How some Canadians companies stand by their product.

[u/cdn_sentry117]

With Sterling Arms standing up for themselves against the prohibited classification the RCMP put on the R9, and winning, it got me thinking about the Crusader Arms Crypto. Those guys came out with a rifle that met the new laws, then pumped out a bunch of beyond subpar rifles with worse than Chinese QC. Made a pile of cash and as soon as it was banned, did nothing to stand up for their product. Instead created another piece of garbage.

Not to just bash CA (well, maybe a little, actually a lot), we now have seen what a good Canadian firearms manufacturer does. Makes a product, stands by it, then fights for it. Their win, to me anyway, shows what companies we should actually support.

After CA removed their website, blocks peoples comments on Instagram that comment the issues they have with their new Backland Hunter rifles I am genuinely shocked anyone can still support them by giving them a dime.

Anyway, I'm kind of curious what other people's thoughts are on CA doing nothing to fight for the rifle they developed, that also being a fight for their customers base. Especially now that we have seen Sterling Arms having being successful with their R9 reclassification. Will this maybe get them to take a stance for the crypto classification?

[u/CanadianMultigun]

I think you should be careful about this comparison.

We´ve all seen how insane the Canadian system is with it´s literal time travel decisions (a gun designed before another gun was determined to be a variant of the 2nd gun), completely incoherent application of the rules and banning by name etc.

I´m really glad SAI won their argument, but the track record of the ATRS and the general "Fuck you the rules only count when I want them to" attitude of the government & RCMP means that it´s a really difficult decision to commit a huge amount of time and money to.