Nothing has changed here. They are following a "law" that was already in place. I understand your point but until they take something "new" away from us too much is being made of this.
Notice to S&W M&P 15-22 Rifle Owners
- Thread starter Questar
- Start date
Nothing has changed here. They are following a "law" that was already in place. I understand your point but until they take something "new" away from us too much is being made of this.
Danimal247
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Toronto, ON
btw this is the culprit pistol
- Location
- East ontario
well this sucks, shame the rcmp was not spending this tiem and money catching pedos and drug dealer.
bbb
bbb
Oh no you didn't!!! I hope you don't say that to a police officer if he pulls you over for speeding?
- Location
- East ontario
Oh no you didn't!!! I hope you don't say that to a police officer if he pulls you over for speeding?
allready got a ticket, damaged my car and lost by day job this week, what have a got to lose
bbb
allready got a ticket, damaged my car and lost by day job this week, what have a got to lose
bbb
Ouch. That sucks Simon!
I have to disagree with you there. There are two aspects of this that I find particularly troubling:
1. The degree of discretion permitted to the RCMP. It's similar to that used to classify the S&W 1522 as a "variant" in the first place. The law is so fuzzy that they can impose restrictions that the legislators probably didn't even intend. This magazine issue is a particularly egregious example.
2. The retroactive nature of the decision. Everything was apparently fine until Smith came out with a pistol that happens to accept this mag. Now, suddenly the earth shifts and white is black. This makes me very uneasy about the future.
I'm not sure what, if anything, can be done, but I don't think we should simply accept this outrageous move without protest.
Well, the pistol version didn't "happen" to accept the magazine. It was intentionally designed to use it, and the manufacturer has marketed the pistol as using the magazine. That does make it a pistol magazine.
It remains to be seen if a ruling appears respecting the aftermarket Black Dog 15-22 compatible magazine, and the aftermarket magazines which fit the Ruger 10/22 carbines and pistol. Given the very specific nature of the S&W ruling, a broadened ruling affecting these others would be most disturbing.
As Questar pointed out at the beginning of the thread, the problem lies with the law. The question is, how to change it? No easy solution here.
It remains to be seen if a ruling appears respecting the aftermarket Black Dog 15-22 compatible magazine, and the aftermarket magazines which fit the Ruger 10/22 carbines and pistol. Given the very specific nature of the S&W ruling, a broadened ruling affecting these others would be most disturbing.
As Questar pointed out at the beginning of the thread, the problem lies with the law. The question is, how to change it? No easy solution here.
I don't think you are understanding what has happened. We can't have it both ways. The LAR15 mag situation worked in our favour, the M&P 15-22 doesn't. Remember the law is on the magazine not the firearm. By marketing that particular mag as a pistol mag we get the reverse effect of the LAR15 situation plain and simple. A Canadian owning an unpinned 26 round pistol mag was prohibited before all this happened. I am not saying the laws make sense but nothing really has changed.
Damn. I have been thinking about picking up an M&P 15-22, but I think I will be holding off on it until the issues surrounding the aftermarket mags are cleared up. Originally, the restricted status bothered me, but I have realized that I shoot 95% (at least) of my rimfire at the range, so a range-only toy isn't really a problem for me. But this is completely different. If I wanted a 10 shot rimfire I would buy another pistol. Too bad I dislike the 10/22's so bad. Maybe an actual AR with a conversion kit is my answer.
Mark
Mark
Yes, does ANYBODY even have one? I was under the impression that it had to be a "readily" available firearm in Canada. If there is none here then WTF?
gushulak
CGN frequent flyer
Its reasons like this way I hate this country and our stupid ass laws.
Why does the RCMP just ban everything? Seems like that's the way things are going.
Was going to get a MP15-22 just to have some fun at the range. I am pissed that it is restricted and even more pissed that now we have to neuter .22 rimfire mags.
No respect for those who make our laws.
Why does the RCMP just ban everything? Seems like that's the way things are going.
Was going to get a MP15-22 just to have some fun at the range. I am pissed that it is restricted and even more pissed that now we have to neuter .22 rimfire mags.
No respect for those who make our laws.
I think I do understand the situation. I am not disagreeing with your statement that nothing has changed, but with your attitude of acceptance. I think you are basically saying "don't make a fuss and maybe they won't notice that ARs can have 10 round mags." I don't think that's a very good long term strategy to address manifest shortcomings in the law.
Also, I think this ruling has a very large potential downside. The LAR thing is almost a unique occurrence. There aren't going to be many other "pistols" that use center fire rifle cartridges and mags. But we already have the Ruger Charger and who knows what else in the works. If these accept "rifle" mags then the day of high cap .22 mags could be over. That would affect far more people than the LAR mag.
Would this even matter?
For a "pistol" magazine to be usable in a rifle, the "pistol" has to be readily available. I suppose this is to prevent a one-off pistol being used to justify thousands of hi-cap mags for common semi-auto rifles.
With respect to the S&W situation, it is either a pistol magazine, or it is not. Its manufacturer says it is a pistol magazine. The RCMP agreed.
Look at the various rulings that have been made by the RCMP in the last couple of years. All have been based on the letter of the law, or on case law precedents. How many have been reversed?
Could things get worse? Read the laws and regulations with force of law, see what you can come up with.
Put in a Liberal/NDP/Bloc/whatever controlled government, and just wait.
I find the fact that the mag can be reclassified based on the appearance of another gun subsequent to the original classification to be particularly arbitrary and disturbing.
I see no reason why the RCMP could not extend this logic to 10/22 high cap mags (based on the existence of the Charger and potentially other new "pistols.") This, after all, is based on the rifle/pistol issue, not the fact that the 1522 was restricted.
Sure, we all know the law is an ass and not easily changed. But this may be more a matter of interpretation, like the question of "variant." That's why I asked earlier whether a remedy might exist via OIC. If so, then the Minister of Public Safety and Cabinet have the power to clarify and define the interpretation. In that case we should all be lobbying Vic Toews.
#1bcshooter
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- North Of The DMZ (US border)
Does the Ruger charger come with a 25 rnd mag .NO
If the charger came with a 25 rnd mag the MAG would be prohibited
Does the S&W MP1522 (pistol) come with a 25 rnd mag. YES
That MAG is prohibited
Does the AR pistol come with a 10 rnd mag YES
Tha AR pistol MAG is legal
Now if Ruger ever offers the charger with a factory 25 rnd mag
The MAG would be prohibited
It's not really that black and white since it is manifestly both. If Smith stops making the pistol does it go back to being a rifle magazine? Alice in Wonderland would have felt quite at home in this discussion.
Not really. Many have been based on the RCMP's interpretation of an imprecisely defined word or phrase, like "variant." Henderson may or may not bring some clarity, but I'm inclined to think the government could provide some definition through the regulatory process without involving Parliament.
