Question to magazine capacity of SMG
- Thread starter scianna54
- Start date
Regulations Prescribing Certain Firearms and other Weapons, Components and Parts of Weapons, Accessories, Cartridge Magazines, Ammunition and Projectiles as Prohibited or Restricted (SOR/98-462)
Enabling Statute: Criminal Code
Full Document for Printing: HTML (94Kb) PDF (207Kb)
Regulation current to December 31st, 2010
Attention: See coming into force provision and notes, where applicable.
<http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-46/SOR-98-462/index.html>
Enabling Statute: Criminal Code
Full Document for Printing: HTML (94Kb) PDF (207Kb)
Regulation current to December 31st, 2010
Attention: See coming into force provision and notes, where applicable.
<http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-46/SOR-98-462/index.html>
JimboJones
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Brantford, Ontario
IMO what tiriaq is trying to explain to you is that the magazines are regulated on thier own. A good example is the LAR-15 mags. The LAR is a pistol, ergo mags designed and marked for that firearm are pinned to 10. They do of course fit in an AR-15 rifle. This is not illegal due to the magazine being regulated not its end use. There are many other examples along these lines some that work for and recently one that works against (IIRC the mp15-22 mags now must be pinned to 10 even though it is a rimfire rifle)
Can not remember if it is the sr-22 or MP15-22 that recently had the mag limit impossed due to cross marketing the pistol with identical mags. Someone that knows, please correct me if I am wrong.
Last edited:
OK, scenario, somebody is offering a SMG with the original magazine which is pinned to 10 and then it comes with 6 more magazines pinned to 5 (where the original SMG those mags are manufactured for is prohibited) but they also fit this restricted SMG.
The law is not satisfactorily clear.
Firearms do NOT have a magazine capacity limit; MAGAZINES do.
What this means is the onus is not on the type of firearm using a specific magazine, it is on the magazine itself and WHAT IT WAS DESIGNED FOR. The RCMP determines this based almost strictly on a manufacturer's marketing information, if you believe that. I'll explain further.
The law states the following:
- Magazines for a centerfire, semi-automatic rifle have a 5 round capacity.
- Magazines for a centerfire, manually-operated rifle have unlimited capacity.
- Magazines for a handgun (of any caliber INCLUDING rimfire) have a 10 round capacity.
- Magazines for a rimfire rifle have unlimited capacity.
- A few rare exceptions such as belts of a TYPE made before 1946, Bren drum mags, Luger snail drum mags, etc.
For the most part, the stipulation "commonly available" is attached to the description of the firearm. That means imported and sold commercially, even if it's by only one dealer.
Now, this has led to the (reasonable) belief that any centerfire semi-automatic rifle can never have more than 5 rounds in its magazine. That is wrong. If a magazine is designed for a HANDGUN rather than a rifle, it is 10 rounds capacity. That is well established. What the law doesn't clearly tell you though is if that magazine fits and functions in any other firearm, that is perfectly acceptable. This is how we have 10-round magazines for AR-15s now, because they were specifically designed and manufactured for the LAR-15 "pistol" (which is just an AR-15 sans buttstock). The catch was, Questar imports and sells the LAR-15 commercially, so it is now a "commonly available" handgun. The law does not state that you cannot use that magazine in any other firearm regardless of classification, and in fact the RCMP have put that into print (available on Questar's website, someone else may have the link handy).
This also applies to magazines for manually operated firearms. For instance, if someone were to manufacture a bolt action rifle in 9mm and make NEW magazines, mark them as specifically for their bolt action rifle and nothing else, they could have an unlimited capacity. If they just so happened to fit a 9mm AR-15 then that is just a bonus, and inconsequential to their classification. However when this occurs, if there is so much as a hint of talk about compatibility or design influence from the AR-15 it is considered to be an AR-15 magazine and then 5-round capacity only. How the manufacturer words their marketing literature is crucial because that is what the RCMP bases their determinations off of.
It is now well known that the Australian International Arms (AIA) bolt action .308 Enfield rifles use the same pattern magazine as the M-14. The only thing that's missing is the hole in the front for the catch on the M-14. The magazines are newly manufactured in 10-round capacity and are never mentioned in company literature that they're based on M-14 mags; as far as AIA is concerned, it is their own design. You can use those 10-rounders legally in your M-14 rifle. However in the same breath, their 7.62x39mm rifle is advertised to use or be compatible with AK-47 magazines. Therefore even though they may manufacture a 10-round magazine for this rifle, the mention of compatibility with the AK means their magazine is for a centerfire semi-automatic and thus can only hold 5 rounds according to the RCMP.
Regarding an SMG, it will depend on how the firearm is classified. If it is a pistol (unlikely) then the magazine can have a capacity of 10 rounds. If it is deemed a rifle then the five round rule applies. If it is classified as a Commercial Version (or CV, a semi-automatic version of a full automatic SMG) then the magazine is regarded as being the same as a rifle and thus 5 rounds again.
It is important to note that a magazine that fits and functions in a firearm other than the one it was designed for MUST remain unmodified. Modifications to allow a magazine to fit a different firearm that would normally classify a magazine as less capacity, would constitute manufacture of a prohibited magazine. Basically you cannot take an AIA 10-round .308 magazine for instance, and drill a hole in the front so that it locks in better with your M-14. Doing so means you're making an M-14 magazine and can thus only hold 5 rounds.
It is a ridiculous law that is conveniently poorly written, and sometimes works in our favor. It just takes some creativity to work with it. Hope this (lengthy) explanation helps.
Firearms do NOT have a magazine capacity limit; MAGAZINES do.
What this means is the onus is not on the type of firearm using a specific magazine, it is on the magazine itself and WHAT IT WAS DESIGNED FOR. The RCMP determines this based almost strictly on a manufacturer's marketing information, if you believe that. I'll explain further.
The law states the following:
- Magazines for a centerfire, semi-automatic rifle have a 5 round capacity.
- Magazines for a centerfire, manually-operated rifle have unlimited capacity.
- Magazines for a handgun (of any caliber INCLUDING rimfire) have a 10 round capacity.
- Magazines for a rimfire rifle have unlimited capacity.
- A few rare exceptions such as belts of a TYPE made before 1946, Bren drum mags, Luger snail drum mags, etc.
For the most part, the stipulation "commonly available" is attached to the description of the firearm. That means imported and sold commercially, even if it's by only one dealer.
Now, this has led to the (reasonable) belief that any centerfire semi-automatic rifle can never have more than 5 rounds in its magazine. That is wrong. If a magazine is designed for a HANDGUN rather than a rifle, it is 10 rounds capacity. That is well established. What the law doesn't clearly tell you though is if that magazine fits and functions in any other firearm, that is perfectly acceptable. This is how we have 10-round magazines for AR-15s now, because they were specifically designed and manufactured for the LAR-15 "pistol" (which is just an AR-15 sans buttstock). The catch was, Questar imports and sells the LAR-15 commercially, so it is now a "commonly available" handgun. The law does not state that you cannot use that magazine in any other firearm regardless of classification, and in fact the RCMP have put that into print (available on Questar's website, someone else may have the link handy).
This also applies to magazines for manually operated firearms. For instance, if someone were to manufacture a bolt action rifle in 9mm and make NEW magazines, mark them as specifically for their bolt action rifle and nothing else, they could have an unlimited capacity. If they just so happened to fit a 9mm AR-15 then that is just a bonus, and inconsequential to their classification. However when this occurs, if there is so much as a hint of talk about compatibility or design influence from the AR-15 it is considered to be an AR-15 magazine and then 5-round capacity only. How the manufacturer words their marketing literature is crucial because that is what the RCMP bases their determinations off of.
It is now well known that the Australian International Arms (AIA) bolt action .308 Enfield rifles use the same pattern magazine as the M-14. The only thing that's missing is the hole in the front for the catch on the M-14. The magazines are newly manufactured in 10-round capacity and are never mentioned in company literature that they're based on M-14 mags; as far as AIA is concerned, it is their own design. You can use those 10-rounders legally in your M-14 rifle. However in the same breath, their 7.62x39mm rifle is advertised to use or be compatible with AK-47 magazines. Therefore even though they may manufacture a 10-round magazine for this rifle, the mention of compatibility with the AK means their magazine is for a centerfire semi-automatic and thus can only hold 5 rounds according to the RCMP.
Regarding an SMG, it will depend on how the firearm is classified. If it is a pistol (unlikely) then the magazine can have a capacity of 10 rounds. If it is deemed a rifle then the five round rule applies. If it is classified as a Commercial Version (or CV, a semi-automatic version of a full automatic SMG) then the magazine is regarded as being the same as a rifle and thus 5 rounds again.
It is important to note that a magazine that fits and functions in a firearm other than the one it was designed for MUST remain unmodified. Modifications to allow a magazine to fit a different firearm that would normally classify a magazine as less capacity, would constitute manufacture of a prohibited magazine. Basically you cannot take an AIA 10-round .308 magazine for instance, and drill a hole in the front so that it locks in better with your M-14. Doing so means you're making an M-14 magazine and can thus only hold 5 rounds.
It is a ridiculous law that is conveniently poorly written, and sometimes works in our favor. It just takes some creativity to work with it. Hope this (lengthy) explanation helps.
I cannot think of a case where an original smg magazine could be pinned to 10 rounds, rather than 5.
Perhaps you could identify the firearm.
There has been a lot of talk about 20 rd AIA magazines that coincidentally might work in a M-14 rifle. Have you seen one yet?
Perhaps you could identify the firearm.
There has been a lot of talk about 20 rd AIA magazines that coincidentally might work in a M-14 rifle. Have you seen one yet?
Tiriaq - When I called to verify a (restricted) Sterling Mk4 Police Carbine last year, the lady I spoke to went through all of the Sterling FRT no's with me to find the right one. I remember one of the things she asked was if the capacity was 5 or 10 rounds since at least one of the FRT entries for "Sterling Police Carbine" or "Mk4 Police Carbine" she found was for 10 rounds and others were for 5. I decided to play it safe and stick with the 5 round FRT. I have been curious about this since it happened.
I assume the 10 round FRT version is regsited as a pistol (can used pinned 10 round SMG mags?) or someone was able to register with a 10 round mag from the Sterling Mk.7 (not commonly available pistol) that is essentially a factory shortened version of the SMG mag? Or perhaps she was looking at "Ruger Police Carbine" instead of Sterling?
I am curious to know what the other Sterling FRT entries she saw were if you happen to have access to the tables?
I'll try and find the FRT I used to register it to compare. Mine is registered as "Commercial Varaint" with 5 round limit listed.
A magazine designed and manufactured for the Sterling pistol would be acceptable at 10 rounds. If you look at the link posted by Wendell, you will notice that there are some "pistols" with magazines limited to 5 rounds, but the Sterling is not in that list.
A Sterling SMG magazine pinned to 10 rounds would not qualify as a pistol magazine.
The FRT entries -1, -2, -3, etc, depending on magazine capacities are rather odd, given that magazines are accessories, and given that any magazine with a capacity greater than that rescribed by law would be a prohibited device.
A Sterling SMG magazine pinned to 10 rounds would not qualify as a pistol magazine.
The FRT entries -1, -2, -3, etc, depending on magazine capacities are rather odd, given that magazines are accessories, and given that any magazine with a capacity greater than that rescribed by law would be a prohibited device.
Having an FRT with a 10 or 20 or 30 round magazines does NOT make the magazine legal... it simply denotes that the gun was available from the manufacturer/exporter with that magazine capacity originally. It does NOT change the legal requirement that the magazine be limited to a legal capacity. As an example, pretty much ever AR-15 has an FRT child entry for the 20 and 30 round magazine versions... the gun's themselves are still Restricted (not prohibited), but the Magazines are considered Prohibited Devices if they are not pinned to limit their capacity.
Unless the firearm is classified as a "HANDGUN" it is likely that the magazine made for it are limited to 5 round maximum capacity. Uzi magazines (for example) are specifically named in the act as limited to 5 rounds. The legislation specifically talks about magazines manufactured and designed for use in a Handgun that is generally available in Canada... so it does NOT cover SMG's, at least not that we've ever seen.
Mark
My storm will accept 10 round Beretta 92 mags...therefore as it was designed to use these pistol mags, it is legal to hold 10 rounds.
My USC will accept 10 round mags but they must be pinned at 5 - that is because it must be as it was not designed for pistol mags as the Storm was.
My USC will accept 10 round mags but they must be pinned at 5 - that is because it must be as it was not designed for pistol mags as the Storm was.
How do you know if the magazine is made for a handgun originally?
Last edited:
I was under the impression (perhaps mistakenly) that these are the only magazines that fit the Storm, therefore it was designed with this in mind. Do they sell other magazines (besides these) that will fit the Storm? (and I don't mean larger capacity pistol mags).
Was the 10 round magazine designed and manufactured for use in a pistol?
You are using the term "smg". I would suspect that an UZI compatible 10 round magazine designed and manufactured for use in a "smg", and supplied with it as a OEM part isn't going to qualify as a pistol magazine.
I'll go one step further... the magazine he is describing (pinned to 10 rounds) is likely a Prohibited Device under the regulations. Just because someone pinned it to 10 rounds and sold it doesn't make it legal or conforming.
If that magazine wasn't classified by RCMP as a "Handgun Magazine" legally allowed to hold 10 rounds then it is "over-capacity" and falls into the category of a Prohibited Device, possession of which is a criminal offence.
Mark
Not true... in fact the original CX4 Storms that entered Canada came with 10 round magazines that were declared "Prohibited Devices" by the RCMP because those original magazine were in fact identified as CX4 Storm magazines and as such they were ruled to be "Rifle Magazines" which are legally allowed a maximum capacity of 5 rounds. The fact that they looked almost the same and fit the same as the Beretta pistol magazines they were adapted from was irrelevant... they were designed and manufactured for use in a rifle and therefore limited to 5 rounds.
Those magazines are allowed 5 round even if you use them in a handgun... it doesn't change anything. The issue is not the firearm in which they are used but the firearm for which they were designed and manufactured.
It was this ruling that formed the basis for our LAR-15 ten round AR Pistol Magazine application.
Mark
My memory suggests the order was reversed. I thought the first batch of CX4 rifles were shipped with plain 10 round Model 92 magazines and were accepted as handgun magazines. The second batch imported had 10 round magazines stamped CX4, and the RCMP concluded that since they were specificly marked and made for a rifle, they were rifle mags legal only at 5 rounds or less.
Did I get the order wrong?
