Incidentally, I believe the majority of examples of the Charlton conversion were lost in a warehouse fire after they were mothballed following the victory over Japan. I think most of the surviving ones are in museums.
20 rd Lee Enfield magazine
- Thread starter Skaal-tel
- Start date
Incidentally, I believe the majority of examples of the Charlton conversion were lost in a warehouse fire after they were mothballed following the victory over Japan. I think most of the surviving ones are in museums.
- Location
- WMU247 near Edmonton
I thought the Huot was Ross based
and the South Africans had an enfield conversion? Rieder
Not a good example.
The AIA mags are for a manually operated firearm, but are limited to 10 rounds because the RCMP said so. If anything, that reinforces the fact that OP may have a prohibited device In my eyes.
The AIA magazine was designed and manufactured for use in a manually operated firearm.
The Lee Enfield magazine was designed and manufactured for use in a manually operated firearm.
The WWI 20 round Lee Enfield magazine was designed and manufactured for use in a manually operated firearm.
None of these was designed and manufactured for use in an auto firearm.
Nor were the 20round AIA magazines, but those got the ban-stick...
The difference is that these were not AIA magazines. They were magazines allegedly for the AIA rifle, but the market was for use in M305/M1A rifles. Dual purpose. Were they manufactured for use in a manually operated rifle, or manufactured so that they could be used in an auto rifle? That is what caused the RCMP policy. And are the 20 rounders listed anywhere as prohibited devices, or was it a matter of the importer deciding to go along with the RCMP opinion and marketing only 10 rounders?
Except there is still holes in that story. If the RCMP is considering them magazines for an automatic rifle, they should be limited to 5 rounds, as per regulations. By not limiting them to 5 rounds the RCMP is saying they must be for something other than a semi-auto rifle. Of course, that brings up the whole can of worms for where did they come up with 10 rounds being okay? And the only thing I can think of is that stipulation about the Enfield mags limited to 10 rounds.
Sorry, that just does not make sense. If it is prohibed, then it is designed for a semi-centre and therefore 5rds.. If not, then it's unlimited. There is nothing about 10rd mags dealing with long guns. It is only pistols, (firearm designed and shot with one hand) that is regulated for 10rds. And the mags have been ruled as to: what the firearm was designed to use for either long guns, and handguns. Sub-guns have been determined to be not handguns, therefore fall under the long gun definition of 5 rd. Of course there is link and belt, but another time.
Where is this mythical RCMP "said so"?
You are right. It doesn't make sense. But it happened. Someone was making/going to import 10, 20, and I think even 30 round AIA magazines, which are technically designed for the AIA enfield rifle, a new-production 308 caliber enfield made in australia. These magazines *happened* to fit in the M14-style rifles as well. The RCMP got wind of this, and told the importer they had to be pinned to 10 rounds.
They claimed something about it being a dual purpose magazine, even though such a term doesn't exist in the regulations or anything... I dont know all the details, but I do know something about it stinks....
Eaglelord17
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Sault Ste. Marie
It is not a dual purpose magazine. I have witnessed someone try to put a M14 magazine in a AIA, you can't without modifying the mag. AIA mags do fit in the M14 though. Basically the AIA uses a standalone magazine that happens to be extremely similar to a M14 magazine but isn't quite a M14 magazine.
stencollector
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- shilo MB, the armpit of Canada
So the mag fits both the AIA and the M14, is marketed towards both, but is not a dual purpose magazine? The importers are lucky it was not limited to 5 rounds.
You are saying there was a "determination" by the CFC lab, the 20+ mags were also designed for a semi-auto/centre, therefore prohibed..... OK. It doesn't actually explain the 10rd number, as if it is a "bad" mag for use in a SA/Centre, then it should be maxed at 5rds. The situation you are describing is missing something. There is no "provision" for a determination to make up a non-existent/arbitrary number, ie. 10rd max for any long gun. (yes I know making up regs or law isn't something new to the lab but....and I know there would be no back room armstronging importers by the lab, but........)
If there was a company that designed a specific mag, 20-30rd, marketed and marked as for the bolt, then I believe it would be OK. If by happenstance it was "unfortunate" enough to fit an AI (or other bolt gun) may squeak by.
stencollector
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- shilo MB, the armpit of Canada
I believe the RCMP are using the Enfield magazine exemption (which is non-necessary) as a limitation. It would fall on the importer to try and challenge it in court, but most likely the small Canadian market would not justify the cost.
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/foru...*ACCEPTING-PRE-ORDERS**?highlight=aia+enfield
Its all in there.
RCMP does whatever they want.
I am well aware what I said makes no damn sense, because it doesnt. but it DID happen. The company originally had permission to import 20 round mags, and before they actually arrived that was changed.
