Notice to S&W M&P 15-22 Rifle Owners

JimV said:
...Personally I think people should comply with the directive but strongly protest the way the entire matter was handled...
Click to expand...

That is exactly the approach I am taking. I have spoken with my MP's office and pointed out, amongst other things, the legal "limbo" owners will be placed in with regard to processing.

I have been told by RCMP that they are swamped with this right now. From my conversations with them, they don't know what has been done for which person and by whom. My latest enquiry to find out if they had received my information was met with the reply to try again next week since the person I spoke with initially is off for a few days. They don't know if my information is there, or where it might be if it is. They have told me there are piles of documents and information everywhere with regard to this matter.

The seller of my rifle (who sent verification of my 10 round mag) was told by the person he spoke with that they themselves had the information of over 100 people to process and that it would take several weeks to get through the pile.

If it is going to take several weeks to process all of this stuff, why on Earth have they given owners a mere month to comply? What's going to happen is, that many people won't receive any sort of acknowledgement from RCMP as to receipt of proof of compliance for quite some time after the deadline. People are going to be going through the roof! --"Are police going to come knocking, or what?". It's an extremely bad situation to be putting people into who have done nothing wrong. My MPs office also saw this as wrong, especially when they pointed out that it takes the CFC a long time to process firearms info at the best of times, never mind now.

And speaking of which, I also will be speaking to the whole presumption of guilt issue here; in my opinion (and in the opinion of my MPs office), they should have merely sent a notice to advise that in order to be compliant, the magazines need to be modified, and barring that, turned in. No threats of police action or demands for proof were necessary in light of the fact they made no such demands or threats when the mag restrictions were first brought in, and people had to take care of all their existing now over-capacity mags at that time (they agreed with this too). Innocent until proven guilty.

In the end, I hope to have my MP contact the braint trust behind this gong show and ask for justification and to explain how they thought the way they are going about this was a good idea....I don't know, but maybe if a lot of people got up and prodded their MP to do something similar, then maybe we could at least watch the bureaucrats squirm as they try to explain themselves.
 
JimV said:
That's an interesting number if accurate. I don't know what is meant by the "grey market", but CCC Regulation 3 (1)(b) deems any cartridge magazine prohibited

"that is capable of containing more than 10 cartridges of the type for which the magazine was originally designed and that is designed or manufactured for use in a semi-automatic handgun that is commonly available in Canada."

If only 10 guns were imported that would make the chances of any one individual in Canada being able to buy one about 1 in 3,400,000. Imagine if they weren't commonly available!
Click to expand...

Apparently there are 5 dealers distributors of S&W in canada none of them imported the handgun, they were brought in with out the distributers knowledge, same as you would go over to States and buy one and do the endless paperwork and wait months to get. d:h:
 
Correction.

tiriaq said:
Interesting point.
Then again, the firearm in question is in current production by a major manufacturer, who has importers in Canada. The firearm is available to anyone who wants one.

Apparently SW has decided that they will NO LONGER produce the pistol version. If only 10 or so pistol versions made it in to Canada, why are the 1000 or so of us rifle owners being threatened with legal action? Presumption of innocence, hello!?!
Click to expand...
 
locgo said:
tiriaq said:
Interesting point.
Then again, the firearm in question is in current production by a major manufacturer, who has importers in Canada. The firearm is available to anyone who wants one.

Apparently SW has decided that they will NO LONGER produce the pistol version. If only 10 or so pistol versions made it in to Canada, why are the 1000 or so of us rifle owners being threatened with legal action? Presumption of innocence, hello!?!
Click to expand...

We are the proverbial low hanging fruit.
Click to expand...
 
Please! Write your MP's!!!


I wrote to both my MP and Public Safety Minister, Vic Toews on this and got very little to reassure me. Essentially, the Minister just recited the RCMP's findings and that was it. I was pretty sure something like this was going to happen, so I pinned the mags myself and sold the rifle to a member here who is a LEO. He was happy with it, so that was good enough for me.

Sadly, I really like this rifle, regardless of the restricted status, but the feeling of betrayal I felt by being criminalized by my country overnight is something I'll never forget.
 
The situation is BS. I chopped my mags down, I like the look and can now go prone...
Cut the end of the mag off, you will keep the end piece so make sure its straight:
1522%20mag%20mods%20sm%20%281%29.jpg


Have to cut a bit of the mag end to allow spring to be inserted/removed (circled red), superglue this piece back on after making your 2nd cut further up the mag:
1522%20mag%20mods%20sm%20%282%29.jpg


Finished mag and inserted into rifle:
1522%20mag%20mods%20sm%20%283%29.jpg

1522%20mag%20mods%20sm%20%284%29.jpg


Cutting the spring is not necessary for this modification.
 
luke s said:
What new registration? mags aren't registerd
Click to expand...

Its because of the way the FRT works.
The basic FRT nmber for a gun might be 12345.
The gun with a 5 shot magazine might be 12345-1; with a 10 shot magazine 12345-2; with a 15 shot magazine 12345-3, etc.
From the CFP point of view, this makes sense.
 
tiriaq said:
Its because of the way the FRT works.
The basic FRT nmber for a gun might be 12345.
The gun with a 5 shot magazine might be 12345-1; with a 10 shot magazine 12345-2; with a 15 shot magazine 12345-3, etc.
From the CFP point of view, this makes sense.
Click to expand...

No way, had no idea. Thanks.

What are the CFO hours, I need to call in and say what I have done to the mag, but I am at work usually 8-6.
 
ndttech said:
Got my letter today...
Glad I bought my mag restrictors last Nov for $4.25 plus shipping

www.tacticool22.com

Sent the info off to the RCMP and I think they are happy with it....
Click to expand...

Got a reply today (Sept 21)
The restrictors are not acceptable.
It has to be a permanent pinning.
I can do it myself, but it has to be verified with a confirmation fax sent to ottawa.
 
I am hoping to get a face to face with my MP (if he is around) and rattle his chain about this.

I don't own the handgun version of this. Gonna try and run this angle. Also ask about accountability of the RCMP firearms lab. They seem to have none and make decisions based on politics and not the law.

However not allot of time for this.........:mad:
 
I think you might need to send sales receipts or bring them to a gun store and have them fax a pic/ short description confirming that it is 10 rounds.
 
luke s said:
What new registration? mags aren't registerd
Click to expand...

No kidding.

Anyway, I got hold of the Alberta CFO finally who agreed largely with the points that I was making and he got hold of someone at the CFC who decided they would take my word for it that I had turned them in to the CPS even though I can't produce definitive documentary evidence of it (I think this was founded largely on the basis that the CFC themselves can't get hold of anyone at CPS either).

They said they would send out a new registration certificate, at which point I made this point that the certificate would be identical to the one I already have as the firearm is still the same, and the standard conditions on the certificate mention nothing about changes to magazine capacities having to be notified.

"But that's the way our database works."

Well as far as I can see their database is not in compliance with the law as surely whoever wrote the form of a registration certificate into the regulations knew what could and could not be recorded on it, so I have made a formal complaint to the Federal privacy commissioner saying that the CFC is maintaining a database of information they are not legally allowed to maintain and moreover are going to great lengths to collect information to verify the information in that database that they are also not legally allowed to collect.

I may be wrong, perhaps there are regulations knocking around somewhere I haven't seen but certainly the way they are verifying the information seems illegal to me.

The CFO basically said the same thing as I did, it's an accessory, it can be changed at will with ease, so it's pointless to record it. Makes as much sense as recording the make of tires you have on your car in a vehicle registry (less sense actually).
 
The information on a Registration Certificate is only a fraction of what is recorded in the actual Registry.
The identification system is based on the descriptions listed in the Firearms Reference Table.
A registration for a given firearm is matched to a FRT entry.
For example, the generic FRT number for a Sterling Mk.4 Police Carbine is 71015.
With a 5 round magazine, the complete FRT number is 71015-1; 10 round, 71015-3; 15 round, -5; 20 round, -7; 30 round - 9; 34 round, -11.
It doesn't have to make sense, its how they do it.
Instead of wasting time dealing with -X classifications based on the capacity of an accessory detachable magazine, they should be working on something really important, like determining how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. They could no doubt come up with a definitive number - or at least a number that everyone would be compelled to accept.
If you want to complain that recording the detailed technical description of a firearm is illegal, have at it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom