LAR15 Pistol Mag in AR15 - ruling

[Questar]

Apparently they are another legal pistol magazine... already talked about in this thread:

http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=374677

According to the last communication we had with RCMP/CFC on that topic the 30/10 magazines were classified as "prohibited devices". I hope that CanAm actually got them approved but until someone can show some written confirmation of that from RCMP Tables Section then all I can do is believe what was sent to us by the RCMP in their written classification of our LAR15 10 round magazines, wherein they said that no other design was approved.

As I've said before... we submitted an 30/10 prototype, with all the necessary markings and documentation and that design was classified as a "Prohibited Device" with the clear ruling that no 30 round mag body would be viewed as anything but a rifle magazine. To overturn that will require a court ruling.

As of a few weeks ago I was told by Ottawa (by telephone and email) that there had been no changes or additions to the approved list of 10 round pistol magazines and that no 30/10 design had been approved.

Take it for what it's worth... but without some written classification you are begging to be charged and becoming the test case.

Mark

 

[LloydM]

So after all the arguing that went towards convincing me that a pistol magazine is legal to use in a rifle, such as a:
-10 round Glock magazine in an Olympic Arms AR
-10 round Beretta magazine in a CX Storm
-10 round LAR15 magazine in an AR...

After all that how can anyone say that this pistol magazine is any different? Is it the fact that it is pinned? Does this mean that it would be unlawful to put a 10/30 round glock mag in the Olympic AR, or a 10/15 Beretta mag in a Storm? As for the 10(30) round LAR15 magazine, I am not even sure if it is pinned or if it just has a longer body or plate inside. This seems like a contradiction to me. I would appreciate your imput Mark.

 

[Questar]

So after all the arguing that went towards convincing me that a pistol magazine is legal to use in a rifle, such as a:
-10 round Glock magazine in an Olympic Arms AR
-10 round Beretta magazine in a CX Storm
-10 round LAR15 magazine in an AR...

After all that how can anyone say that this pistol magazine is any different? Is it the fact that it is pinned? Does this mean that it would be unlawful to put a 10/30 round glock mag in the Olympic AR, or a 10/15 Beretta mag in a Storm? As for the 10(30) round LAR15 magazine, I am not even sure if it is pinned or if it just has a longer body or plate inside. This seems like a contradiction to me. I would appreciate your imput Mark.

You are confusing 2 issues. Issue #1 is the classification of the magazine and that is whether they classify the magazine as a "Pistol Magazine" or a "Rifle Magazine". That decision is what determines the number of rounds the magazine can legally hold (5 or 10). Issue #2 is what firearm you "USE" the magazine in and as the RCMP have repeatedly stated, the use of a magazine is NOT regulated by any laws... so if you have a legally classified "10 round Pistol magazine" then you can use it in whatever you want.

Determining the classification of the magazine is the difficult part and open to some interpretation by RCMP. That has always been the issue and without a court ruling that would force them to revise their previous decisions, the RCMP have classified all 30 round AR magazine designs as "rifle magazines"... it has nothing to do with being "pinned".

Hope this clarifies. (like mud?)

Mark

 

[76r]

Man I'm glad I don't live in Ontario!

Yeah, I know what ya mean. I shake my head every time you read stuff like this. Hard to believe this is the same country?
Lots of 'people in authority' with puffed out chests and chips on their shoulders out 'there'!

 

[Tuco Pike]

As far as I know, the magazine laws and the firearms act applies to the whole country, not just us here in Ontario with our puffed out chests and the massive chips on our shoulders. Don't mess with my author itah .

 

[Paul Morrison]

I think this might have to do with a recent decision in R. v. Cancade, in which a person in possession of 30 round AR-15 magazine shells (no internal parts), with the intent to pin them to 5 rounds, was convicted of possession of a prohibited device.

 

[Deckard]

OK, what is this 'guest' thing?

 

[F22_RaptoR]

I think this might have to do with a recent decision in R. v. Cancade, in which a person in possession of 30 round AR-15 magazine shells (no internal parts), with the intent to pin them to 5 rounds, was convicted of possession of a prohibited device.

See, now thats the whole problem.

The magazine body itself is considered the "magazine".

Thats why blocked magazines are epoxied or permanently sealed (like some of my USC 5/10 round mags, you can't strip them).

If the body itself is modified to hold only 5 rounds (by pinning or riveting somehow) with or without the follower & baseplate, then that's okay to have the mag be strippable.

Thats why I like pinned mags better than blocked, since you can strip them to semi-clean them (even though the follower cant come out)

 

[76r]

As far as I know, the magazine laws and the firearms act applies to the whole country, not just us here in Ontario with our puffed out chests and the massive chips on our shoulders. Don't mess with my author itah .

I meant no offense to 'the membership'. My comment was directed by the perception that those out East seem to be hassled more by law enforcement and the CFC (the chips and puffs labels belong to them), than we are out West. All thought the laws are the same, it seems that our interpretation is from a more 'positive' angle than curtailing rights and freedoms. (eg. our ATT's are blanket '5 yrs anywhere, anytime'. As if the assumption is "Of course he's trustworthy, he's a responsible member of society. And has shown no reason why we should hassle him as if he was a child molester, just 'cause he has firearms.)
I know I carried it a little far, but...it's close.

 

[Tuco Pike]

I think this might have to do with a recent decision in R. v. Cancade, in which a person in possession of 30 round AR-15 magazine shells (no internal parts), with the intent to pin them to 5 rounds, was convicted of possession of a prohibited device.

Well I sure hope that got over turned or just thrown out. It doesn't become a device until it is assembled. The magazine shell no matter how big or small cannot be a prohibited device otherwise all 30 round, 20 round and some 10 round magazine shells that have only been riveted would be prohibited, which they are not. The follower has to be installed (and is still not a device), for the rivet to be installed (or the follower couldn't be put in,) or for a plate to be welded in. It does not become a device until the spring is in and the floor plate is on. The person or persons who laid the charge should be brought up on charges themselves and run out of town on a rail (we don't do enough of that anymore).

 

[Tuco Pike]

I meant no offense to 'the membership'. My comment was directed by the perception that those out East seem to be hassled more by law enforcement and the CFC (the chips and puffs labels belong to them), than we are out West. All thought the laws are the same, it seems that our interpretation is from a more 'positive' angle than curtailing rights and freedoms. (eg. our ATT's are blanket '5 yrs anywhere, anytime'. As if the assumption is "Of course he's trustworthy, he's a responsible member of society. And has shown no reason why we should hassle him as if he was a child molester, just 'cause he has firearms.)
I know I carried it a little far, but...it's close.

No offense taken.... Just kidding , But we do have big chips on our shoulders from all the hassles that we do get from our powers that be. It's like Eric Cartman is running the roost here, don't mess with his author itah!!!

 

[Paul Morrison]

It doesn't become a device until it is assembled.

The B.C. Superior Court disagreed. I'm with you, but my opinion doesn't matter. I hope they appealed as well, but somehow I doubt it.

The magazine shell no matter how big or small cannot be a prohibited device otherwise all 30 round, 20 round and some 10 round magazine shells that have only been riveted would be prohibited, which they are not.

I suspect that having prevailed in Cancade, this will be the RCMP's next trick.

Which is why I hope Cancade appealed.

We really need to establish a big firearms legal defence fund in Canada. I wonder if we could convince the NRA to give us a few million!

 

[e123456]

Questar, thanks a lot for the letter. Visited Williams Arms and could not walk away from the box full of lar-15's, $35. Nice : )

 

[jdman]

OK, what is this 'guest' thing?

He goes by another name on CGN now for some reason.

 

[Max Power]

I think this might have to do with a recent decision in R. v. Cancade, in which a person in possession of 30 round AR-15 magazine shells (no internal parts), with the intent to pin them to 5 rounds, was convicted of possession of a prohibited device.

Read that judgement and puked. I love how something that feeds ammo by definition can be considered as such even when not capable of doing so in its present state. Now that is some screwed up logic.

I better get rid of all the metal in my garage that is big enough to make into a firearm reciever lest I get charged. Apparently the litmus test of function has been thrown out with this judgement (or lack thereof lol).

 

[V29189***]

He goes by another name on CGN now for some reason.

yeah - for security reasons....

 

[jdman]

yeah - for security reasons....

Yeah, i know it wasnt the best handle to use.

 

[Tuco Pike]

The B.C. Superior Court disagreed. I suspect that having prevailed in Cancade, this will be the RCMP's next trick.

Well then they are truly not Superior are they? Quite infantile it would seem. And I think we have all grown tired of the RCMP, and their tricks. You are right, Canadian guns owners are mostly like "let the other guy do it", where as the US with the NRA is "I'll gladly step up and do it.".

 

[OZZ]

Well then they are truly not Superior are they? Quite infantile it would seem. And I think we have all grown tired of the RCMP, and their tricks. You are right, Canadian guns owners are mostly like "let the other guy do it", where as the US with the NRA is "I'll gladly step up and do it.".

Do you ever expect anything else from a police force started by the queen of England??

The english are used to being subjects and we suck balls becasue we cant even fully break away form that queen and her police.

 

[Sadbash]

Better tell him he should stick with things he knows how to deal with like parking tickets. Another prima donna who wants to change law acording to his own narrow minded views instead of inforcing it.