Rem 7615 rifle for IPSC?

PEI ROB said:
This thread was hijacked plain and simple.

Modifing an AR15 mag so it would only fit in a 7615 would suffice. Question is, how?
Click to expand...

Now this is the interesting question, because if you redesign the magazine, does it then become "designed for" use with that firearm? You could take an AR-15 magazine and put a flange on it, assuming the magazine well on the 7615P is shorter than on an AR-15. Then it would only fit in the 7615P.

I have to say this is an interesting discussion because semi-auto centrefire rifles (and pump-actions for that matter) are banned here, so in IPSC rifle we only have two divisions instead of four (but we have no mag restrictions). Absolutely everybody uses something bolt-action/lever-action/straight-pull equipped with large capacity magazines. Often AR-15 magazines, but I've seen everything under the sun, including a wide variety of modified Mini-14 magazines (to fit modified Browning BLRs).

IPSC rifle is a fairly new thing here, I think there's only been 3 matches so far, but practical rifle has been around for ages so there is tons of funky equipment in use.

I wonder if a modified Browning BLR fitted with a modified Mini-14 30-round mag would be legal in Canada? There's various other contraptions I've seen, modified M1A mags being used in all sorts of bolt-action rifles, etc.
 
heroofmyownlife said:
If I have a 7615P show up at my door, and in the box with it is a 30 round magazine that is marked to the effect of "Rem 7615P" I think it would be very valid to say that the magazine in question was "designed and manufactured" for use in a pump gun, thus failing the second test and not being subject to restriction.
Click to expand...

But what mags come with it in the box? Like I said, I had this come up with my L98A1, and it did come with RG mags that were designed to go into it. However it was a more complex question in my case because they're also designed to go into the L85A1 as well, which is full-auto, which meant there was no way out from it. :(
 
i have a 7615P. it came with a bushmaster 5 rounder, by the way the sights plain and simple suck ass for a rifle. i have been talking to the CFC who forewardede me the the head firearms forensic tech in the RCMP. as it stands the mag must be pinned to five rounds if it was DESIGNED for a semi-auto, reguardless what the mag goes into. the mag well is shallower on a 7615 than an AR. so if you make a mag FROM SCRATCH to fit the 7615 that would be ok. all you have to do is make it with a nub to prevent it from going into a AR. if you take an AR mag and modify it this is now a PROHIBITED device. i am still waiting to hear back wether you could use the mag in an AR that modified to take a 7615 mag.

f2fd618d.jpg
 
Last edited:
From reading the relevant legislation I can only conclude that owning 30rd magazines from a production run for the Remington pump would not only be perfectly legal if you owned such a rifle but also if you didn't.

There is also no law that I am aware of that would prohibit the use of these mags in an AR15. It's the exact same legal loophole that makes the use of 10rd pistol mags in carbines legal. The only difference is the pistol mags were designed AND manufactured for a 10rd restricted weapon, whereas these mags would only fail to meet the "manufactered for" portion that would mandate restricted capacity.

Get a magazine manufacturer to do a production run of 30rd magazines for the Remington, clearly marked as such, and taaa-daaaa you've got legal 30rd mags for use in an AR15.
 
I think the only way that would fly is if they were supplied by Remington and said "Remington" on them. However even then I think it's still a bit iffy, because their own sales literature says the rifle is designed to use AR-15 magazines.
 
How about this scenario - if a stripped, never assembled into a magazine, magazine body were flanged/lumped/whatever, so that it could not fit an AR, and was then assembled into a magazine, would it not be a 7615 magazine, and not an AR mag? Related example - if the receiver from a rifle is altered to semi auto only, the result is a prohip. But if a VZ58 receiver, which was never assembled into a rifle, is altered to semi auto only, the resulting rifle will be either restricted or non-restricted, depending on barrel length. In other words, the stripped, never assembled body is a work in progress, which is completed so that it will only fit a manually operated repeating rifle.
 
Like I said above, it's iffy, because you're using an AR-15 magazine body, and their own sales literature says the rifle is designed to use AR-15 magazines. So it could be argued you've just stuffed a modified AR-15 magazine into a rifle designed for AR-15 magazines. On that basis it's got to be 5 rounds or less capacity. If they'd marketed it as simply being a pump-action rifle that used a big magazine, you might have a point, but they didn't unfortunately.
 
I see your point. Perhaps if a manufacturer of magazines were to produce a magazine that would only fit 7615s, and not any AR, then the magazine would be OK. It would leave the plant as a 7615 mag., and never was an AR mag. Even if the 7615 is advertised to accept AR mags, the magazine itself would not be designed or manufactured for an AR. Given that it is not the rifle, but the magazine that is controlled, such a magazine should be acceptable.
 
Am I mistaken or are there not AR15s designed for and advertised to accept 10rd Glock pistol mags? It's legal to use those mags as they are in this case both designed and manufactured for use in pistols. According to the law both the design AND manufacture must be for a semi auto centre fire rifle in order to be subject to the 5 rnd mag limit.

It sounds as though the RCMP is looking to get sued, and/or some officers are looking to get a malicious prosecution charge as the law makes it very clear that such magazines are perfectly legal.

Not that I'm volunteering for legal guinnea pig duty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom