.22 mag Lee Enfield conversion?

TheCoachZed

TheCoachZed

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
40   0   0
Location
Southern NB, aka "Canada's Bible Belt"
Hey guys,

As you know, there were a few LEs made before 1898.

Also, there are a few LEs around barreled in .22 LR.

Would it be possible to find one of these barrels, ream it out to .22 mag, put it on a pre-98 action, and gleefully ask for the return of your registration papers from the CFC? And then, use said rifle to blast coyotes all summer . . .

I know some will be unhappy at the idea, but hey - there are sporter Long Lees around (one on the EE right now), and it'd be a cool project,since it's not historically 100% intact anyway. I think there is an Israeli K98 on the EE right now that was chambered in .22 mag through the same process.

Of course, its possible nobody would sell their .22 LE barrels. I have no idea how hard these are to find.
 
For antique status it needs to be manufactured in 1897 or earlier, be a single shot and a centre-fire with a bore greater than 8.3mm or a rim-fire in anything other than .22. So here in Canada you idea dies on the table. Hell we all have PALs and registered firearms already anyway what's another .22 on your file. Instead of trying to mod a pre'98 .303 there are some cool rook rifles out there if you can find them that have antique status.
 
If I recall correctly . . . only .22 Short, Long and Long Rifle are mentioned, NOT .22 magnum, which is why I proposed that particular caliber.

Yes, we all have our FACs, but I have hunting buddies who don't. It'd be nice to have a gun to lend them sometimes.
 
TheCoachZed said:
If I recall correctly . . . only .22 Short, Long and Long Rifle are mentioned, NOT .22 magnum, which is why I proposed that particular caliber.

Yes, we all have our FACs, but I have hunting buddies who don't. It'd be nice to have a gun to lend them sometimes.
Click to expand...

But wouldn't your buddies need a PAL to get ammuntition?
 
I'm all for helping your buddies, but there is potential for a lot of hassle along the way. They get stopped for some reason, for sure the cops don't have the rules memorized, so there goes your rifle, confiscated right off the bat. Now you've got the hassle of getting it back. Meanwhile, they decide to check out you and the rest of your collection, "in the interests of public safety". No doubt your buddies would have some hassles of their own to deal with.
So unless you're right by their sides all the time, why not tel them to get their PALs if they want to hunt?
As for the rifle, it's a neat idea. I have a Lee Enfield Mark II, .22LR. Taking it plinking next weekend. It sures makes the ammo last, it takes so long to reload!
 
TheCoachZed said:
Yes, we all have our FACs, but I have hunting buddies who don't. It'd be nice to have a gun to lend them sometimes.
Click to expand...
Tell em to get their PALs. I don't know why people have a hardon for getting an antique status rifle when similar rifles only need a PAL. Unless there's a legal reason they can't get their pal?:confused:
 
TheCoachZed said:
Yes, we all have our FACs, but I have hunting buddies who don't. It'd be nice to have a gun to lend them sometimes.
Click to expand...

Hunting buddies without firearms of their own? are you sure you didn't mean camp bunnies? Actually that might be kind of cool, have a group of guys following you around to carry your gear, retrieve your kill and dress it out for you. It would be like going on safari in the 1920's. :)
 
.22 Magnum did not exist prior to 1897, so no need to mention it in the regulations since it is a modern Post 1898 caliber.
 
A firearm manufactured prior to 1898, and otherwise meeting the other criteria, and subsequently converted to a newer calibre is still an antique unless it specifically listed. .22 Short, .22 Long, and .22 Long rifle are the only rimfire calibres listed as not being antiques. Therefore, it would be hypothetically possible to put a .22 Magnum barrel on a pre-1898 receiver and have it de-registered as an antique.

Here is the text of the regulation:
http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/regu/sor-98-464/latest/sor-98-464.html

See also this from the NFA:
http://www.nfa.ca/content/view/150/199/
 
Problem is what the Law says and how RCMP & Provincial CFO's interpret it are two very different things. We have seen numerous recent examples of this fact, not the right time to push the enveloppe in my opinion.
 
JP said:
Problem is what the Law says and how RCMP & Provincial CFO's interpret it are two very different things. We have seen numerous recent examples of this fact, not the right time to push the enveloppe in my opinion.
Click to expand...

There is never a "right" time to push the envelope. Granted your likely to attract some attention, but I know many guys who never did anything to attract attention who got it anyway, so I say go for it.
 
The phrase "everything is legal as long as you don't get caught" comes to mind. Certainly here you are looking to capitalize on an apparent loophole, and in the event someone does check you (or your hunting buddy) you appear to be legal by the definitions set forth. But remember when it comes to firearms there is no such thing as innocent until proven guilty. You and/or he will have to prove your case in court. and that could be time consuming and costly. I know personally whether or not the gun was technically legal to have without permit, I wouldn't be waltzing around with it without a PAL, and I sure as hell wouldn't be handing out loophole firearms to anyone that could put my a$$ in a sling and liability if he was careless with it. Placing my life in the hands of a court, a legal loophole and the actions of someone else entirely strikes me as being a bit foolhardy. But that's just me.
 
I believe that a person cannot have possession of a firearm without a PAL, even in your presence , unless they are under the age of 18. People over 18 must have thier own PAL. I think it is called a "mentoring program for youngsters" that allows youngsters to shoot and hold guns within an arms length of an adult.

Also if they follow you in the hunting effort , it can be interpretted a them persuing game without a licence, unless they manage to buy one. Why chance it...you can lose a lot more than your gun as they can also take away hunting and possession priveledges.
 
The guys I have in mind DO have hunting licences. They got them when they were teens, and continue to buy them. The CFC never bothered to mail them their forms when they turned 18 to get their proper PALs. They've done the work to get their PALs, but the CFC never mailed them the papers, and the guys never bothered to look into for themselves - but they DO have licences, as you do NOT need a PAL to get a hunting licence. I don't condone hunting with unlicenced yahoos.

As far as the "arms length" firearm laws, who knows? It's true that you'd be at a judge's mercy with any of these issues. I certainly wouldn't want to take chances.

I wasn't planning on arming masses of unruly hillbillies. I was interested in building a rifle that would not only be unique, it would be mine, theoretically, forever, if the antique laws don't change (and I'm sure they are about to, thanks to that pothead out west), AND, should someone want to borrow a rifle to go hunting and they didn't have their FAC, I could lend it to them for a day.

It'd be a lot easier just to buy a flintlock anyway.
 
I believe that a person cannot have possession of a firearm without a PAL, even in your presence , unless they are under the age of 18. People over 18 must have thier own PAL.
Click to expand...

That's why he's talking about keeping it within antique status, as you do not need a PAL for an antique. But as you say that's little comfort when you have just lost your hunting privileges and any other firearms you may have had with you while awaiting your court date in 6 months.

Thing is apparent loopholes have a way of being slammed hard on those looking to exploit them, and I wouldn't be surprised to see individuals receive far more serious repercussions to be used as an example.

Fact is the antique laws are what they are to basically make it that if it shoots modern or commercially available ammo it's not antique. So modifying it for .22 magnum is contrary to the intent of the law and therein lies the problem. Here is a quite from the RCMP site on antique firearms...

The Criminal Code defines antique firearms as:

* firearms manufactured before 1898 that were not designed or re-designed to discharge rim-fire or centre-fire ammunition, or
* firearms prescribed as antique firearms in the Criminal Code regulations...
Click to expand...

now yes it goes on to specify calibers if rim and centre fire, but did you catch the wording "or re-designed"? and with that little phrase any lawyer would have your nuts by a string.
 
Last edited:
Whats this loophole you guys talk about. That is the way the law was written, it is not a loop hole, it is the law. Their doesn't seem to be any clear intention in any other parts of the firearms act, so how would anyone claim intentions on the antique part. If they tried to claim what you are doing is against the intentions of the law, maybe the crown would like to explain the intention of banning a 4 inch revolver, while allowing a 4 1/4" auto thats smaller overall. Or explain any of the other idiosyncrasy's that show absolutely no clear intent in the law whatsoever.

Please stop calling the antique laws a loophole, thats like Miller accusing handgun owners of using a loophole to own them. Remember, he often doesn't call for a ban, but closing the loopholes that allow people to own handguns.
 
Oh and to add, there is no need to have a PAL to shoot, no matter what the age.

I can take out 60 year olds and allow them to shoot as long as they are under my immediate care (arms length). Hunting licenses don't require PAL's as you could hunt with a bow, or borrow a gun under supervision, at least in Alberta. So unless there are some provincial regs that apply, there is no problem with taking out a friend with your non restricteds if they are under your control.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom