Idpa q&a

stormbringer said:
That would be prudent........

Mind you I also carry a copy of the transport regs for the very same reason. Plenty of shooters do not know the rules and the police are no different in far to many cases.
Click to expand...

I also carry a copy of the regs same as you Storm, I also carry a copy or two of the letter from the RCMP regarding the 10 rd AR pistol mags when I am using that at the range. I have had one occasion to present the AR mag letter. That is my point if you don't have the paperwork to back you up it could get ugly.
 
I really don`t see what the problem is here....If there is a letter from the RCMP, as some people claim, concerning this mag issue, then for heaven`s sake, post it!.....Why all the secrecy?.....
 
Airwolf said:
Why all the secrecy?
Click to expand...
It isn't a secret - select people whose discretion I trust have seen it.

If we just post it on CGN, countless pissy, angry, demanding persons are going to contact the Firearms Support Services people for "clarification", "confirmation", and so on. This will rightly irritate the group that issued the letter and may negatively influence future positive determinations.

Also, the gentleman who did the determination was a pleasure to deal with and I'd hate to expose him to such a flood.

I'm looking into the CSSA publishing the key contents with an explanatory article that will give context and, in so doing, reduce the spillover to the RCMP - Stormbringer is talking to the senior people in the CSSA to gauge interest.

The determination is about two years old, so it's about time to tell the wider shooting community, but I intend to do it in a measured way.
 
acrashb said:
I'm looking into the CSSA publishing the key contents with an explanatory article that will give context and, in so doing, reduce the spillover to the RCMP - Stormbringer is talking to the senior people in the CSSA to gauge interest.

The determination is about two years old, so it's about time to tell the wider shooting community, but I intend to do it in a measured way.
Click to expand...

That sounds a lot better than continuing this hijack of a thread. Give us all a heads up, acrashb or Storm, if there are any new developments.

We have heard enough of the interpretation of the law as it is written, and we have enough from those who refuse to believe that it would be legally possible to put more than 10rds of a certain caliber into a pistol magazine that is clearly designed for another caliber.

The logical next step is to let us all see how the RCMP interpret the law and work from there.

Keep us in the loop if CSSA or anyone else intends to publish a piece or all of the letter from the RCMP.
 
... I still get crap from people at the club using 10rnd LAR mags.. I'm not going to even try and explain to them the legalities of using .40 double stack mags in my 9mm Para.

My one issue with the .40 Para mags is that they're not marked, and my .40 mags look just like my 9mm mags, only hold more ammo. So in this case, I have to tread lightly.. (and keep my mag receipts).

For the most part, it's really not worth it.. right or wrong. I think the whole base ruling is so screwed up that we're able to have these types of discussions. If I shoot my myself or with my comrades, I use them. If it's a club-level event or meet, they stay at home.
 
DMcFaul said:
... I still get crap from people at the club using 10rnd LAR mags.. I'm not going to even try and explain to them the legalities of using .40 double stack mags in my 9mm Para.

My one issue with the .40 Para mags is that they're not marked, and my .40 mags look just like my 9mm mags, only hold more ammo. So in this case, I have to tread lightly.. (and keep my mag receipts).

For the most part, it's really not worth it.. right or wrong. I think the whole base ruling is so screwed up that we're able to have these types of discussions. If I shoot my myself or with my comrades, I use them. If it's a club-level event or meet, they stay at home.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure your receipt proves anything. If you magazines aren't marked, you possibly offside. The receipt can be traced to that specific magazine unless they are serially numbered, which I doubt.

Without the stampings, you'll have a tough time proving the magazine was originally designed for a .40 cal
 
Onagoth said:
I'm not sure your receipt proves anything. If you magazines aren't marked, you possibly offside. The receipt can be traced to that specific magazine unless they are serially numbered, which I doubt.

Without the stampings, you'll have a tough time proving the magazine was originally designed for a .40 cal
Click to expand...

Can the 9 round mags hold the .40? If not maybe that would help.
 
The lips will (almost certainly) be wider in the .40 than the 9mm. THe follower is likely different as well. But markings are better, as they are clear and have been noted as important in the Beretta Storm saga.
 
stormbringer said:
Please send me a copy of this email ASAP.

stormbringer@amtelecom.net

BTW..........EESA goes by what ever the LAW says........not one point less.

Which if you were unaware means that if you have a Beretta 92 in .40 SW and it fits 14 9mms you would be good to go! (note in IPSC you are limited to 10).
Click to expand...

(answering the bolded text)....as you are in IDPA. Revolvers in IDPA are limited to 6 in the cylinder, although you can use revolvers with more capacity (ie. you can use a revolver with a 7 or 8 round capacity cylinder, but only load it with 6). Same with CDP - you can use an auto with a higher capacity, but only loaded with 8 max. (ie a Glock 21sf).

A slight clarification should be noted about a cover garment. There are some instances where a stage will not require it (such as a simulated late night burglary where you are supposedly in bed asleep to start), and of course you do not use a concealment garment for the classifier.

:nest:Not sure why you guys are bickering about the silly mag laws but it really should be broken out into a new thread. just mho.:nest:
 
John in B.C. said:
It's called a hijack and frankly I think this thread shows what a bunch of jerks CGN'ers can be at times.

I am very disappointed...but not all that surprised :(

John
Click to expand...

Maybe the original poster can chime in on whether this thread going off topic bothers them? Personally his question was addressed and then turned into another interesting topic. If this was my original thread it wouldn't bother me one bit. I bet if we took a poll on which bothered posters more, hijacks or people calling CGN members jerks I think the latter would win!
 
acrashb said:
It isn't a secret - select people whose discretion I trust have seen it.

If we just post it on CGN, countless pissy, angry, demanding persons are going to contact the Firearms Support Services people for "clarification", "confirmation", and so on. This will rightly irritate the group that issued the letter and may negatively influence future positive determinations.

Also, the gentleman who did the determination was a pleasure to deal with and I'd hate to expose him to such a flood.

I'm looking into the CSSA publishing the key contents with an explanatory article that will give context and, in so doing, reduce the spillover to the RCMP - Stormbringer is talking to the senior people in the CSSA to gauge interest.

The determination is about two years old, so it's about time to tell the wider shooting community, but I intend to do it in a measured way.
Click to expand...

Nonsense.....You`re treating this "letter" from the RCMP like you have the Dead Sea Scrolls....
Only "select" people whose "discretion" I trust have seen it....
Click to expand...
You sound like a politician who believes only they have the "wisdom" and "intelligence" to deal with this (almost) self proclaimed sensitive letter....We poor street peasants just don`t have the mental capacity to judge these things for ourselves...As a matter of fact, this sounds more like Micheal (I`m better than you) Ignatieff
...This will rightly irritate the group that issued the letter and may negatively influence future positive determinations....
Click to expand...
Good Grief, listen to yourself.....The RCMP have published many documents that have clarified firearms issue`s, yet you, and others, really believe the police will throw a hissy-fit if people seek some clarification?....People called, (and probably still call) the RCMP over the 10 round AR15 mag affair, and did that have a "negative influence" on future judgments?......Some people here seem think that they belong to CISIS or the CIA....:rolleyes:
Back to the topic....
 
Just to finally put an end to this hijack, the following is an excerpt from a CSSA email today....

"Did you know?

Many .40 S&W handgun mags are perfectly usable in 9mm Luger pistols. These magazines will hold an extra 3-4 shots. For example, the Beretta 96 .40 S&W magazine will hold 14 rounds of 9mm ammunition and functions perfectly in Beretta 92 pistols and Cx4 carbines. Not only is the extra magazine capacity handy, IT IS PERFECTLY LEGAL!

In a letter dated July 9, 2007, RCMP Senior Firearms Technologist William Etter states, "The Former Cartridge Magazine Control Regulations are oriented to the possession of Cartridge Magazines. Once a cartridge magazine is acceptable as a magazine for a "handgun, commonly available in Canada" and is capable of containing ten shots or less of the kind or type for which the magazine was originally designed, its further use in any other handgun or any other calibre cartridge is not regulated.

The use of a Heckler & P7 M10 cartridge magazine in a Heckler & P7 M13 firearm loaded with 13 cartridges of 9MM LUGER calibre, in our opinion, would not constitute a violation of the Former Cartridge Magazine Control Regulations."

This is great news for pistol shooters. Canadian shooters have envied our American cousins since the onset of our silly magazine restrictions came into force. Now it appears, there is a little light at the end of the tunnel."


Time to buy some G22 mags for my G17!
 
cbabes said:
Just to finally put an end to this hijack, the following is an excerpt from a CSSA email today....
[...]
IT IS PERFECTLY LEGAL!
Click to expand...
I love being right.

Bill Etter is the guy I worked with (as mentioned, a fine gentleman); the CSSA took the letter, paved some ground, and has now released the results.

Thanks to Tony at the CSSA for moving this forward.
 
Also a small little caveat.
Magazines should be factory marked with the original calibre they were designed for.
Buying an aftermarket Beretta 96 Mag to use in your Beretta 92 may be a great boon, BUT if there are no markings on the magazine, there is no way to determine original calibre.

Just a heads up. Otherwise I forsee a resurgence of Beretta Storm 9mm for multigun matches... :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom