10/22 10+ round magazine prohibition - discussed yet?

[play.soccer]

Update

Canadian Sporting Arms and Ammunition Association
07/20/2016

UPDATE ON 10/22 MAGAZINES

The following response from the Canadian Firearms Program is being sent out in response to inquiries about the classification of 10/22 magazines. It's clear from the response there has been no new bulletin issued, but rather the R.C.M.P. is stating this is merely an implementation/enforcement of Bulletin No. 72 issued in March, 2011 and modified in September, 2013 .

The R.C.M.P is claiming that Bulletin No. 72 makes clear that all 10/22 magazines can be used in either a rifle or pistol and therefore must be modified to limit it to 10 rounds regardless of the intention of the manufacturer or importer. This, despite the fact that the regulation reads:

"Magazines designed to contain rimfire cartridges and designed or manufactured for use in a rifle do not have a regulated capacity."
In Canada, it's clear the magazines are being manufactured, imported and marketed in Canada for use in rifles, and therefore not subject to the 10-round limit for pistols. In its response below the R.C.M.P. states:

"Whether the magazine is intended by the importer to be used in a rifle is not relevant to the classification determination."

The Board of Directors of the CSAAA are meeting today to explore action. Please stand by for updates.

https://www.facebook.com/csaaaorgani...91692991054951

------------------

Prohibited 10/22 Platform Magazines
07/19/2016
Chief's Blog

I have received a number of inquiries regarding 10/22 magazines. Today I received an update from the Canadian Firearms Program that clarifies the situation.

Prohibited 10/22 Platform Magazines

Issue
This concerns the classification of 22 Long Rifle (22LR) calibre cartridge magazines designed or manufactured for Ruger 10/22 rifles, Charger pistols and related firearms, commonly referred to as the “10/22 platform”.

History
The Canadian Firearms Program (CFP) has responded to numerous queries from individuals and firearms businesses concerning the classification of magazines designed or manufactured for Ruger brand 10/22 rifles and Charger pistols, plus clones of such firearms made by other manufacturers.

The overall issue was that any 10/22 platform magazine which exceeded ten shots capacity was a prohibited device. This information was also well circulated on Canadian online forums specializing in firearms issues. The CFP specifically addressed one of the more common overcapacity 10/22 platform magazines, the Ruger BX-25 magazine, which contains 25 cartridges and is described by Ruger as being manufactured for both the Ruger 10/22 rifle series and 22 Charger pistol series, identifying the BX-25 magazine as a prohibited device (CFP Bulletin 72, 2013-09-05).
Additionally, the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT) decided that a similar magazine, the Ruger BX-25x2 magazine (50 shots), was a prohibited device (AP-2013-059).

Magazines up to 110 shot capacity are available. Although the 22LR cartridge is less powerful than most, it is nonetheless lethal, and combined with high capacity magazines, presents a public safety hazard and an officer safety concern when responding to incidents involving these magazines.
Notwithstanding the steps taken to inform the Canadian public and firearms businesses, it appears that prohibited 10/22 platform magazines continue to be imported into Canada and sold by unqualified businesses and individuals.

Rationale
In short, 10/22 platform magazines are designed and/or manufactured for both rifles and handguns. While rimfire calibre rifle magazines are not regulated, the capacity of handgun magazines is universally limited to ten cartridges, and in consequence, 10/22 platform magazines are prohibited devices if the ten shot limit is exceeded. Whether the magazine is intended by the importer to be used in a rifle is not relevant to the classification determination.

Summary
All 22 Long Rifle calibre magazines for the 10/22 platform, regardless of brand, are prohibited devices at any capacity exceeding ten shots. The ten shot limit applies irrespective of the type of firearm it is used in. Magazines exceeding ten shots capacity are not prohibited devices if reduced in capacity to ten shots or less by pinning or by other means described in the magazine regulations.

Action Required
CFP will continue to distribute the information to law enforcement (CACP, CROPS, NWEST, Public Safety Canada), businesses and clients (through CFO's offices) concerning the classification of those magazines

http://www.police.midland.on.ca/news...lateforme-1022

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by Grizcore

Does it not make more sense to prohibit the charger as a high capacity pistol, instead of contradicting a federal law stating no limit to rifle capacity? The idea of telling people to "leave the large mags at home" is not prohibition and seems mute. Anyone who would abuse the high capacity mags for criminal acts probably won't care what they were politely asked to do. This is a minor issue compared to the implications of law enforcement (police) managing gun laws (state) or any laws for that matter. I respect all laws in Canada that are vetted and enforced with due legal process, but this is a unilateral decision made by a group of people that are paid to enforce the law, not dictate it, IMO.

Originally Posted by Grizcore

From further information found on rcmp website, since 2013 any magazine over ten rounds that fits a pistol (regardless of original design intent) is prohibited unless pinned to ten. I still don't see the point in this prohibition. Pistols are so regulated already, ruining my super plink fest or gopher apocalypse with my drum magazine is not going to affect a pistol owners moral compass. It's like outlawing race slicks because someone might drive them on the road. If someone is found with 25 rounds in a pistol then throw the book at them. The sad thing is that someone will always ruin it for everyone else.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Why prohibit anything? It is a poor interpretation of a nonsensical law to begin with. Vilifying a magazine simply because it can be used in something else, is a ludacris goose chase that could affect firearms usage across the country. Who cares if the people who have a Charger are putting them in the pistols?! Roughly 400 of them in Canada, who paid for them and registered them legally. Using the 25 rounder was not illegal.

This is the problem with the Canadian gun owner. Quick to throw fellow gun owners under the bus, as long as it doesn't affect the all important myself. Oh, we'll even happily wave and "help" out when our neighbors place is being dismantled for holding a switch blade comb.

The sad thing is you almost get it. Except by your last sentence you think it's one guy. Well in this case it's you. The one that won't stand up for your fellow gun owners. Only that there is a lot of you. You that didn't kick up a fuss when half the pistols went prohib in 95. You that didn't scream and kick when we lost AK and AR went restricted. Only a few years ago that was someone's 10/22 with 30 round mags. Take a look at the Canadian list of prohibited weapons. Just a ton of stuff on there, and guess what. It's growing. In a couple decades, it's very foreseeable that we'll still be navel gazing and nodding our heads like a bunch of dupa when we get left with single shots. Hey, because they left us something, right?

[Grizcore]

I completely agree. Like I said pistols are already so heavily regulated any ban doesn't make sense. Throw the book at someone with a 25 shot in their pistol. I don't want any gun banned, but 400 pistols vs. a million rifles. If there going to ban something it should be the one that affects the least of us. I'm not throwing anyone under the bus so don't paint me with that brush.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by Grizcore

I completely agree. Like I said pistols are already so heavily regulated any ban doesn't make sense. Throw the book at someone with a 25 shot in their pistol. I don't want any gun banned, but 400 pistols vs. a million rifles. If there going to ban something it should be the one that affects the least of us. I'm not throwing anyone under the bus so don't paint me with that brush.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

I don't think you're considering the big picture on this issue. That pistol was made 30 years after the bigger mags were made. If this goes through they will try that sort of crap with all different mags. And they have before.

Why throw the book at someone who is using a legally bought mag? That crap would open the door for all kinds of magazine useage "enforcement" that we did not have.

[RolHammer]

Originally Posted by play.soccer

"...Although the 22LR cartridge is less powerful than most, it is nonetheless lethal, and combined with high capacity magazines, presents a public safety hazard and an officer safety concern when responding to incidents involving these magazines...."

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but this is where this whole thing jumps the shark. There's already a law - an actual piece of legislation - that covers this and includes having weighed exactly this matter in the crafting of its wording. That legislation places no limit on rimfire magazine capacity. Surely there must be incidents of mass shootings in Canada that underline the importance for this post-legislation update of opinion? Even just one? <crickets>

Originally Posted by Tactical Lever

...nodding our heads like a bunch of dupa ...

*dupi (short 'i')

And yes, in that scenario we would be.

[Grizcore]

If some guy bought a truck legally and drove it through a playground full of kids would you cut him slack because because he bought the truck legally? I'm not for banning anything, the problem is not the equipment it's the intended usage.everyone is not stable or smart enough to handle fully automatic rifles, or high capacity mags. I owns many of these now prohibited magazines. My intention has never been to use them violently. For the very last time, I want people to be accountable for how they use the magazine and in what fire arm. I should be able to own a charger and that bc 25 and not be in trouble until I put the two together, in public, with malicious intent. I think it's you that doesn't see the big picture. All men are not equal, or sain, or accountable for their actions. The idea of police determining state policy scares the crap out of me, but i understand why the idea of every hot head drug dealer owning an ar15 and armor piercing rounds probably scares law enforcement a little. In a perfect world we would be free to own what we want and use it as we please, legally. But this world is not perfect. And it most definitely is not as cut and dry as everyone gets access to everything and hope for the best. The thing I would like to see is the owners being held accountable for their actions and usage. But pistols were doing just fine before that charger, and so we're the 1022s. Now it's a mess because of unintended usage of equipment. Trunk through playground.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

[Grizcore]

*truck

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

[Bergerboy]

I see tempers are getting hot. I think a better place to vent would be to your respective MLA

https://www.assembly.ab.ca/net/index.aspx?p=mla_home

Let them know you feel that this is unjust and pressure them to repeal it.

Edit: No petitions especially the Facebook ones, they are useless.

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by Grizcore

If some guy bought a truck legally and drove it through a playground full of kids would you cut him slack because because he bought the truck legally? I'm not for banning anything, the problem is not the equipment it's the intended usage.everyone is not stable or smart enough to handle fully automatic rifles, or high capacity mags. I owns many of these now prohibited magazines. My intention has never been to use them violently. For the very last time, I want people to be accountable for how they use the magazine and in what fire arm. I should be able to own a charger and that bc 25 and not be in trouble until I put the two together, in public, with malicious intent. I think it's you that doesn't see the big picture. All men are not equal, or sain, or accountable for their actions. The idea of police determining state policy scares the crap out of me, but i understand why the idea of every hot head drug dealer owning an ar15 and armor piercing rounds probably scares law enforcement a little. In a perfect world we would be free to own what we want and use it as we please, legally. But this world is not perfect. And it most definitely is not as cut and dry as everyone gets access to everything and hope for the best. The thing I would like to see is the owners being held accountable for their actions and usage. But pistols were doing just fine before that charger, and so we're the 1022s. Now it's a mess because of unintended usage of equipment. Trunk through playground.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Straw man argument. Anything can and will be misused. In France, guns are heavily regulated and some idiots killed 150 there with illegal guns. In Jamaica only cops, security guards and military have guns. Yet nearly all the murders are by gun, and outnumber our yearly worst city by a factor of ten. Violence and crime has went up in the U.K. since there gun laws got more strict.

Tell me again about the crime stats here concerning regular capacity 10/22 mags and how we will be safer once they are gone. We've only had them about 40 years now...

BTW we have laws against murder irrespective of magazines and trucks. Maybe France should ban anything over 1/4 ton trucks?

The big picture is eventual disarmament, and crime going up as it's happening. Take a look around and see what's going on in the rest of the world.

[Tactical Lever]

You'll have to really point out the misuse of the Rugers. Just not seeing it.

Don't forget, it was only a few years back we had (and still have grandfathered) FA, and we did just fine.

[Grizcore]

You can twist my words all you bud, I'm to busy for bored trolls.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

[RolHammer]

Originally Posted by Bergerboy

I see tempers are getting hot. I think a better place to vent would be to your respective MLA

https://www.assembly.ab.ca/net/index.aspx?p=mla_home

Let them know you feel that this is unjust and pressure them to repeal it.

Edit: No petitions especially the Facebook ones, they are useless.

As this is a federal matter, probably should go to your MP. And, for most of us, it'll be an easier sell as well as they'll be more likely to be blue than orange.

For myself, I've already sent a message to Garnett Genuis to make sure he's up to speed.

[Bergerboy]

Originally Posted by RolHammer

As this is a federal matter, probably should go to your MP. And, for most of us, it'll be an easier sell as well as they'll be more likely to be blue than orange.

For myself, I've already sent a message to Garnett Genuis to make sure he's up to speed.

Good catch, brain fade this afternoon somehow equated RCMP as a provincial force....oops.

http://www.lop.parl.gc.ca/ParlInfo/c....aspx?Menu=HOC

here is a link to your MP.....the federal guy....

[JamesB]

It is interesting that the RCMP are trying to blame this problem on dealers and distributors who have misunderstood the law for the last 20 years.
That line of reasoning suggests that the RCMP have been incompetent in both enforcing the act, and passing on information to their clients. The Butler Creek mags have been retailed here for 30 years of so. They pre date the firearms act, and one would have thought that once the act was in place the brain trust at the RCMP would have made some effort to close down the sale of what they claim were "obviously" prohibited devices.
Sorry this smells a lot like BS from my perspective.

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by JamesB

It is interesting that the RCMP are trying to blame this problem on dealers and distributors who have misunderstood the law for the last 20 years.
That line of reasoning suggests that the RCMP have been incompetent in both enforcing the act, and passing on information to their clients. The Butler Creek mags have been retailed here for 30 years of so. They pre date the firearms act, and one would have thought that once the act was in place the brain trust at the RCMP would have made some effort to close down the sale of what they claim were "obviously" prohibited devices.
Sorry this smells a lot like BS from my perspective.

BS is right, must have been a newly promoted, newly posted and newly situated position in which this got dug up and the hey I will make my mark syndrome starts but the law is the law and these magazines of 25 round capacity are being sold so myself and a million others are criminals...cell mates for life over the dreaded capacity of a magazine, if they ever saw me shoot rabbits they would know it takes two magazines for every four rabbits...duh!

[DiabeticKripple]

Sounds like the RCMP is making up their own laws

[bobtodrick]

Originally Posted by Grizcore

If some guy bought a truck legally and drove it through a playground full of kids would you cut him slack because because he bought the truck legally? I'm not for banning anything, the problem is not the equipment it's the intended usage.everyone is not stable or smart enough to handle fully automatic rifles, or high capacity mags. I owns many of these now prohibited magazines. My intention has never been to use them violently. For the very last time, I want people to be accountable for how they use the magazine and in what fire arm. I should be able to own a charger and that bc 25 and not be in trouble until I put the two together, in public, with malicious intent. I think it's you that doesn't see the big picture. All men are not equal, or sain, or accountable for their actions. The idea of police determining state policy scares the crap out of me, but i understand why the idea of every hot head drug dealer owning an ar15 and armor piercing rounds probably scares law enforcement a little. In a perfect world we would be free to own what we want and use it as we please, legally. But this world is not perfect. And it most definitely is not as cut and dry as everyone gets access to everything and hope for the best. The thing I would like to see is the owners being held accountable for their actions and usage. But pistols were doing just fine before that charger, and so we're the 1022s. Now it's a mess because of unintended usage of equipment. Trunk through playground.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Pure crap.
'Intent'....far more people have been murdered with a CF bolt action than Ruger 10-22's, so by that reasoning we should be banning all hunting rifles, knives, baseball bats and rocks.

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by Grizcore

You can twist my words all you bud, I'm to busy for bored trolls.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Bored troll my rear! You spout some anti crap about throwing the book at Charger users, and really expect not to get called on it? Then you say that limiting magazine size is for the public good. Really? I don't have to twist words, it's all right there. Should I quote you in case you forgot what you said?

[Grizcore]

Like I said 6 posts ago " bans are mute" if someone wants to do harm they will by any means necessary. Both of you are arguing My point about holding each individual accountable. I don't want any of the bans. I don't think 22s are a major source of crime and I don't agree with them trying to regulate these magazines. If you have something to say fine but argument based in agreement is a ridiculous habit to have so just leave me out of it.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by RolHammer

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but this is where this whole thing jumps the shark. There's already a law - an actual piece of legislation - that covers this and includes having weighed exactly this matter in the crafting of its wording. That legislation places no limit on rimfire magazine capacity. Surely there must be incidents of mass shootings in Canada that underline the importance for this post-legislation update of opinion? Even just one? <crickets>

*dupi (short 'i')

And yes, in that scenario we would be.

Thanks for the correction!

[guywiththemule]

And now it begins( bans and confiscations and voila..."instant criminals")... Check the liberal platform on guns and crime.... and guess who is in charge of evil guns ???? Would that be responsible or accountable government or police ???

[srs123]

I give up. I'm selling all my guns

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by srs123

I give up. I'm selling all my guns

Watchya got?

[rugatika]

I am guessing the RCMP won't have the balls to charge a single soul with this. If they do they will get laughed out of court. The law is pretty damn clear, and has been stated already...How do you design a 25 round mag for something that isn't going to exist for another 30 years or more?

As an aside...I'm not a lawyer or anything, but as someone who clearly has a better understanding of the law than they do, I would be willing to give them a hand to prevent any further embarassment to the force. (small fee of course)

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by Grizcore

Like I said 6 posts ago " bans are mute" if someone wants to do harm they will by any means necessary. Both of you are arguing My point about holding each individual accountable. I don't want any of the bans. I don't think 22s are a major source of crime and I don't agree with them trying to regulate these magazines. If you have something to say fine but argument based in agreement is a ridiculous habit to have so just leave me out of it.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Well then clarify your argument. I do agree with some of what you are posting, but then you mention "throwing the book" at a Charger guy with a "normal" size mag. Which is/was perfectly legal.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying btw, but half your posts so far say prohibit that guy, or control this. I say if you can't trust a person in public then he needs to be in jail. And if you can't trust a gun owner with a .22 and a bigger mag who can you trust?

I think you should spend some more time talking to your grand dad and have him tell you the way the gun laws were and how everyday life was concerning general well being and safety.

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by rugatika

I am guessing the RCMP won't have the balls to charge a single soul with this. If they do they will get laughed out of court. The law is pretty damn clear, and has been stated already...How do you design a 25 round mag for something that isn't going to exist for another 30 years or more?

As an aside...I'm not a lawyer or anything, but as someone who clearly has a better understanding of the law than they do, I would be willing to give them a hand to prevent any further embarassment to the force. (small fee of course)

Wondering why common sense is not applied is the easy part of the equation. As they go forward, it will get either more convoluted or we will have a thriving trade in Brown Besses and Blunderbusses (no not the politicians, this time).

[Dewey Cox]

Just thought I'd put a post on the general forum, as I know a lot of people never look at the guns and ammo section.
Magazines for ruger 10-22's that are larger than 10 shots are now prohibited.
What a country we live in.

[bat119]

The RCMP just noticed a device that's been sold in Canada for 30 years can be used on a pistol (Ruger charger) that's only been around for 10 years, now the thousands of innocents that own these mags are in possession of a "prohibited device" a criminal offence. Any other semi 22 with larger mags will still be legal.

how stupid is that?

I wonder how many Ruger chargers there are in Canada ?

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by bat119

The RCMP just noticed a device that's been sold in Canada for 30 years can be used on a pistol (Ruger charger) that's only been around for 10 years, now the thousands of innocents that own these mags are in possession of a "prohibited device" a criminal offence. Any other semi 22 with larger mags will still be legal.

how stupid is that?

I wonder how many Ruger chargers there are in Canada ?

They numbers I've been hearing is about 340-400. It recently came to my attention that Mossbergs may be affected also, as they are 4 (!!) pistol versions of that gun in Canada.

There have been 5.7 million 10/22 made since 64, and I would guess that somewhere from 1/4 million to near half a million of them ended up here. Of those, I would say probably 3/4 of them have a 25 round magazine, with some having multiple magazines. Some guys have a several 25 rounders and a drum. Probably not a stretch to say half a million normal capacity mags floating around Canada.

I don't think whoever made this decision has half a clue what's out there and how many ticked off people this will affect. They saw the Charger and thought: "big deal, we annoy that many Canadians going to work in the morning".

And of course they would love to take away all our semi-autos. They did just that in Australia a few years back. Not even allowed a 10/22. Or pump action rifle either, IIRC. Then someone made a cool sound lever action 12 gauge, and they want to get that reclassified too!

[Dead Mule]

Originally Posted by RolHammer

Just caught some chatter on the CCFR FB page about the prohibition of 10/22 magazines with a greater than 10 round capacity. The search function didn't kick up any relevant threads here - has this been discussed yet?

So once again our demented government is banning inert plastic and metal boxes with a spring inside.

Perhaps they should ban springs as well?