AIA Enfield mags - Here in 2014 **ACCEPTING PRE-ORDERS**

Wait, so are we getting 20/20 & 25/25 mags or are they going to be pinned to 5 now cause the RCMP says they're duel use?
 
This is just another example of the problem(s) with our firearms act.

The guys at NR Magazine are just trying to run a business, and the rules are so unclear they need a ruling from the RCMP to proceed, and when they get that ruling it doesn't even stick, the RCMP reverse the decision, citing 'dual use' -- a term that does not even appear in the relevant acts and regulations.
 
a little part of me died as I read that today :(

...now i'm just angry at the RCMP Firearms Lab

I was worried something like this would happen with all the open talk of using these mags in M14's.


Until things change, you guys have to realize we are at the whim of the RCMP, like it or not. You can't take them at their word, and the appear to delight in screwing us over.




B said:
Dear B,

This email is being sent to you because a problem has developed with your order.

In May of 2014 the RCMP had informed Northern Republic Magazine Inc. that magazines for Lee-Enfield variants not using the traditional .303 British magazine did not require a capacity restriction. However, in June of 2014, the RCMP has notified Northern Republic Magazine Inc. that they view the AIA Enfield magazine as a "Dual use" magazine with the M14 rifle, meaning that the capacity rules for semiautomatic rifle magazines should apply.

However, the RCMP have indicated that Section 84 of the Criminal Code of Canada's states that rather than the typical five (5) round limit for semiautomatic rifles, a permissible capacity of ten (10) rounds for the Lee-Enfield rifle applies to the AIA Enfield rifle instead of the five (5) rounds typically associated with magazines that can be used in a semi-automatic firearm.

Northern Republic Magazine Inc. had originally planned to bring the AIA Enfield magazine chambered in .308 Win into Canada with a ten (10) round limit, however the confusion with the RCMP prompted Northern Republic Magazine Inc. to change their marketing to promote an unblocked magazine. We understand that you may have made your purchase of an AIA Enfield magazine with the understanding that there was no capacity restriction on the magazine. However, in order to facilitate the legal import of the AIA magazines in Canada, all magazines with capacity over ten (10) rounds will again be manufactured with a ten (10) cartridge limit in place.

Should you chose to cancel your order, no penalties will be incurred and a full refund issued.

Northern Republic Magazine Inc.
Click to expand...
 
romurra said:
This is just another example of the problem(s) with our firearms act.

The guys at NR Magazine are just trying to run a business, and the rules are so unclear they need a ruling from the RCMP to proceed, and when they get that ruling it doesn't even stick, the RCMP reverse the decision, citing 'dual use' -- a term that does not even appear in the relevant acts and regulations.
Click to expand...

It just underlines the problem with a "Firearms Act" that is allegedly intended to 'control' the 'legitimate' use of firearms but one in which all the power to make decisions is in reality given to a bureaucracy whose ultimate intention is to ensure that there are no longer ANY 'legitimate' uses of firearms OR 'legitimate' firearms to use so that it can 'control' them right out of legal existence.

And this little power-grab is just one more tiny step on that road.

About 35 years ago, when I was first applying for my first FAC, I commented to the local firearms officer in the local police department that the hoops I had to jump through and the red tape that was involved in everything really made no sense whatsoever when it came to preventing misuse of firearms. And he (and ALL the clerks in the office) simultaneously told me that as far as they could see, the entire reason for ALL the forms and the red tape was simply to try to discourage as many people as possible from ever becoming firearms owners. In their view, the idea was to create as many obstacles as possible on the way to legal ownership of firearms so that the only people who would bother to jump through all the hoops -- getting an FAC to buy non-restricted firearms -- and then going through all the additional application processes to register restricted firearms and apply for ATTs to use them -- would be those who were really and truly determined to own firearms. The 'waverers' who would see something about skeet-shooting, for example, and decide "that looks like fun, I think I'll give it a whirl" would bump into this enormous snarl of red tape in their path when they went to buy the shotgun ... and would decide to take up fishing or photography or golf or motorbike racing instead. And over the years and decades, this would reduce the number of firearms users and thus eventually, over time, kill off the shooting sports to the point that legal firearms ownership could be ended in Canada.

I have never seen anything in the last 35 years that would suggest this was not a completely accurate description of the long-term 'social engineering' plan of which the Firearms Act is just the latest additional turn of the screw.
 
I can't say I'm surprised at this, and I'm getting mighty sick and tired of the RCMP Firearms Lab.

That said, I will still gladly renew my order for the 10/20 mags for my AIA rifle. At $75.00, and considering how much the used mags go for on the EE, it's still a great deal for a niche market item.

Thanks NR Magazine.
 
JNA said:
Im changing my order from the 25 rounders to the 10 rounders.
Click to expand...

As will I, I had ordered 20 rounders, I'll just go to 10. Canceled the order yesterday, I'm just waiting for the refund to go through on my card before I replace that order (don't want to pinch the old credit limit).

Also, I want to say to NR Magazine; you guys are great. You've put in a ton of effort to bring us what should turn out to be a great product, and what the RCMP did isn't your fault. I for one am not angry with you guys at all, in fact I'm really appreciative. I'll replace an order with you guys as soon as my card is credited. Cheers!
 
Last edited:
Im not putting this on nrm, everything iis on the rcmp shoulder. Nrm did an awesome thing for the firearm community, popo came in and be Mr killjoy
 
sky52 said:
Im not putting this on nrm, everything iis on the rcmp shoulder. Nrm did an awesome thing for the firearm community, popo came in and be Mr killjoy
Click to expand...

This. My only criticism was there was way, way too much made on this thread by members on how they would be compatible with M14's.
 
That genie was already out of the bottle. Apparently there are You-Tube videos featuring it, as well as other threads. It would be pretty naive to think that the RCMP were not already aware, or even remotely interested in other applications for the magazines. That being said, however, I wish they would stop spending so much of their time and our tax dollars looking for ways to give us the shaft.
 
Odd Shot said:
This. My only criticism was there was way, way too much made on this thread by members on how they would be compatible with M14's.
Click to expand...

If the RCMP truly decided they were dual use, ie for use in a bolt action, and a semi auto center fire, they would have made the decision to limit them to the lowest capacity of the two magazine types. Specifically, 5 rounds. That is how other mags designed for two types of canadian firearms, ie dual purpose or dual use, have been restricted.

In this case, it appears that they have use the 10 round "exemption" noted for the enfield mags as the limiting factor of the mag design.

If it was a dual use ruling, the mags would pinned to 5.
 
fenceline said:
If the RCMP truly decided they were dual use, ie for use in a bolt action, and a semi auto center fire, they would have made the decision to limit them to the lowest capacity of the two magazine types. Specifically, 5 rounds. That is how other mags designed for two types of canadian firearms, ie dual purpose or dual use, have been restricted.

In this case, it appears that they have use the 10 round "exemption" noted for the enfield mags as the limiting factor of the mag design.

If it was a dual use ruling, the mags would pinned to 5.
Click to expand...

To me it reads something like this...

Rcmp was going to limit them to 5, then someone (probably their lawyer) pointed out the exemption for Lee Enfields, and so they upped the capacity to 10.

Sounds like we need another letter campaign to our MPs. There is two key points to push.

1) the rcmp gave the ok for these magazines, then a month later changed their minds.

2) these magazines are designed for a bolt action rifle. Regardless of what they happen to fit into, they are manufactured as AIA enfield magazines. As stated by NRM there is even design differences.

Also where did they come up with this "dual purpose" term?
 
Suther said:
To me it reads something like this...

Rcmp was going to limit them to 5, then someone (probably their lawyer) pointed out the exemption for Lee Enfields, and so they upped the capacity to 10.

Sounds like we need another letter campaign to our MPs. There is two key points to push.

1) the rcmp gave the ok for these magazines, then a month later changed their minds.

2) these magazines are designed for a bolt action rifle. Regardless of what they happen to fit into, they are manufactured as AIA enfield magazines. As stated by NRM there is even design differences.

Also where did they come up with this "dual purpose" term?
Click to expand...

If they classed them as only being for an enfield rifle! then ya! I can see that logic. But if they classed them as m14/enfield mags, it would be five.

Look at the bx25 mags. Pistol and rimfire rifle mags, limited to 10 as pustol are the lowest.

Either way, shows the asinine complicated firearms act as being a ridiculously incoherent piece of dribble.
 
Should have done what marstar did. Annouced the mag. Lock the thread, no commenting allowed. If ppl ask if they will fit any other firearm,john would ignore them and tell them to re read the decription again.
 
Also, stop mentioning it is a lee enfield mag. Its not even a goddamn lee enfield firearm. Some ppl on here should not even reproduce, dragging down the iq level average of the gene pool
 
sky52 said:
Also, stop mentioning it is a lee enfield mag. Its not even a goddamn lee enfield firearm. Some ppl on here should not even reproduce, dragging down the iq level average of the gene pool
Click to expand...

Like saying an ar15 made by one company in another caliber isn't an ar15 because it wasn't made by armalite.

Variation on a theme. The theme being Enfields, made by AIA, in 308.
 
Parts are not interchangeable between a mk4 and an AIA M10. No bayo lug, no stripper clip guide, different mags/magwell, different calibre, etc.

If this is the case, then a Ruger 10/22 is a variant of my CIL semi-auto.

This needs to be challenged using all facts at hand.
 
NaviDave said:
Parts are not interchangeable between a mk4 and an AIA M10. No bayo lug, no stripper clip guide, different mags/magwell, different calibre, etc.

If this is the case, then a Ruger 10/22 is a variant of my CIL semi-auto.

This needs to be challenged using all facts at hand.
Click to expand...

There are AKs that are not interchangable between one brand to another. Still AK actions. Bayo lugs and stripper clip guides aren't the defining part of a gun design.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom