Does the AI Enfield use an M14 magazine?
- Thread starter Luckyorwhat
- Start date
What I think that we need to do is have manufactured a small number of handguns, however clumsy that are based on the the AIA action, so that a dealer could then manufacture legal 10 round magazines for them in bulk.....
Or perhaps a few VZ58s, M1Carbines and rifle actions can be sacrificed as the basis for small production run handgun designs......
Or..............
Who's up for purchasing the first super-cool Norinco Limited Edition SKS Sport Pistol? I can just picture Johnne from Marstar giving the specs to a Norinco rep over the phone, with an order for 30,000 specially marked magazines to go along with the twenty Limited Edition SK........muhahaha! Perhaps they can be chromed and replete with a canadiangunnutz logo somewhere on the pistol? And of course with a special custom carrying case made with the shavings of reject M-305 Chu wood stocks!
Group buy for the cause anyone?
Frank
PS. We could learn from tradition by producing a wooden holster for the pistol that doubles as a detachable butt stock much like with the Broomhandle Mausers and Chinese Contract Inglis High Powers. I can see the commercials for it featuring several People's Liberation Army female models/soldiers in miniskirts blowing away an opposing force in WW2 Japenese uniforms...
Or perhaps a few VZ58s, M1Carbines and rifle actions can be sacrificed as the basis for small production run handgun designs......
Or..............
Who's up for purchasing the first super-cool Norinco Limited Edition SKS Sport Pistol? I can just picture Johnne from Marstar giving the specs to a Norinco rep over the phone, with an order for 30,000 specially marked magazines to go along with the twenty Limited Edition SK........muhahaha! Perhaps they can be chromed and replete with a canadiangunnutz logo somewhere on the pistol? And of course with a special custom carrying case made with the shavings of reject M-305 Chu wood stocks!
Group buy for the cause anyone?
Frank
PS. We could learn from tradition by producing a wooden holster for the pistol that doubles as a detachable butt stock much like with the Broomhandle Mausers and Chinese Contract Inglis High Powers. I can see the commercials for it featuring several People's Liberation Army female models/soldiers in miniskirts blowing away an opposing force in WW2 Japenese uniforms...
Last edited:
misanthropist said:
This is the same as modifying a PINNED mag to take more than 5 rounds. QUESTAR's mags do not need you to cut holes in them yourself. Ie modifying. There is an RCMP ruling allowing those because they are stock. Actus reus: modifying/altering mag. Mens reus, doing it to use in a m14. In addition unless you plan on carrying both rifles on your shoulder at the same time there is no logic to you swapping it in a different gun. I wish this wasn't so. I will look up the section in the firearms act but guarantee you there is a provision in the criminal code that definitely doesn't condone this. This is my two cents go ahead and do waht you want but you don't have me convinced it is legal so I would think twice.
BAITRON said:
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/showdo...l=L&statuteyear=all&lengthannual=50&length=50
I know we're in Canada, but for the most part it's still safe to assume that things are legal until stated otherwise. We haven't gone that far down the rabbit hole that we have to assume everything is illegal until proven not! You have failed to illustrate how "modifying/altering mag" is illegal. One can't have a guilty mind if they're doing nothing wrong. And there's no need to even OWN both rifles, let alone CARRY both rifles. The rifles are not the matter, the regulations apply to the MAGAZINES alone. The magazines are prohibited or not, rifles have their own categories. If you possess a 100-round AR15 magazine, it's prohibited whether you own an AR15 rifle or not. Likewise if you own a 10-round Enfield magazine it's legal, whether you own an Enfield or not.
If you paint a daisy on the side of your Enfield magazine, it's still an Enfield magazine. And if you cut a notch in your Enfield magazine it's still an Enfield magazine. And if you attach a vibrating dildo to your Enfield magazine, it's just a kinky daisy-painted notched vibrating Enfield magazine.
The reason you can't take the pin out of your AR15 magazine is because that would be creating a prohibited device, and you can't own that. Under regulations I posted
"Former Cartridge Magazine Control Regulations
3. (1) Any cartridge magazine
(a) that is capable of containing more than five cartridges of the type for which the magazine was originally designed and that is designed or manufactured for use in
(i) a semi-automatic handgun that is not commonly available in Canada,
(ii) a semi-automatic firearm other than a semi-automatic handgun,
"
Your AR15 rifle magazine was designed for your AR15 rifle, so it can't hold more than 5, pretty clear.
An Enfield isn't a semi-automatic firearm, it's bolt-action, so section (1)(a)(ii) cannot apply to it. Period.
But if you take an existing magazine for a manually operated firearm, and alter it to fit in an autoloading firearm (in which it would not function prior to modification) are you not manufacturing a magazine for use in an autoloading firearm? And you are knowingly altering the magazine for use in an autoloader.
Let us know the content of the written ruling that you receive from the CFC legal section. Without a written opinion, and/or court precedent, any opinion is just that, an opinion, without any legal weight.
Let us know the content of the written ruling that you receive from the CFC legal section. Without a written opinion, and/or court precedent, any opinion is just that, an opinion, without any legal weight.
Luckyorwhat said:
Good point, imagine cutting the hole, altering the angle of the locking notch and then the mags just fall out anyway since the mags aren't made to the same tolerance front to back. The mags fit very precisely into the AIA so they don't need the front notch to stay in.
Isn't there enough benefit of the doubt to feel that this might be a bit iffy in a legal sense as well? In addition pretty hard to imagine anonymity now too.
That said, I don't have to worry about being attacked by polar bears either, definitely the extra rounds would be a safety factor but they are present in the AIA, perhaps the best answer to this issue.
tiriaq said:
I'm ordering one first, so I can see first-hand.
But to be clear, my understanding so far is that the magazine would already function in the autoloading rifle, the notch just makes it stay in place better.
And the wording does say ANY magazine Originally designed for any rifle called an Enfield, <=10, is OK. Any magazine. Any means any.
An Enfield magazine basically slides up into a well, and is latched at the rear by a catch. The M14 magazine hooks on its front end (that's why the square hole is there) and then rocks back to latch. Whether a magazine would function when it is not secured at the front end is an open question. AFAIK the AIA magazine is derived from the M14 magazine. The square hole was deleted so that it could be argued that the magazine was not an M14 magazine. If you want to experiment with an unaltered AIA magazine, or with a M14 magazine unsecured at the front end, I have a Norinco operating spring guide you can experiment with. Grind back the corner so that it does not engage the magazine. If you want it, PM your mailing address.
If the AIA magazine is altered in any way, so that it will function correctly in a M14, and retains its capacity of 10 rds, I suspect that the powers that be would determine that this was manufacutre of a prohibited device.
If the AIA magazine is altered in any way, so that it will function correctly in a M14, and retains its capacity of 10 rds, I suspect that the powers that be would determine that this was manufacutre of a prohibited device.
BAITRON said:
Fair enough - you essentially figure that the crime being committed is manufacturing a prohibited device...I think a court case would be required to know for sure but IF you can get away with the mod without manufacturing a prohibited device, then I would say everything else is extraneous - you don't have a prohibited device so no problem, no matter what gun you stick it in.
But you could well be right that cutting a square hole is enough to be manufacturing a prohibited device.
misanthropist said:
Polar Man said:
I missed the window for calling the store an ordering one, but I think you guys have the question perfect right there. I'll email tonight.
P.S.
Seriously - why else would they exempt Lee Enfield magazines from section 1a? Section 1a never applies to bolt-actions.
Last edited:
