To get it out of the way, there is no exemption in the Law for the Ljungman AG42B to use more than the 5 rounds prescribed for a semi automatic rifle magazine.
If you read the law, the 10 round Lee Enfield magazine is specifically exempted by name. This is because of the automatic Lee Enfield based rifles.
I am not arguing that the authors of the Law
thought they were doing something meaningful, only that the result is pointless (and un-enforceable):
The
Cartridge Magazine Control Regulations specifically exempt magazines for the Charlton Rifle (
SOR/98-462 S.3(2)(b)(i)). Why would they need a further exemption for the Lee Enfield?
The
Regulations deal entirely with semi automatic (and auto) fire-arms. Section 2(a)(ii) says that Lee-Enfield magazines are exempt from S.1(a); S.1(a) names semi fire-arms only. The Lee-Enfield is already exempt from 1(a), by virtue of its manual action.
Charltons mostly used Bren magazines, for their larger capacity.
Charltons were converted from obsolete LM and MLE, and some from SMLE. All of those use a different magazine from a No.4 (or No.5) rifle.
Charltons are quite rare; they were produced sparingly as experiments to begin with, and most were lost in a depot fire after the War. I don't know who they expect to see hunting with one.
Magazine controls are based on the fire-arm that the magazine
was designed for. The famous RCMP
Bulletin 72 covers this in all its combinations. The magazines in question are No.4/5 and No.1 rifle magazines, and just like LAR-15 pistol mag.s aren't limited by the fact that they fit in ARs, neither are these.
To me it seems like an ill-conceived attempt to limit what was the most plentiful gun in the nation, for fear that somebody would realize they could start a factory for 100-round drums for the things, and suddenly the woods would be awash in blood.
