

Strangeday
08-07-2014, 03:02 PM
And yet I am still suing the Queen over it...

Bottom line is I am glad this happened. I am glad that the givernment is finally being forced to deal with the FA and it's garbage. In the end I think we are going to owe a huge thank you to whoever caused this sh@t storm because it has been the catalyst for change.

TSE JR
08-07-2014, 03:31 PM
JR, we accept that as an admission of guilt, but not as an apology.

CSC, in your world, you are free to spin my words any way you wish.

JR

CSC
08-07-2014, 03:59 PM
CSC, in your world, you are free to spin my words any way you wish.

JR

You are doing a fine job of spinning all by yourself big guy. The released documents state outright that you accused us of selling prohibited weapons. It also quite clearly shows that the receiver of our gun was identical to one of your control guns. Now go read your quote that I posted above (I have bolded the specific statements) and tell me what version of events is the truth?

We will await your apology at a future date.

TSE JR
08-07-2014, 04:04 PM
:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

x0ra
08-07-2014, 04:12 PM
This is getting fun to watch. Gun runners going to war with one another...

Steveo9mm
08-07-2014, 04:22 PM
:popcorn:

TSE JR
08-07-2014, 05:05 PM
This is getting fun to watch. Gun runners going to war with one another...

Nothing to see sir... keep movin'.... :Beer time:

CSC
08-07-2014, 08:27 PM
This is getting fun to watch. Gun runners going to war with one another...
Other than the obviously defamatory and untrue allegations that were made and have hurt this company's reputation it has been interesting. It clearly demonstrated the type of person JR is and as more documents are released more people will find out.
I would also like to point out that CSC has consistently backed our version of events with documents from official sources. JR on the other hand has made repeated unfounded allegations, changed his story repeatedly, ignored questions, told of secret documents but in the end produced nothing to support his version of events.
There will be lots to see here.

TSE JR
08-08-2014, 10:11 AM
:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

FlyingHigh
08-08-2014, 08:54 PM
Admin review complete, thread reopened.

FlyingHigh
08-09-2014, 02:36 PM
Factual information has been provided in this thread, trolling and non factual comments will not be tolerated.

Please remain civil and keep that in mind. Carry on folks.

Strangeday
08-09-2014, 09:16 PM
I think people are missing the bigger picture in this situation. Regardless of how it happened people rose up and took more action over the RCMP's attack on Canadians than ever before. It forced them to "double down" against the CPC and move to prohibit the 858 family. The response was "Biblical" (yes I said it). Memberships to the NFA and CSSA poured it. Media finally started to grasp the real issue. The government was forced to act.....and now we have new legislation coming down the pipe and the attention of Ottawa.

Everyone knows I am personally affected by this and that I have stood up. Regardless of the circumstances or whomever started this...I say....

THANK YOU from every law abiding gun owner in Canada.

THANk YOU for being the catalyst for lasting and meaningful change.

Derrick

Mad Hatter
08-09-2014, 09:39 PM
http://i768.photobucket.com/albums/xx328/myakey/facebook_like_icon_zpsafeacbe3.jpg

DOOK
08-10-2014, 03:53 AM
Meh. Listening to both sides.
,and I concur with SD.

Petamocto
08-10-2014, 06:34 AM
I think it is very unfair to drop the hammer on the guy who brought this to the attention of law enforcement (if he really did have legitimate reason to believe that illegal firearms were being sold).

We place ourselves on a pedestal over illegal gun owners, saying that we have passed the tests and we follow the rules so we should be left alone as responsible people.

Yet when someone reports something that he believes is sketchy, he is crucified as a community backstabber.

What was the alternative? Having the RCMP themselves identify this at some point, which would give them carte blanche to stop all firearm sales of everything until a fine tooth comb investigation reviews everything sold?

In my opinion the optics of this made us come out as big winners. Yes, if you are one of those who owns a SA/CZ you may have been justifiably upset in the last few months, but overall this a a win for the community.

The outcome is that the government was forced to make some common sense changes, and more importantly, we look like honest people and not people who dodge all the rules we can.

hercster
08-10-2014, 07:17 AM
I think people are missing the bigger picture in this situation. Regardless of how it happened people rose up and took more action over the RCMP's attack on Canadians than ever before. It forced them to "double down" against the CPC and move to prohibit the 858 family. The response was "Biblical" (yes I said it). Memberships to the NFA and CSSA poured it. Media finally started to grasp the real issue. The government was forced to act.....and now we have new legislation coming down the pipe and the attention of Ottawa.

Everyone knows I am personally affected by this and that I have stood up. Regardless of the circumstances or whomever started this...I say....

THANK YOU from every law abiding gun owner in Canada.

THANk YOU for being the catalyst for lasting and meaningful change.

Derrick

:agree:

This issue, the High River hijinks and the current CFO antics have all been gifts! While it's not number one on everyone's list, the firearms mess has finally been seen by Joe Public for what it is and we have gained allies in "the massive middle". A lot of people couldn't care less about the classification nonsense or magazine limits but they sure can relate to broken doors and mud on the bed.

To all of you with the heavy hands and dirty boots, THANK YOU!

Gaidheal
08-10-2014, 11:27 AM
The real problem is the law.

Semi-auto is semi-auto. It should not matter beyond that. Converted from full-auto? Who cares?

It is already illegal to make something - anything - into full auto. Current state should be all that matters.

The laws are too many and too complex. Part of why it costs so damned much to enforce.

Simplify the laws and all this crap can't even exist in the first place!

Doug_M
08-10-2014, 12:26 PM
The real problem is the law.

Semi-auto is semi-auto. It should not matter beyond that. Converted from full-auto? Who cares?

It is already illegal to make something - anything - into full auto. Current state should be all that matters.

The laws are too many and too complex. Part of why it costs so damned much to enforce.

Simplify the laws and all this crap can't even exist in the first place!
Exactly! So many motorcycles for example, are capable of going tens of km past the speed limit, but we don't classify them. We just make speeding illegal. And I'm willing to bet my house that speeding kills far more per year than legally owned firearms.

CSC
08-10-2014, 02:03 PM
I think it is very unfair to drop the hammer on the guy who brought this to the attention of law enforcement (if he really did have legitimate reason to believe that illegal firearms were being sold).

We place ourselves on a pedestal over illegal gun owners, saying that we have passed the tests and we follow the rules so we should be left alone as responsible people.

Yet when someone reports something that he believes is sketchy, he is crucified as a community backstabber.

.

I think if you take the time to read through my website (which includes all the documents that have been made public to date), it becomes pretty clear that a) none of the issues of alleged "sketchiness" were real, and b) anyone with any real expertise with the rifles could only have expected this outcome.
In the end it may all end up working out ok for gun owners. That will not make the instigator a hero, his actions were and still are defamatory, reckless and wrong.

Jay
08-10-2014, 05:12 PM
And I'm willing to bet my house that speeding kills far more per year than legally owned firearms.

Not if the zombie apocalypse begins!

Foxer
08-10-2014, 05:47 PM
Not if the zombie apocalypse begins!
That's not killing tho - they're already dead. :)

Strangeday
08-10-2014, 06:24 PM
Not if the zombie apocalypse begins!

Mmmmm. Zombie Apocalypse....

Jay
08-11-2014, 01:42 AM
That's not killing tho - they're already dead. :)

They may seem "dead" in every way... but they still won't shut up about wanting to kill us all.

Foxer
08-11-2014, 01:44 AM
They may seem "dead" in every way... but they still won't shut up about wanting to kill us all.

no no..... That's the liberals :). (Badda bing!:) )

Jay
08-11-2014, 01:57 AM
No no, the liberals want their vote.

CSC
08-13-2014, 09:54 AM
I think it is very unfair to drop the hammer on the guy who brought this to the attention of law enforcement (if he really did have legitimate reason to believe that illegal firearms were being sold).

We place ourselves on a pedestal over illegal gun owners, saying that we have passed the tests and we follow the rules so we should be left alone as responsible people.

Yet when someone reports something that he believes is sketchy, he is crucified as a community backstabber.

What was the alternative? Having the RCMP themselves identify this at some point, which would give them carte blanche to stop all firearm sales of everything until a fine tooth comb investigation reviews everything sold?

In my opinion the optics of this made us come out as big winners. Yes, if you are one of those who owns a SA/CZ you may have been justifiably upset in the last few months, but overall this a a win for the community.

The outcome is that the government was forced to make some common sense changes, and more importantly, we look like honest people and not people who dodge all the rules we can.

I just found one more document that helps address this as well.
http://i762.photobucket.com/albums/xx267/cie-canada/JRemail25Mar_zpsd72a75ab.jpg (http://s762.photobucket.com/user/cie-canada/media/JRemail25Mar_zpsd72a75ab.jpg.html)

So to clarify (as I know nobody wants to actually read all of the documents I have published) here is the timeline of the Swiss Arms rifle complaint.

1. Rifle is purchased from CSC 8 December 2012
2. JR refers complaint to RCMP 20 December 2012 (see FOI request)
3. RCMP forensics lab receives three rifles for examination from JR 5 Feb 2013 (Minister's briefing notes)
4. IWA 2013 occurs 8-11 Mar 2013, JR attends and speaks to SAN
5. JR sends an email to SAN asking if it is possible that the rifle he reported in December and sent to the RCMP in Feb MIGHT be a "fake".
6. June through to date, JR claims that CSC rifles are "bogus", "counterfeit" etc.

Read the email above, then read JR's comments on page one of this thread. It is really hard to imagine that his actions were informed, or supported by anything said or done by SAN as they all occurred before he even discussed the details with them.
As for those thanking him for his actions, well hopefully he does not do something similar to you in the future. Being on the receiving end of the smear campaign is not a welcome event.

TSE JR
08-13-2014, 11:40 AM
deleted

crazycrocket
08-14-2014, 03:55 AM
JR weren't you aware of who was importing the firearms when one arrived at your shop?


Also when you started importing swiss arms didn't you know they were essentially variants of the 550s? Owning both a 542 and a swiss arms, I can tell you the designs are SIGNIFICANTLY different. What you presented to the RCMP originally to get them into the country shows how stupid they are. How one earth did they believe you?

Being familiar with the samples of what you sent in years ago to the RCMP why didn't you compare the models yourself before making a report if it was out of genuine concern? Did you compare them and make the decision based on the paint finish alone?

Do you feel it would have been wrong if your competitor HAD been bringing in PE90s or 550s for the swiss market converted to Canadian use? How is that morally and public safety wise different from saying the swiss arms were built on 540 mandrels and therefore are 540 variants and not 550s when they were originally imported?

Was public safety and compliance your only motive for reporting this firearm?

Why didn't you pursue the firearms origin with the manufacturer before contacting the police? Had they told you they were built to the same standards as all the others imported into Canada in the past would you have still reported it?

What are you currently doing to rectify the situation as your past attempts of working with the RCMP and swiss arms didn't achieve the desired goal?

Don't take this as an attack. These are honest questions, I'd like honest answers.....

OITC
08-14-2014, 07:30 AM
CSC, you salty bro? Haha

Jay
08-14-2014, 08:30 AM
CSC, you salty bro? Haha

saving it for the limelight I guess.

TSE JR
08-14-2014, 10:29 AM
Don't take this as an attack. These are honest questions, I'd like honest answers.....

Dear Crazy Rocket, I am unwilling to wade into any discussions in this or any other controversial topic on this specific board as I am extremely limited as to what I can post here. You can always call me: 403-720-4867

JR

ilikemoose
08-14-2014, 02:05 PM
I just found one more document that helps address this as well.
http://i762.photobucket.com/albums/xx267/cie-canada/JRemail25Mar_zpsd72a75ab.jpg (http://s762.photobucket.com/user/cie-canada/media/JRemail25Mar_zpsd72a75ab.jpg.html)

So to clarify (as I know nobody wants to actually read all of the documents I have published) here is the timeline of the Swiss Arms rifle complaint.

1. Rifle is purchased from CSC 8 December 2012
2. JR refers complaint to RCMP 20 December 2012 (see FOI request)
3. RCMP forensics lab receives three rifles for examination from JR 5 Feb 2013 (Minister's briefing notes)
4. IWA 2013 occurs 8-11 Mar 2013, JR attends and speaks to SAN
5. JR sends an email to SAN asking if it is possible that the rifle he reported in December and sent to the RCMP in Feb MIGHT be a "fake".
6. June through to date, JR claims that CSC rifles are "bogus", "counterfeit" etc.

Read the email above, then read JR's comments on page one of this thread. It is really hard to imagine that his actions were informed, or supported by anything said or done by SAN as they all occurred before he even discussed the details with them.
As for those thanking him for his actions, well hopefully he does not do something similar to you in the future. Being on the receiving end of the smear campaign is not a welcome event.

Yet another damning piece of evidence.

CSC
08-14-2014, 02:39 PM
Dear Crazy Rocket, I am unwilling to wade into any discussions in this or any other controversial topic on this specific board as I am extremely limited as to what I can post here. You can always call me: 403-720-4867

JR

crazycrocket

I am not sure why JR refuses to post any documents to support his version of events and continually directs people to call him to discuss. However, I do encourage you and anyone else interested in the story to do so. After he has provided you with his version of events you can fact check by going to https://www.theshootingcentre.com/sans-overview where I have posted all relevant documents that have been sourced to date.

crazycrocket
08-14-2014, 10:46 PM
I am very aware of the issue CSC I've been following and the writeup on your website has been awesome at showing the facts.

I was hoping JR would answer my questions I don't need documents to support what he is saying I'd just like him to just answer a question for once instead of saying to call him personally and discuss what happened. I can call him personally and post my interpretation of everything on here if I wanted. It would be nice to hear his side of the story because the more that is released the more solid it looks that CSC did NOTHING wrong (as if there was ever a doubt when the police didn't storm in and shut you down based off a complaint you were selling prohibited rifles as non restricted). It would just be nice to know where the whole fiasco started from original importation to reporting so I may steer clear of purchasing expensive paperweights in the future.

I have really tried to watch this all and not jump into it but when he won't answer questions like everything is some secret and you have to phone him... What gives?

I.C.R.
09-03-2014, 01:15 PM
The real problem is the law.

Semi-auto is semi-auto. It should not matter beyond that. Converted from full-auto? Who cares?

It is already illegal to make something - anything - into full auto. Current state should be all that matters.

The laws are too many and too complex. Part of why it costs so damned much to enforce.

Simplify the laws and all this crap can't even exist in the first place!

^^^^^^ I agree

mouthpiece
09-18-2014, 06:31 AM
The "full report" is not at all the full report. It does not contain the representations received from JR and other civilians. Nor does it reflect the continued investigation that was undertaken in summer of 2014 when other civilians were interviewed and the RCMP sent officers to the Swiss Arms facility in Europe.

Whine will that be produced to the public?

Neil Burke
09-19-2014, 07:17 PM
I agree with Strangeday about the big picture being a good thing, but it'd be nice if every thread, even remotely, on this topic /didn't/ turn into a pissing match between the two dealers.

mouthpiece
10-15-2014, 06:15 AM
When this rcmp report is reviewed and then the fact that both dealers made representations to the rcmp why are their reports to the rcmp not seen?

cybershooters
08-12-2015, 06:16 PM
So according to the regulations: http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2015/2015-08-12/pdf/g2-14916.pdf (page 72 onwards)


The report also concluded that the Swiss Arms family of rifles is not a variant of the SG-550, a prohibited firearm. The report stated this because
1. While they are produced by the same manufacturer, SAN, the SG-550 and the Swiss Arms family of rifles are manufactured in separate facilities.
2. The receivers are not compatible, and parts are not interchangeable.
3. It would take significant time and talent to render a Swiss Arms rifle to fire multiple projectiles with one pull of the trigger (Note: making this alteration is a criminal offence).

As a result, it is their view that these firearms do not meet the legal definition of “prohibited firearm.”

Erm... did they read the RCMP forensic report mentioned by the OP? The receivers are not only similar they are in fact identical and I can't see where they're made being of much relevance. They could be made on the Moon for all it matters.

So if the Tories lose, I wouldn't be surprised if said committee changes its mind.

Also I note that not all of the models are listed in the regulation, so what is the legal status of those?

CSC
08-15-2015, 09:57 AM
So according to the regulations: http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2015/2015-08-12/pdf/g2-14916.pdf (page 72 onwards)



Erm... did they read the RCMP forensic report mentioned by the OP? The receivers are not only similar they are in fact identical and I can't see where they're made being of much relevance. They could be made on the Moon for all it matters.

So if the Tories lose, I wouldn't be surprised if said committee changes its mind.

Also I note that not all of the models are listed in the regulation, so what is the legal status of those?

Agreed, the FRT also contradicts the Gazette entry, and as you point out although the Classic Green "aka PE90" reverts to its older status, the SG550SP "aka PE90" remains prohibited. To me this seems to allow some busybody with too much time on his hands to replicate the same complaint again and have new shipments seized.
FWIW I really would not worry about a government undoing this FRT, it is far more likely that we will see all semi autos get prohibited than we will see individual prohibitions again.

Foxer
08-15-2015, 10:24 AM
So according to the regulations: http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2015/2015-08-12/pdf/g2-14916.pdf (page 72 onwards)



Erm... did they read the RCMP forensic report mentioned by the OP? The receivers are not only similar they are in fact identical and I can't see where they're made being of much relevance. They could be made on the Moon for all it matters.

So if the Tories lose, I wouldn't be surprised if said committee changes its mind.

Also I note that not all of the models are listed in the regulation, so what is the legal status of those?
There is no committee. Blaney just did it. And because of the new laws it doesn't matter if the guns in queston violate any other regulations, if the gov't says it's non restricted it's non restricted. They could make a belt fed machine gun non restricted if they want.

A future gov't could choose to change them again - they could do that with ANY gun and always could - but there'd be a big difference. In this case the cops were the ones who did it. In the future, it would have to be a GOV'T that specifically did it - and would then have to answer to a whole lotta gun owners as to WHY the gov't itself is demanding they fork over their property without compensation. There's no way they could avoid owning it, it would be 100 percent their decision so is that something they want to do? Millions would flow into the war chests of the CPC as a result, the CPC would likely just switch it back again when they got in and now it's an election issue, there'd be lawsuits, and the general public was NOT ok with the idea of private property being seized for no obvious reason without compensation.

I think that particular issue would be quite dead for a long time. They would find something new to harass us about.

Also - holy necrothread batman!

cybershooters
09-10-2015, 02:56 PM
There is a committee, the report was produced by a committee appointed by Blaney.

Also, the SOR is based on a list of guns that were in the FRT - not all the variants were in the FRT. JR appeared to have imported some after the LGR ended that were not verified and not in the FRT, ditto for the Classic Green Sniper.

So on that basis they're still prohibited.

cybershooters
09-10-2015, 02:58 PM
Agreed, the FRT also contradicts the Gazette entry, and as you point out although the Classic Green "aka PE90" reverts to its older status, the SG550SP "aka PE90" remains prohibited.

It's worse than that, it's not just the old SG550 SP version, there are variants that were imported and sold as non-restricted firearms much more recently that aren't in the FRT (I suppose in part because verification became moot) and thus aren't in the SOR.