Is it Legal to Use My SR22 w/GSG mag on BC Crown Land?

And a question about the original question: Isn't the SR22 a semi-automatic pistol?
And as a pistol isn't it restricted?

That means the pistol regardless of the magazine would not be legal to use anywhere other than a range. (And until now, I was unaware that the SR22 had high capacity magazines available)

Unless someone can provide me with a reference to what I'm not understanding from the CRFSC I recently took.
 
Slartybartfast said:
I'm new, that I'll admit.
But the law couldn't be clearer. If the magazine can go in a semi-automatic pistol, it's limited to 10 rnds.

The intent is clear. Never more than 5 rounds in a CF rifle, never more than 10 rnds in any semi-automatic pistol. To enact that, the law defined the design of the magazine.

F'n sucks that Ruger released the POS Charger pistol, but they did. It's such bad gun from what I've heard, why not petition to have those banned from Canada so that all the 10+ rnd magazines for 10/22's can be legal?

Perhaps the gun associations could offer advice in how to re-write the law to make the intent and wording closely match. Lurking in the loopholes, whether pretending pop-rivets are effective magazine capacity limiters or using LAR magazines or having 100rnd AR magazines pinned to 5, could eventually lead to disaster.

It was a lucky thing for gun owners across Canada that Richard Bain was an incompetent and didn't check the function of his magazines before trying to kill as many people as possible. The first miracle is his incompetence, the second miracle is that the media and gun haters didn't focus on how ineffective and dangerous letting people have easily unpinned magazines is.
Click to expand...

So you're calling for a ban on the Charger and claiming riveting mags is a dangerous practice because bad men can unpin them?

It's nice to see someone so willing to throw law abiding gun owners under the bus.
 
Slartybartfast said:
I'm new, that I'll admit.
But the law couldn't be clearer. If the magazine can go in a semi-automatic pistol, it's limited to 10 rnds.
Click to expand...

Actually, the law says if it's "designed or manufactured" for a semi-auto pistol, then it's prohibited.

Thus, any mag manufactured before the creation of the Charger cannot possibly be affected by this law, but magazines manufactured after its introduction would be prohibited. (Which is an odd situation, I agree.)
 
Gatehouse said:
It's funny.....this summer, all over BC, hundreds of folks that have never heard of a RCMP 10/22 magazine bulletin are going to go camping and take their 10/22's with 25 round magazines for plinking. September these same rifles and magazines will come out for potting grouse. What the heck is going to happen with all these new criminals?
Click to expand...

EXACTLY
Not suggesting anything here but I wonder what they would do if everyone just ignored it and there was civil disobedience
Would the RCMP flex it muscle to SHOW us we live in a police state or would they change their approach once the realize they CANNOT criminalize the masses and get away with it... yet

It is an important blunder to get corrected because when there are no more firearms owners standing for what is right, what is the next thing that will criminalize people?

I'm hoping cars as "you can't compare cars to guns"... :bangHead:
 
terez said:
Uhhm...

This 22lr mag issue is FAR from defined....not even law actually.
Bulletin shmulletin........

Most cops in the field haven't a clue about any of the firearms laws...much less this latest interpretationmorphedintobulletin silliness.

IF you are shooting responsibly and otherwise legally conducting yourself I wouldn't think the 1022 mag issue will even come up....altho 100rd drums are a bit of a heat score regardless of the law...just sayin.

At the end of the day its your neck and the consequences will be yours alone if they decide to make an issue of any firearms matters.

I've seen fellow shooters harassed for nonrestricted fireams being unlocked/no trigger locks etc during daylight hrs while in care/control of the shooter, seen regular non restricted rifles referred to as "machine guns", seen people challenged for their "registrations" for their long guns....THIS YR....and so on.
At the end of the day its a crap shoot....and the consequences all yours (ours)
Click to expand...

Except most cops in the field have received a notice from their superiors about the 10/22 mags, so most cops know about their prohib status.

Also, cops were instructed to NOT lay charges for 10/22 mags alone. Just confiscate.

Finally, some cops don't know the difference between a 10/22 and other 22lr semis, and there is at least one story floating around here about a guy having rem 597 mags taken by cops.
 
chrispn said:
So you're calling for a ban on the Charger and claiming riveting mags is a dangerous practice because bad men can unpin them?

It's nice to see someone so willing to throw law abiding gun owners under the bus.
Click to expand...

Can you not admit that using a pop rivet is laughably simple to defeat? All laws are because bad men might do something. If legally you can only have 5rnds in a centerfire rifle, why offer easily modified 100rnd magazines for sale making it easy for "bad men"?
And "Bad Men"? I've heard range officers clearly say they wouldn't mind if the rivet was missing, so if we wanted to shoot more than 5 at a time...
I don't want to throw anyone "under the bus". Obstinate gun owners who do more hating of the law and the rest of the community and think they're smart using a loophole throw themselves under the bus. The packaging on the US GSG mags says designed for "10/22 and Charger". The Canadian marketing and most Canadian gun owners and organisations knew that the high cap 10/22 mags were being allowed on a permissive interpretation of design and marketing.
Responsible gun organisations need to help write laws that can be better interpreted and enforced. To pretend that leaving everything alone will miraculously have everything left alone is ridiculous.
 
Slartybartfast said:
And a question about the original question: Isn't the SR22 a semi-automatic pistol?
Click to expand...

This particular confusion is Ruger's fault; they make a pistol called the SR22, and a rifle called the SR-22 (which is a dressed-up AR style for the 10/22). No compatibility between the two, and larger magazines for the pistol are not at issue.

Slartybartfast said:
But the law couldn't be clearer. If the magazine can go in a semi-automatic pistol, it's limited to 10 rnds.
Click to expand...

You're correct that the law is quite clear, but absolutely wrong otherwise. Nowhere is the *use* of a magazine defined, only its intent of _design_ or _manufacture_.

The RCMP's SFSS put out their Bulletin No.72 specifically to show the difference between the use of a mag. and its design.

They are now attempting to impose their own intent on the designers and manufacturers of certain magazines for the 10/22 carbine, which is absurd and the current point of contention.

F'n sucks that Ruger released the POS Charger pistol, but they did. It's such bad gun from what I've heard, why not petition to have those banned from Canada so that all the 10+ rnd magazines for 10/22's can be legal?
Click to expand...

Because again, that's not how the Law is worded. Removing the Charger from Canada does not erase its existence, so *IF* these are pistol magazines (which they are NOT), it wouldn't change.

[N.b., if expelling the Charger makes it a pistol ‘not commonly available,’ a different part of the Regulations kicks in to limit the capacity to 5. If we were talking about pistol magazines, which we are NOT.]

Slartybartfast said:
The packaging on the US GSG mags says designed for "10/22 and Charger". The Canadian marketing and most Canadian gun owners and organisations knew that the high cap 10/22 mags were being allowed on a permissive interpretation of design and marketing.
Click to expand...

And the packaging for Canadian GSG drums says Canadian Edition for 10/22 Rifle, as well as the body. Because that is what it is. Because they re-designed the magazine for Canada, to _not fit_ in the Charger, and they manufacture that mag. for Rifles only. It is not a loop hole; it is the letter of the Law.
 
Sqr said:
Even if the Law changes why would you want to sell the rifle and isn't 10 not enough for plinking?
Click to expand...

Because no one wants to get involved with a cop who doesn't know the law and has to deal with problems because the cop has something to prove.
(Seems to be the norm with gun owners)
 
red_bailey said:
And the packaging for Canadian GSG drums says Canadian Edition for 10/22 Rifle, as well as the body. Because that is what it is. Because they re-designed the magazine for Canada, to _not fit_ in the Charger, and they manufacture that mag. for Rifles only. It is not a loop hole; it is the letter of the Law.
Click to expand...

How are they different? I wasn't aware of any difference between US and Canadian Ruger semi-automatic rifles.
 
A lot of ####en sheep here on the order of the RCMP would turn in there rifle to these #### you you dont deserve to have one
 
Slartybartfast said:
I'm new, that I'll admit.
But the law couldn't be clearer. If the magazine can go in a semi-automatic pistol, it's limited to 10 rnds.

The intent is clear. Never more than 5 rounds in a CF rifle, never more than 10 rnds in any semi-automatic pistol. To enact that, the law defined the design of the magazine.

F'n sucks that Ruger released the POS Charger pistol, but they did. It's such bad gun from what I've heard, why not petition to have those banned from Canada so that all the 10+ rnd magazines for 10/22's can be legal?

Perhaps the gun associations could offer advice in how to re-write the law to make the intent and wording closely match. Lurking in the loopholes, whether pretending pop-rivets are effective magazine capacity limiters or using LAR magazines or having 100rnd AR magazines pinned to 5, could eventually lead to disaster.

It was a lucky thing for gun owners across Canada that Richard Bain was an incompetent and didn't check the function of his magazines before trying to kill as many people as possible. The first miracle is his incompetence, the second miracle is that the media and gun haters didn't focus on how ineffective and dangerous letting people have easily unpinned magazines is.
Click to expand...

Good points. I agree completely the intent of the magazine laws was to limit the number of rounds in specific firearms.

The intent is not the law however. The law is not a "gun law". That would have been simple. Semi auto rifle five rounds, pistol ten. That law does not exist. There is no law at all, whatsoever, restricting the number of rounds used by firearm.

Instead we have magazine law. The difference is critical. A legal magazine cannot become illegal through its use in different firearms and with different calibres. Neither can a legal magazine become illegal through the introduction of a new firearm which uses magazines in common. Many, many examples. Sub2k, pistol mags, etc.

Your last paragraph is truly bizarre. All magazines whether factory limited or pinned are easily modified. They are a tube of plastic and a spring. Compliance with our magazine limitations is purely voluntary and of no significance to public safety. I invite you to do the math on the number of limited magazines in Canada, and the impossibility of demonstrating an impact on public safety. The one million currently unpinned Butler Creek magazines currently in Canada according to the manufacturer is a good example: you are actually saying that this is a dangerous situation, even if pinned, with 50 years and one million magazines to prove you absolutely %100 wrong.

The simple fact is that magazine restrictions in Canada do not matter. Firearms are not available for self defense and so their capacity is relevant only to the sport shooters who bear the brunt of the political machinations which limit them.

What is truly ineffective and dangerous is someone deciding what they will "let" their fellow Canadians have. Rational and empirically-based limits on freedom are certainly necessary, but please do not imply that reduced capacity magazine laws fall into this category.
 
Some of us just can't be bothered with the agro Goose, save it for when it's worth something, besides I can change my 597 mags out in less than two seconds, (add two blinks if I have to charge the breech)
 
To understand the folly and absurdity of this issue.....simply swap the name "gun" and "magazine" for "computer" and ""ram".

If the horse police interpreted out if the blue, with ZERO public advisement, that a certain brand/model of computer and certain types of RAM or video cards....only when used together constitute a felony crime as well the devices themselves are prohibited and subject to confiscation......regardless of the intent/actions conducted with said devices.

The lens would be immediately focused on the ridiculous/absurd/draconian/illegal/immoral situation.....

Shame on our federal police, those that run it......and more so the ELECTED persons who are neglecting their oversight and either allowing or facillitating this circus....cuz its one or the other they are assuredly guilty of.


So nevermind yer 1022 mag issue
We all should be concerend that we are currently felons and subject to charges/confiscation and criminal record when we are caught driving a yellow corvettte equipped with a cold air intake, or possessing a purple 10oz driver inbour golf bag, or have a certain brand and capacity memory stick in our computer, or you are caught with a certain magnification and brand of binoculars while birdwatching......

Sounds absurd but the simple swap of the words gun and mag for any of the above scenarios tells the tale.

This trancends firearms.....this is absolute abuse of power, negligence of elected govt oversight of one of their most powerful tools.


Get incolved people, share this issue and the comparison....yes it takes effort and grief.


Sadly this is the tip of the iceberg.....aint gonna get better
For thos unaware the Canadian lberal party are signatory to the UN mandate of complete/total civilian disarment.....and are absolutley onboard with trampling your rights, flaunting the law and due process to get there.
 
Apologies for the syntax and other.....tapped out on a cell phone with fat fingers in the sun/humidity while pissed off..... :)
 
Slartybartfast said:
I'm new, that I'll admit.
But the law couldn't be clearer. If the magazine can go in a semi-automatic pistol, it's limited to 10 rnds.

The intent is clear. Never more than 5 rounds in a CF rifle, never more than 10 rnds in any semi-automatic pistol.
Click to expand...
You're allowed 10 cf rounds in bolt action rifles.
 
Slartybartfast said:
Can you not admit that using a pop rivet is laughably simple to defeat? All laws are because bad men might do something. If legally you can only have 5rnds in a centerfire rifle, why offer easily modified 100rnd magazines for sale making it easy for "bad men"?
And "Bad Men"? I've heard range officers clearly say they wouldn't mind if the rivet was missing, so if we wanted to shoot more than 5 at a time...
I don't want to throw anyone "under the bus". Obstinate gun owners who do more hating of the law and the rest of the community and think they're smart using a loophole throw themselves under the bus. The packaging on the US GSG mags says designed for "10/22 and Charger". The Canadian marketing and most Canadian gun owners and organisations knew that the high cap 10/22 mags were being allowed on a permissive interpretation of design and marketing.
Responsible gun organisations need to help write laws that can be better interpreted and enforced. To pretend that leaving everything alone will miraculously have everything left alone is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
You sound like the guy that Frankinpinned my Poor old SKS.Some folks like to interpret the law themselves and make everyone else suffer.You should be whining to stop this idiotic pinning of our magazines, instead of making it tougher.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom