The OIC has been such a clusterf@ck I don't know if they ever actually defined the method to determine energy levels but I assume they would need to look at something like SAAMI specs for factory ammunition rather than what someone conjures up at their reloading bench.
Determining the energy level of a fired projectile is relatively simple. Mass of projectile in Grams multiplied by Speed in Meters per second = Joules of Kinetic Energy.
The trick is determining whether a firearm is capable, under any circumstances, of producing such a shot. It can not be done by math, or by reading markins, or considering saami specs. It can only be confirmed by trying to actually fire a shot in excess of 10kj. This is consistent with the current forensic practice of determining whether a barrelled object meets the definition of firearm, which at the lower bound, requires it be proven that a firearm can fire a with sufficient energy to cause serious bodily harm.
With that argument, the majority of centrefire rifles are prohibited then - As Rwilco points out above with things like barrel swaps and handloads made way too hot an extremely large percentage of guns could be prohibited under such a broad interpretation.
However, I see two major flaws with that logic - the FRT was changed on things like 460bee and 50bmg, and that interpretation is clearly not in the spirit of the law (which as far as I'm aware is something judges consider?).
My interpretation is "capable of..." is used so you cannot download a cartridge like 50bmg to get around the limit. But I'm just a guy on the internet...
Exactly correct. And this is where most gun owners fail to realize just how overly broad the OiC is. The RCMP are trying to take a more narrow approach because it serves their interests to not capture all of the firearms which are captured. The liberal government is pretending that their definition isn't as broad as it actually is, and the gun orgs are probably keeping quiet because overbreadth is one of their possible arguments at the federal court challenges.
What you see as flaws in the logic, are not flaws in the logic. They are problems with the implications of the logic, but that doesn't prove or disprove whether the interpretation is correct, that simply suggests that if the interpretation were properly applied and fully enforced, 2/3rds of the centre fire rifles in Canada are now prohibited.
Don't talk about the FRT as if that is an authority on anything.
The FRT is a book of lies.
The Classification Regulations now say that a firearm capable of firing a shot in excess of 10kj is prohibited.
The Criminal code says, and has said for decades, that a firearm is both a whole firearm, a receiver only, and anything that can be adapted to be either a whole firearm or a receiver only.
If a given receiver can be configured in multiple chamberings, and one of those chambers is over the limit, than the receiver itself becomes prohibited, regardless of what its chambered for. The RCMP are pretending that only firearms PRESENTLY chambered in a +10KJ chamber is prohibited, but as we know the RCMP Drones change their minds like they change their underwear, and they have not yet, ever, testified on behalf of a gun owner at their trial. Even if the law expressly stated only firearms in their current form are prohibited if capable of 10kj, the Hasselwander ruling could immediately be applied such that any firearm readily convertible is still prohibited. Most centre guns can swap barrels with a bench vice and a pipe wrench in under a minute, and would easily pass the hasselwander test.
But all this is picking pepper out of Fly #hit, because most bolt action rifles have already been vulnerable to being deemed prohibited simply by virtue of the nebulous manner in which 'variant or modified version' can and has been applied to other firearms on the previous OIC list, which already included numerous bolt action rifles.
