Got out to the range today with my new .50 cal AR mags.

Status
Not open for further replies.
TrevorF said:
They are simply misinformed. There doesn't need to be an RCMP ruling. Because it's a 5 rnd mag and not a 10 rnd pinned to 5.

There is no grey area. I can't figure out why people can't get their head around this. The explanation is in RCMP special bulletin number 72.
Click to expand...

The problem with this logic is you are hinging it all on an RCMP bulletin which at the bottom of it has this following disclaimer:

"This bulletin is intended to provide general information only. For legal references, please refer to the Firearms Act, the Criminal Code and Regulations. Provincial, territorial and municipal laws, regulations and policies may also apply."

It is a real possibility that a court of law would disagree with the wording and legal implications of the bulletin with regard to the spirit of the Firearms Act. If fellow shooters want to hang their hat on that bulletin alone then they can fill their boots - I too disagree with a lot of our silly firearms laws and I'm not a lawyer, just a prudent fellow that has seen otherwise innocent people put to the sword of our 'legal system'.
 
tiriaq said:
Please read Post #5 in this thread. Confirmation of RCMP approval would be an excellent idea if these are going to be promoted here.
Click to expand...

Why does it need to be approved by the RCMP? It's designed for a calibre and clearly printed on the mag.

My Glock .40 mags state .40 on there. There is no SAAMI cartridge named the .40.
 
My question is: Are thoses mags .223 mags that happened to fit 5x .50cal and then a smart-ass bought them in bulk and stamped ".50cal magazine" on it purposely to sell them on Gunnutz? Keeping saying that they are "designed" for .50cal doesn't necessarily make them so. If this is, indeed, the case, theses mags will be classified as prohibited device.

The LAR15 mags have been specifically aproved by RCMP as pistol mags and a special bulletin was emmited for them. Sorry but for me, until i get proof that theses are specifically build from the gound up for .50cal, i will stay away from them.
 
My question is: Are thoses mags .223 mags that happened to fit 5x .50cal and then a smart-ass bought them in bulk and stamped ".50cal magazine" on it purposely to sell them on Gunnutz? Keeping saying that they are "designed" for .50cal doesn't necessarily make them so. If this is, indeed, the case, theses mags will be classified as prohibited device.

The LAR15 mags have been specifically aproved by RCMP as pistol mags and a special bulletin was emmited for them. Sorry but for me, until i get proof that theses are specifically build from the gound up for .50cal, i will stay away from them.
 
The problem with this logic is you are hinging it all on an RCMP bulletin which at the bottom of it has this following disclaimer:
Click to expand...
Not hinging it all on this no. However, it is a a quick and dirty reference that is easily acceptable.
It's a 5 rnd mag, end of story. It's really that simple.
It is to bad the manufacturer didnt loan you his .50cal to use in your review as well...
Click to expand...
Wouldn't that be nice. Of course now I want to buy a .50 upper!
 
The LAR15 mags have been specifically aproved by RCMP as pistol mags and a special bulletin was emmited for them. Sorry but for me, until i get proof that theses are specifically build from the gound up for .50cal, i will stay away from them.
Click to expand...
What proof do you need? Not picking, just curious. The details are on the companies website and I compared them to regular AR mags in my video.
The LAR15 mag is not a good analogy as to why these are legal. The LAR15 mag is a pistol mag and as such is labelled as a pistol mag. The better analogy is the 9mm in a .40 mag comparison.
 
Unregistered_ said:
Why does it need to be approved by the RCMP? It's designed for a calibre and clearly printed on the mag.

My Glock .40 mags state .40 on there. There is no SAAMI cartridge named the .40.
Click to expand...

The 10/10 LAR magazine design was submitted to the RCMP, and approval obtained, prior to manufacture and importation for the Canadian market. The 10/30 LAR was rejected. Has this magazine been approved? It will be evaluated, one way or another. Is it wise to assume that it will not become an issue? If the design is rejected, there will be weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth. Based on recent RCMP decisions, it might be wise not to make any assumptions.
Further, this magazine is being promoted on CGN. Has this promotion been approved?
 
FAQMAT said:
My question is: Are thoses mags .223 mags that happened to fit 5x .50cal and then a smart-ass bought them in bulk and stamped ".50cal magazine" on it purposely to sell them on Gunnutz? Keeping saying that they are "designed" for .50cal doesn't necessarily make them so. If this is, indeed, the case, theses mags will be classified as prohibited device.

The LAR15 mags have been specifically aproved by RCMP as pistol mags and a special bulletin was emmited for them. Sorry but for me, until i get proof that theses are specifically build from the gound up for .50cal, i will stay away from them.
Click to expand...

The LAR15 mags may have been the guinea pig for the RCMP, but if you take the time to read bulletin #72, you will clearly see that their decision isn't limited to the LAR15 magazines, but that it is one that is all encompassing for all other magazines (that is why the RCMP gave more than one example) that are like the LAR15 - built for a particuliar firearm (in this case, a pistol), but that so happens to fit in another firearm (and there's no limitation on the type of firearm), in this case, a .50cal that can also cycle .223 rounds. The intent of the product is one thing, but the other usage of it, if it so happens there are other, are perfectly legal as per the bulletin.

So saying that the bulletin #72 is for the LAR15 and that mag only is incorrect.
 
BenL said:
The LAR15 mags may have been the guinea pig for the RCMP, but if you take the time to read bulletin #72, you will clearly see that their decision isn't limited to the LAR15 magazines, but that it is one that is all encompassing for all other magazines (that is why the RCMP gave more than one example) that are like the LAR15 - built for a particuliar pistol firearm (in this case, a pistol), but that so happens to fit in another firearm (and there's no limitation on the type of firearm).

So saying that the bulletin #72 is for the LAR15 and that mag only is incorrect.
Click to expand...

If you take the time to read my entire post, you will understand that my point is not about the bulletin. My point is: Where is the proof that this mag is not just a .223 mag stamped .50cal?
 
TrevorF said:
What proof do you need? Not picking, just curious. The details are on the companies website and I compared them to regular AR mags in my video.
The LAR15 mag is not a good analogy as to why these are legal. The LAR15 mag is a pistol mag and as such is labelled as a pistol mag. The better analogy is the 9mm in a .40 mag comparison.
Click to expand...

This. x5
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom