Another RCMP Memo?

mmattockx

mmattockx

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
103   0   0
Location
Done with sheeple
From this thread in the Black Rifles Forum: http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?p=5670079#post5670079

As posted by Rick at ATRS:

alberta tactical rifle said:
I agree with your logic, if we become a pita for the CFOs they may although unlikely want to rethink this latest bit of poorly thought-out legislation.

The memo we got from the RCMP is pretty clear that they are now limiting ALL rimfire mags to 10 round only regardless of what the mags fit.
I believe it was an attempt to get the "centerfire" semi auto rifles that are adapted to shoot rimfire back into black letter law of 5 rounds with the 10 round pistol mag exemption, but as usual someone who did the writing had no concept of the ramifications.

I sure hope who ever gets elected has a budget fopr FAR more courts and prisons as they just made how many thousand more criminals????:eek:
Click to expand...

Have any other of our dealers got another memo after the S&W M&P 15/22 mag fiasco?

Thanks,
Mark
 
http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/bulletins/bus-ent/20110323-72-eng.htm


1. Magazines designed or manufactured for both rimfire calibre rifles and handguns

Magazines designed to contain rimfire cartridges and designed or manufactured for use in a rifle do not have a regulated capacity. However, magazines designed to contain rimfire cartridges and designed or manufactured for use in a semiautomatic handgun are limited to 10 cartridges. Magazines designed or manufactured for use in both rifles and semiautomatic handguns are subject to the handgun limit of 10 cartridges.

Example:
Smith & Wesson M&P 15-22 rifle and 15-22P pistol chambered for 22LR caliber:

the 10 round magazine is unregulated
the 25 round magazine is a prohibited device
 
So how just many 25, 30 and 50 round mags for the 10/22 are there in Canada? That's quite a few prohibited items they've just created just for this one rifle.

Words simply cannot express how utterly stupid this is. Or they (keyword: RCMP) are.
 
Read Bulletin Number 72 very carefully. It does NOT state that all .22 semi auto magazines with a capacity of more than 10 rounds are prohibited devices. Those magazines designed and manufactured for use in both rifles and handguns are the ones affected.
 
http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/bulletins/bus-ent/20110330-73-eng.htm

Special Bulletin for Businesses No. 73

Armi Chiappa introduced both the Model m four-22 Rifle and the Model m four-22 Pistol in late 2010. Both firearms are semi-automatic, and chambered for 22LR rim-fire ammunition. The cartridge magazine sold with both firearms has a nominal capacity of 28 shots. The magazines are common to both the rifle and handgun (Pistol) version of the firearm and all advertising material portrays the two firearms with the 28 shot magazine. There is a reference in the Armi Chiappa advertising to a ten shot magazine for jurisdictions where there are cartridge magazine capacity limitations.

The ten shot magazine for Armi Chiappa Model m four-22 which is sold as an accessory, is an unregulated item in Canada; however, the 28 shot magazine for the Armi Chiappa Model m four-22 is a prohibited device, since it exceeds the legal capacity for use in a semiautomatic handgun.
Conclusions

All 22LR rim-fire calibre semi automatic handgun cartridge magazines are limited to 10 shots of the kind or type for which the cartridge magazine was designed. Cartridge magazines are not serial numbered. The cartridge magazines in question are "designed and manufactured for use in a handgun," and therefore fall into the following legal class:

1. The ten shot (10 shot) cartridge magazine is an acceptable cartridge magazine.
2. The twenty-eight shot (28 Shot) cartridge magazine is a "prohibited device" and unlicensed possession is an offence.

For more information, please contact the RCMP Canadian Firearms Program by one of the following methods:

telephone: 1 800-731-4000 ext. 2542

web site: www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/index-eng.htm

e-mail: cfp-pcaf@rcmp-grc.gc.ca

This bulletin is intended to provide general information only. For legal references, please refer to the Firearms Act, the Criminal Code and Regulations. Provincial, territorial and municipal laws, regulations and policies may also apply.
 
Farmer Harv said:
By the wording as given above...yes. :mad: Being that both the Charger and the 10/22 (& SR-22) use the same mags, I'm now a criminal.

What a bunch of Idiots.
Click to expand...

As long as Butler Creek, et al, do not advertise, promote, label, market their magazines as being intended for use in 10/22 rifles AS WELL AS the Charger pistol, the RIFLE magazines are perfectly legal.
Magazines designed and manufactured for use in rifles are OK.
Magazines designed and manufactured for use in pistols, or for use in both rifles and pistols are the ones affected.
 
tiriaq said:
As long as Butler Creek, et al, do not advertise, promote, label, market their magazines as being intended for use in 10/22 rifles AS WELL AS the Charger pistol, the RIFLE magazines are perfectly legal.
Magazines designed and manufactured for use in rifles are OK.Magazines designed and manufactured for use in pistols, or for use in both rifles and pistols are the ones affected.
Click to expand...

Not according to the RCMP
 
tiriaq said:
As long as Butler Creek, et al, do not advertise, promote, label, market their magazines as being intended for use in 10/22 rifles AS WELL AS the Charger pistol, the RIFLE magazines are perfectly legal.
Magazines designed and manufactured for use in rifles are OK.
Magazines designed and manufactured for use in pistols, or for use in both rifles and pistols are the ones affected.
Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying, and it might very well be true, but I wonder if that little nuance might well be wasted on the people who have the ability to make my life miserable.

Maybe there will be a Special Bulletin released for the 10/22 that I can carry (along with the other Special Bulletins related to magazines, as well as proof of non-restricted status for a few rifles), so I can explain that I'm really not breaking the law when I'm out shooting.

Maybe I'll call tomorrow and see if I can get something in writing from the CFC about my 10/22 mags. Anyone want to give odds on how it'll turn out...?
 
tiriaq said:
As long as Butler Creek, et al, do not advertise, promote, label, market their magazines as being intended for use in 10/22 rifles AS WELL AS the Charger pistol, the RIFLE magazines are perfectly legal.
Magazines designed and manufactured for use in rifles are OK.
Magazines designed and manufactured for use in pistols, or for use in both rifles and pistols are the ones affected.
Click to expand...

yes but there not gonna nueter my 10 22 ill keep my butler creek mags and i can prove in court that they were designed for use in the guns listed on the bags the mags came in and no where on the packaging does it say for use in the ruger charger pistol and with that they can charge me but guess what ill beat it in court hands down plus my mags were purchased long before ruger even came out with the charger pistol so how could the mag possibly be made for a firearm that dident exsist when the magazine was made and designed for that fact.Its sorta like the argument what came first the chicken or the egg
 
jimbo45 said:
yes but there not gonna nutter my 10 22 ill keep my butler creek mags and i can prove in court that they were designed for use in the guns listed on the bags the mags came in and no where on the packaging does it say for use in the ruger charger pistol and with that they can charge me but guess what ill beat it in court hands down
Click to expand...

But the Ruger charger uses the same mag as the 1022 rifle
Ruger sells the rifle & charger with a 10 shot rotary clip . BC & others make larger capacity mags to fit the 1022 and they also fit the charger.
Read the RCMP memo they no longer specify what the mag was made for . If it fits a rimfire rifle & pistol its 10 rnds period
 
So they have managed to make the water even muddier with these last two rulings. What a can of worms this is turning into. I can see a visit to my MP coming as soon as this election is cleared up.

I had hoped that someone had info on the memo Rick mentioned in my OP, it must be the Chiappa memo he was referencing.

Mark
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom