AIA mags in M14?

I don't want to be negative here but this is not as much a sure thing as some people seem to think.

Here is the potential "problem" as I see it... if you go to the AIA website and look at what they say about the rifle and the magazines, what you see is that they say the rifle is designed to work with "M14 style magazines". Based on our experience during the nearly 2 years we spent getting a 10 round AR pistol magazine approved I can tell you that this will pose a problem.

It is similar to the situation that Remington ran into with the 7615 pump rifle where RCMP ruled that the rifle was designed/built to use existing design AR rifle magazines and that because of the design of the 7615 there was no such thing as a magazine designed and manufactured for the 7615... nor could there be (that was their position).

AIA is in effect saying that they designed and built the gun to use M14 magazines... M14 magazines are by definition designed and manufactured as rifle magazines... simply replacing the floorplate with an engraved floorplate saying it's a "10 or 20 round AIA Bolt Rifle magazine" may look nice but I doubt RCMP are going to allow that as proof of the design and manufacture... it's no different than taking a 30 round AR magazine and engraving "10 round pistol magazine" on the side... RCMP already ruled that this does not change the magazine from a rifle magazine to a pistol magazine.

If AIA made their own magazines and those magazines were different than the M14 rifle magazines and if AIA marked all of them as AIA Bolt Rifle Magazines and marketed sold them internationally that way then maybe you'd have a shot at this... in fact I'd say it would be an excellent arguement and a good legal challenge if rejected... but reading the AIA website that's not what it seems to say and the pictures of the magazine on the German website link that was posted do not show any markings identifying the magazines as AIA Bolt Rifle magazines so they obviously weren't made with any markings... and again that would be a problem.

This is not the 'slam dunk' that some people seem to suggest it is...

Mark
 
And the magazine bodies are going to have to be originally manufactured without that pesky little square hole on the upper front edge.
 
Questar said:
I don't want to be negative here but this is not as much a sure thing as some people seem to think.

Here is the potential "problem" as I see it... if you go to the AIA website and look at what they say about the rifle and the magazines, what you see is that they say the rifle is designed to work with "M14 style magazines". Based on our experience during the nearly 2 years we spent getting a 10 round AR pistol magazine approved I can tell you that this will pose a problem.

It is similar to the situation that Remington ran into with the 7615 pump rifle where RCMP ruled that the rifle was designed/built to use existing design AR rifle magazines and that because of the design of the 7615 there was no such thing as a magazine designed and manufactured for the 7615... nor could there be (that was their position).

AIA is in effect saying that they designed and built the gun to use M14 magazines... M14 magazines are by definition designed and manufactured as rifle magazines... simply replacing the floorplate with an engraved floorplate saying it's a "10 or 20 round AIA Bolt Rifle magazine" may look nice but I doubt RCMP are going to allow that as proof of the design and manufacture... it's no different than taking a 30 round AR magazine and engraving "10 round pistol magazine" on the side... RCMP already ruled that this does not change the magazine from a rifle magazine to a pistol magazine.

If AIA made their own magazines and those magazines were different than the M14 rifle magazines and if AIA marked all of them as AIA Bolt Rifle Magazines and marketed sold them internationally that way then maybe you'd have a shot at this... in fact I'd say it would be an excellent arguement and a good legal challenge if rejected... but reading the AIA website that's not what it seems to say and the pictures of the magazine on the German website link that was posted do not show any markings identifying the magazines as AIA Bolt Rifle magazines so they obviously weren't made with any markings... and again that would be a problem.

This is not the 'slam dunk' that some people seem to suggest it is...

Mark
Click to expand...

Mark, The ten round AIA magazines are already approved as magazines for the AIA M10 rifles. Or am I missing something ?
 
czechitout said:
Mark, The ten round AIA magazines are already approved as magazines for the AIA M10 rifles. Or am I missing something ?
Click to expand...

I'm not that familiar with these magazines so I was just reading the thread and commenting on what had been written so far. You state that the AIA magazines are already approved... on what do you base that? Is there something in writing from the RCMP classifying these magazines as being unlimited capacity for a bolt action rifle? Have the RCMP reviewed these magazines and made a determination?

My concern is that when you go to the AIA website they do not show their own magazine... in fact they show that the magazine is an M14 style and that the gun uses a "Magazine Adaptor" which leads one to believe that the gun is designed to use one magazine but has been modified to use an adpator so that it can instead use off the shelf pre-existing M14 magazines and not magazines that have been designed and manufactured for the AIA bolt action rifle. AIA even states that the M14 style magazines and followers are made in the US.

This is very similar to the issue that Remington ran in on the 7615 and that's why I'm surprised to hear that you say the RCMP have already approved these magazines... if that is in fact true then obviously there is more to all of this than I am seeing.

I do not for a moment suggest I have all of the info on this... I don't. I'm simply pointing out that on the surface there are potential issues. If those issues were overcome by the previous importers then that's great. I'm sure those who have imported these magazines would already know the facts relating to all of this... and would have some sort of written response from RCMP on their legal status and classification.

Again... if they are legal that's great... but on what are you basing this and please don't say because someone sold them once or that there are some in Canada... it wouldn't be the first time that something was imported and later found to be prohibited and recalled/seized.

Mark
 
Mark, I think it's all holiday inn lawyer speculation based on the possible presidence set by the LAR mags. I believe that it may be valid and would like to take it further and get some happy m14 owners and some buisiness for our sponsers like yourself. What isthe next step?
 
Mr.4x4 said:
Mark, I think it's all holiday inn lawyer speculation based on the possible presidence set by the LAR mags. I believe that it may be valid and would like to take it further and get some happy m14 owners and some buisiness for our sponsers like yourself. What isthe next step?
Click to expand...

The LAR magazine ruling relates to the classification of handgun magazines... not really applicable to this situation.

If as the earlier post suggested these have already been approved as bolt rifle magazines then there is no issue... but if they haven't been classified then sooner or later the RCMP are going to look at these and as I've said, on the surface, there is a possibility they could be ruled as M14 rifle magazines in which case they would be limited to 5 round capacity. If they are classified as bolt rifle magazines then they are good to go.

Again... the importer would know what has been done and where these sit right now... if they have been reviewd then they would have the communication from RCMP with the findings and the decision.

Mark
 
The AIA rifles are sold with 10 round magazines.
The magazines included with the rifles do not have the M-14 front detent hole, and the lug on the rear for the magazine catch is slightly different than that of an unaltered M-14 magazine. They are purpose made for the AIA rifle.
AIA rifles appear to have been designed around the M-14 magazine, but the ones imported do not have magazines originally made for M-14 rifles. They would therefore be bolt action rifle magazines. There does not seem to be a problem with importation and sale of AIA 10 round magazines.
Some M-14 shooters have reported that unaltered AIA 10 round magazines function in their rifles; there are also reports that they do not. Because the magazine is not secured by the front detent, functionning could be hit and miss.
If someone were to create the hole in the front of the magazine to enhance function in a M-14, he would be manufacturing a prohibited device.
It could be argued that a magazine with 20 round capacity, and no front detent hole, would be a magazine for the bolt action AIA rifle. Whether or not such a magazine would function in a M-14 is unknown.
In the absence of a domestic manufacturer capable of producing magazines, these would have to be imported. M-14 magazines are in production in the US, China, possibly elsewhere. Perhaps the front detent hole could be eliminated from the stamping operations.
Sooner or later there would be a determination by the RCMP about whether or not the magazine is intended for use in an autoloading rifle.

The RCMP letter accepting the LAR 10 round magazines was signed by Bill Etter. Perhaps it would make sense to contact Mr. Etter, and ask him about AIA magzines.
 
tiriaq said:
The AIA rifles are sold with 10 round magazines.
The magazines included with the rifles do not have the M-14 front detent hole, and the lug on the rear for the magazine catch is slightly different than that of an unaltered M-14 magazine. They are purpose made for the AIA rifle.
AIA rifles appear to have been designed around the M-14 magazine, but the ones imported do not have magazines originally made for M-14 rifles. They would therefore be bolt action rifle magazines. There does not seem to be a problem with importation and sale of AIA 10 round magazines.
Some M-14 shooters have reported that unaltered AIA 10 round magazines function in their rifles; there are also reports that they do not. Because the magazine is not secured by the front detent, functionning could be hit and miss.
If someone were to create the hole in the front of the magazine to enhance function in a M-14, he would be manufacturing a prohibited device.
It could be argued that a magazine with 20 round capacity, and no front detent hole, would be a magazine for the bolt action AIA rifle. Whether or not such a magazine would function in a M-14 is unknown.
In the absence of a domestic manufacturer capable of producing magazines, these would have to be imported. M-14 magazines are in production in the US, China, possibly elsewhere. Perhaps the front detent hole could be eliminated from the stamping operations.
Sooner or later there would be a determination by the RCMP about whether or not the magazine is intended for use in an autoloading rifle.
Click to expand...

Based on what you've written, and assuming it is all accurate and correct, then you're on pretty good footing here. By previous definitions set down by the RCMP a magazine is determined to be "what it was originally designed and manufactured to be"... so... if it was in fact a bolt rifle magazine when it was made originally then it is always a bolt rifle magazine, regardless of what you use it in and regardless of what you do to it.

Since RCMP have ruled that engraving or otherwise modifying an AR rifle magazine cannot change the classification of that item to something else... it follows that a bolt rifle magazine cannot be changed either.

If making a cut-out in the bolt rifle magazine does not stop it from working in the AIA rifle then there is no issue whatsoever... it is still what it was made to be, regardless of the fact that the modification allows it to also work in another rifle. If adding the cutout makes it no longer function as an AIA magazine then i suppose the RCMP could try to argue that you have no "manufactured" a magazine for an M14 but they would be on very shaky grounds given that in past they have argued that modifying a magazine that was built for one gun did NOT equal manufacture of a magazine for a different gun... they can't argue both sides of the issue... they have already stated their position on this topic... now they are stuck with that position.

The big concern is that all of this "wakes the sleeping giant" and results in new legislation that simply makes these prohibited by the stroke of a pen... or worse, creates a movement to rewrite the entire magazine legislation. That is always the fear with pushing the boundaries.

We honestly feared that our LAR-15 magazines would set-off a change to the laws... that within months the government would move to change the magazine laws to add restrictions based on the gun and not the magazine... that didn't happen and now everyone seems quite accepting of 10 round pistol magazines being used in rifles. The question is what happens if 20 or 30 round bolt rifle magazines start showing up in M14's? Could that be the straw that breaks the camels back?

Mark
 
Questar said:
Is there something in writing from the RCMP classifying these magazines as being unlimited capacity for a bolt action rifle? Have the RCMP reviewed these magazines and made a determination?
Click to expand...


Yes the RCMP have made a determination. These magazines are legal.

"- the magazine design for this rifle, in calibre 7.62MM NATO has been determined to be a purpose built, proprietary design intended for a bolt action rifle (notwithstanding its incidental ability to be inserted into some other designs with varying degrees of success). Although this magazine design is similar to that used on the M14/M1A type rifles, differences, including the absence of a locating hole on the front of the magazine and a different détente on the rear of the magazine are significant enough to distinguish it from a magazine intended for use in any automatic or semi-automatic rifle of known design. This decision only applies to newly manufactured magazines intended for use in bolt action rifles, commonly known as the Lee-Enfield design as produced/supplied by Australian International Arms (AIA). Design characteristics also distinguish these newly manufactured magazines from their original Lee-Enfield counterparts. These new magazines are intended for use with a rimless cartridge (7.62MM NATO) as opposed to the original rimmed 303 BRITISH cartridge (this also precludes its use in the Charleton Automatic Rifle).
 
Could very well be the straw that broke the camel's back. The intent of the law is clear. The fact that the wording of the law did not entirely accomplish the intent is likely a bit of a sore point in certain circles.
Here is another twist - while the magazine regulations do not establish limits for manually operated and rimfire rifle magazines, but the regulations specifically exempt the Lee Enfield TEN round magazine. It could be argued that the letter of the regulations exempt only the 10 round magazine, and not any larger one.
 
tiriaq said:
while the magazine regulations do not establish limits for manually operated and rimfire rifle magazines, but the regulations specifically exempt the Lee Enfield TEN round magazine. It could be argued that the letter of the regulations exempt only the 10 round magazine, and not any larger one.
Click to expand...


Good Point, but is the AIA a Lee Enfield ?
 
czechitout said:
.....commonly known as the Lee-Enfield design as produced/supplied by Australian International Arms (AIA).....
Click to expand...

Looks as if the RCMP has already determined that the AIA is a Lee Enfield design.
The letter of the law made the LAR 10 rounder legal to use in a rifle.
The letter of the law could also preclude an AIA magazine greater than 10 rounds.

There would still be a market for AIA compatible 10 round magazines.
 
czechitout said:
Yes the RCMP have made a determination. These magazines are legal.

"- the magazine design for this rifle, in calibre 7.62MM NATO has been determined to be a purpose built, proprietary design intended for a bolt action rifle (notwithstanding its incidental ability to be inserted into some other designs with varying degrees of success). Although this magazine design is similar to that used on the M14/M1A type rifles, differences, including the absence of a locating hole on the front of the magazine and a different détente on the rear of the magazine are significant enough to distinguish it from a magazine intended for use in any automatic or semi-automatic rifle of known design. This decision only applies to newly manufactured magazines intended for use in bolt action rifles, commonly known as the Lee-Enfield design as produced/supplied by Australian International Arms (AIA). Design characteristics also distinguish these newly manufactured magazines from their original Lee-Enfield counterparts. These new magazines are intended for use with a rimless cartridge (7.62MM NATO) as opposed to the original rimmed 303 BRITISH cartridge (this also precludes its use in the Charleton Automatic Rifle).
Click to expand...

Cool!

Source?...:redface:
 
tiriaq said:
Looks as if the RCMP has already determined that the AIA is a Lee Enfield design.
The letter of the law made the LAR 10 rounder legal to use in a rifle.
The letter of the law could also preclude an AIA magazine greater than 10 rounds.

There would still be a market for AIA compatible 10 round magazines.
Click to expand...

I noticed that they said the AIA is a Lee Enfield design, but I'm not sure that makes it a Lee Enfield.
 
Mr.4x4 said:
Mark, I think it's all holiday inn lawyer speculation based on the possible presidence set by the LAR mags. I believe that it may be valid and would like to take it further and get some happy m14 owners and some buisiness for our sponsers like yourself. What isthe next step?
Click to expand...

If the mags have been approved already, then there is no next step.

If you write the RCMP and ask them for the official go-ahead to use an AIA mag in your M14, I highly doubt they will be helpful. They will probably make up some arbitrary BS and say no. Might be better to leave it alone? If the mags are already considered legal, why ask them to review the matter?

As far as I understand, these mags have been approved for sale in Canada (the ten-round version has been available from Marstar), and are not currently considered a prohibited device. They are physically different then M14 mags, but seem to function in an M14 from what guys are saying. Remington 7615 mags have to be pinned to 5 because the 7615 was designed specifically to use AR15 mags... But the AIA enfield was not designed to use M14 mags... while these mags could be considered M14-style mags, they are physically different than an actual M14 mag. They were manufactured specifically for a bolt-action rifle, the AIA enfield.

That's the way I see it anyway. If I'm wrong about any of this, somebody please chime in and set me straight. But as it stands, they're not considered a prohibited device, and there's a good argument why it would be okay to use one in an M14.
 
Eddie Honda said:
If I'm wrong about any of this, somebody please chime in and set me straight. But as it stands, they're not considered a prohibited device, and there's a good argument why it would be okay to use one in an M14.
Click to expand...

Unless there is a law that states it is not legal to use them in an M14, then it is legal. I am unaware of any such law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom