Clarification on gas powered airsoft over 500 FPS

[Dog Face Killer]

Originally Posted by The Saint

And Lawdog, the lawyer with years of lobbying experience will tell you that you'll need an excellent lobby organization and existing sympathies to your message in Parliament. If you've bothered reading up on the threads on the subject, that is, instead of calling us a bunch of armchair lawyers.

But don't let us stop you, because obviously, we can't. Just spare us the smug jabs about how you're a doer and we're not.

Thats the kettle calling the pot black....All i have gotten have been "smug jabs"!

As far as the "armchair lawyer" comment...i think it would be safe to say that 99% of the people here have never had to deal with the courts...at least i hope they haven't had too , and therefore are basing their opinions on nothing more than speculation and lack of knowledge of the legal system in Canada.

[CDN_Stalker]

Originally Posted by The Saint

You're not exactly a stranger to political bent, Stalker.

Never said I wasn't, just saying that some who use their 'profession' to enforce their views as being correct are kind of annoying. You know, like actors do? Look at Sean Penn and tell me why he's still around these days.

People with political bents are fun to talk to sometimes, like Droc and Crab (incidentally Crab is working at my hanger for the next two weeks, has been a while since I've hung out with one of the "banned liberals", and it's always good fun, even when debating politics.

[Danke]

Originally Posted by CDN_Stalker

Never said I wasn't, just saying that some who use their 'profession' to enforce their views as being correct are kind of annoying. You know, like actors do? Look at Sean Penn and tell me why he's still around these days.

Matt Damon

[CDN_Stalker]

Originally Posted by Danke

Matt Damon

George Clooney, etc.

The entire 'Film Actors Guild' (F.A.G.). Hahaha

Let's not forget Bonohead.

[Danke]

Originally Posted by CDN_Stalker

George Clooney, etc.

The entire 'Film Actors Guild' (F.A.G.). Hahaha

Let's not forget Bonohead.

Matt Damon!

[CDN_Stalker]

LMFAO! Yes Matt, we know.

[TokyoSeven]

Originally Posted by Dog Face Killer

Thats the kettle calling the pot black....All i have gotten have been "smug jabs"!

As far as the "armchair lawyer" comment...i think it would be safe to say that 99% of the people here have never had to deal with the courts...at least i hope they haven't had too , and therefore are basing their opinions on nothing more than speculation and lack of knowledge of the legal system in Canada.

Speculation you say, well before you go swatting away what everyone here has told you today, know that a few of us have dealt with customs first hand on multiple occasions, some of us have attempted appeals and have failed. I even rember an instance where a member of this forum approached the border in person and attempted to solicit a legitmate answer out of a service agent and was only given the same greyish response that we all know.
Dont you dare speculate on what we do know and do not know and claim that we lack knowledge in the Canadian legal system. The majority of us have learned our lessons through experience, we are not basing out opinions on speculation at all. You should be one to talk if anything, since your little crusade is based entirely on "ifs" and not hows.

"What if this? and what if can we convince this person that? what if? what if? what if? what if?"

[TokyoSeven]

Originally Posted by Danke

Matt Damon!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KUow...eature=related

[CDN_Stalker]

YouTube - Matt Damon in Team America

[The Saint]

Originally Posted by Dog Face Killer

Thats the kettle calling the pot black....All i have gotten have been "smug jabs"!

I hope what you refer to as "smug jabs" aren't us providing observations based on years of Canadian government activities. It's not the same thing as you suggesting as we're a bunch of cowards because we're not out there doing what you think we should be doing. You've chosen action against our advise, fine, but there is zero support for your position somehow being inherently superior to ours. As people have pointed out in the past, lobbying is not inherently neutral, the outcomes aren't just "things get better" versus "status quo". Bad lobby calls attention to us and potentially puts our private trades on the line.

And your challenge to us:

I'm ready to put my money ware my mouth is...are you?
Are any of you...or are you all so alienated that your gona curl up into a little ball (rhetorical question).

Why the heck (how the heck?!) would we put our money into proving that it won't work, especially when we've pointed to plenty of previous cases of it not working? Who do you think you are to ask us to chuck our money in the hole to prove you wrong when we have done it for free already? You're the only who's taking all the wrong lessons out of the CITT appeals.

As far as the "armchair lawyer" comment...i think it would be safe to say that 99% of the people here have never had to deal with the courts...at least i hope they haven't had too , and therefore are basing their opinions on nothing more than speculation and lack of knowledge of the legal system in Canada.

It's a little silly to hold your non-airsoft-importation related experience at self-representation above those of people like MacGyver, who has had extensive experience in dealing with CBSA on the issue and expressed plenty of doubt about your plan. I'm willing to bet you weren't representing yourself against the combined might of the CBSA and RCMP, who BTW, has the law on their side.

Originally Posted by CDN_Stalker

Never said I wasn't, just saying that some who use their 'profession' to enforce their views as being correct are kind of annoying. You know, like actors do? Look at Sean Penn and tell me why he's still around these days.

False analogy. Lawdog use his profession to backup his observations because that's an explanation of the depth and type of his involvement. For example, when he's talking about lobbying, it's not like he's just some random guy there. He's their professional legal consule. It's a little hard to be annoyed at him gaining all these first-hand glimps into different social groups and how he can call upon that in a debate. I mean, he's just doing his job. We wouldn't hold it against you if you legitimately brought your professional experience into a debate.

[Dog Face Killer]

Ok....I'm done masturbating this issue with you guy's. Have a great weekend all!

P.S. ill let you all know when the first order gets here!

[Shinjin_MC]

outta curiosity, how are you planning to do this?
have a sticker that has "over 400 fps and under 500fps" on the box?

CBSA is different from RCMP and CFC
they have a lot more freedoms; and you have a lot less, while dealing with em
I have seen first hand CBSA agents taking away boxloads of KJW M700's even though they had manufacturer statements listing its FPS output

[Dog Face Killer]

Originally Posted by Shinjin_MC

outta curiosity, how are you planning to do this?
have a sticker that has "over 400 fps and under 500fps" on the box?

CBSA is different from RCMP and CFC
they have a lot more freedoms; and you have a lot less, while dealing with em
I have seen first hand CBSA agents taking away boxloads of KJW M700's even though they had manufacturer statements listing its FPS output

Can you elaborate on the "exact" chain of events? Were the guns rated at over 400 FPS...did they have the rating on the box and in the manuals that came with the guns...were they tested by the RCMP...did the person appeal the CBSA on the confiscation...can you provide detailed documents on the case...is this a first hand experience or is a story or something someone told you...etc??????

By the way all, i was soooooo bored today on my Saturday day off that i went to go see a good friend of mine that works at Pearson International airport (YYZ)....guess who he works for?!?!?!? you got it...CBSA.....guess what i was told by his supervisor on his coffee brake.....you got it.....if the gun is "actually" rated at over 400FPS, it is no longer considered a "replica" but a firearm...as long as its rated under 500FPS, they have no choice according to the letter of the law, but to clear it...period. Now he did say that depending on the officer in charge that day, they might give you a hassle....and they might want to send it to the RCMP for testing, but in the end...they have no choice but to release it too you.

But you know what...im not even gona take his word for it....why should I....he has only worked for the CBSA for over 10 years and his supervisor has 20+ years of experience.............sooooooooo.........im gona get a letter from the office of the President of the CBSA "Alain Jolicoeur". Ill be sure to post it up once it comes.

but I'm not stopping there!!!...

"REPLICA FIREARMS

9. A replica firearm is a prohibited device under both the Firearms Act and tariff item 9898.00.00 of the Customs Tariff and may not be imported by residents or non-residents.

10. Replica firearms may lawfully be imported into Canada only with a Firearm Business Licence issued by a Chief Firearms Officer that clearly states the named business may import prohibited devices, e.g., by the movie industry for use as props, and an import permit issued by the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT).

11. To determine whether a device is a replica firearm, it is first necessary to determine if it is a firearm.

12. To be a replica firearm, a device must meet three requirements: "not one of the three..ALL THREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(a) it cannot be a firearm, meaning it does not discharge a projectile with sufficient energy to cause serious bodily injury or death to a person;

(b) it must resemble an existing firearm with near precision in size, colour, appearance, and configuration; and

(c) it cannot be designed or intended to exactly resemble, or to resemble with near precision, an antique firearm.

13. The following are examples of devices that could be considered replica firearms:

(a) Generally, toy or model guns and starter pistols do not qualify to be considered as firearms; however, some toy or model guns and starter pistols may be designed with a very realistic mechanism or appearance (e.g., colour, size). For example, the action of a toy or model gun may cycle in a way similar to a real firearm, the cylinder of a model revolver may rotate, or the side of a model automatic pistol may move once the trigger is pulled. In these cases, they are considered replica firearms even if they are made of plastic, die-cast zinc, or other material.

(b) The term air gun is a colloquial term referring to BB or pellet guns. Such guns operate either as spring-powered, gas-powered, or electrically powered. Virtually, all air guns are firearms, as they meet the definition of a firearm in section 2 of the Criminal Code. When the muzzle velocity of an air gun exceeds 152.4 m per second (500 FPS), it is considered a firearm and must meet the licensing, registration, and transportation requirements of the Firearms Act.

(c) When the muzzle velocity of an air gun is less than 152.4 m per second (500 FPS), it is still considered to be a firearm, but is exempt from the licensing, registration, and transportation requirements of the Firearms Act. Such air guns are exempted only from certain provisions that can be found in section 84(3) of the Criminal Code.

Note: A firearm whether exempted or not by virtue of subsection 84(3) of the Criminal Code, cannot be a replica firearm since the definition of replica firearm is found in subsection 84(1) of the Criminal Code, and, thus is not one of the exempted sections.

Air Soft Guns

14. Most air soft guns (NOT ALL) are considered replica firearm as defined in subsection 84(1) of the Criminal Code. They are clearly designed not only to resemble a firearm with near precision but also to resemble a specific and readily identifiable make and model of firearm. Due to their strong resemblance to real firearms and their lack of capacity to cause serious bodily injury, air soft guns are replica firearms.

15. If you need more information on the capacity of a given device to inflict injury, its muzzle velocity, its resemblance to real firearms, or any other technical matters, detain the shipment and:

(a) use the Firearms Reference Table;

(b) consult regional firearms experts; or

(c) send a sample of the device along with a letter explaining your request to:

Chief Scientist, Firearms
Central Forensic Laboratory
Royal Canadian Mounted Police
1200 Vanier Parkway
Ottawa ON K1G 3M8"


Source you ask??? = CBSA http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/E/pub/cm/...html#P99_16503

[The Saint]

Originally Posted by Dog Face Killer

But you know what...im not even gona take his word for it....why should I....he has only worked for the CBSA for over 10 years and his supervisor has 20+ years of experience.............sooooooooo.........im gona get a letter from the office of the President of the CBSA "Alain Jolicoeur". Ill be sure to post it up once it comes.

Your entire post contains absolutely nothing new. If you had bothered thoroughly checking previous threads on this, you'd realize that people have spoken to CBSA officials and gotten all sorts of responses, none of it in writing. So please get off your pedestal.

Good luck getting it in writing from Alain Jolicoeur. I'm guessing you're not familiar with CBSA appeal procedure, but appeal on seizures can take the form of reclassification of the device in question by the president of CBSA. CITT has thus far blocked all appeals, and by extension, all cases from ever reaching the point of a reclassification by the CBSA president.

[Dog Face Killer]

Originally Posted by The Saint

Your entire post contains absolutely nothing new. If you had bothered thoroughly checking previous threads on this, you'd realize that people have spoken to CBSA officials and gotten all sorts of responses, none of it in writing. So please get off your pedestal.

Good luck getting it in writing from Alain Jolicoeur. I'm guessing you're not familiar with CBSA appeal procedure, but appeal on seizures can take the form of reclassification of the device in question by the president of CBSA. CITT has thus far blocked all appeals, and by extension, all cases from ever reaching the point of a reclassification by the CBSA president.

Prove it....put your money ware your mouth is...show me one iota of "official" documentation on this. All the evidence i have provided thus far...including CITT rulings from CANLII, have been self explanatory...unless you can provide proof, i would kindly suggest you back down!