August 05, 2016

RCMP’s “errant ruling” on rifle magazine challenges authority of elected representatives

Brian LilleyRebel Co-Founder
 

We’ve told you about the RCMP over-stepping their boundaries again by outlawing a magazine that has been legal in Canada for some time by going over the heads of our elected representatives and simply issuing a memo moving the rifle magazine to prohibited.

Watch as I discuss this with Conservative MP from Prince George-Peace River Bob Zimmer to find out what he, as an elected representative of the people, can do about it.

 

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2016-08-13 22:09:56 -0400
The police “To Serve and Protect” is the real deal. It refers to the police serving their own interests, as they are a self serving organization. The protect part is what they do with their asses, they protect themselves from prosecution for any crimes against the tax payer that they commit. A long time ago I was a kid working a summer job. An old guy just short of retirement, who was training me was reading the paper at lunch one day, there was a case reported in the paper about a cop that shot and killed an unarmed citizen and suffered no penalty for his action. My trainer asked me if I knew how to tell a good guy from a bad guy, I told him I didn’t. He said "When a bad guy commits a crime, he gets charged, tried in a court of law, convicted if guilty, and punished. When a good guy is guilty of the same crime, he gets off.
How often have we seen this happen, lost count, yeah me too.
commented 2016-08-06 12:19:03 -0400
pretty much unenforceable unless they pull another high river, which the way things are headed with the cops is very possible.
commented 2016-08-06 08:50:45 -0400
Bill Elder

I need to fix your last sentence.

“Don’t throw out your 10/22 magazines, ever.”

There. That’s better.
commented 2016-08-05 22:11:17 -0400
Well, if anyone actually thinks the police – especially the larger groups – RCMP, OPP, SQ are not the enemy of the people they will learn soon enough.

To “serve and protect” has actually been over turned in the courts.

The are only required to “uphold the law”.

Now it seems they can also make law.

Never trust the police – if they show up the smart thing to do is leave.

Immediately.

All because of the liberal bastards – that you might not have voted for, but your friends and family did.
commented 2016-08-05 20:01:18 -0400
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – July 28, 2016

http://myemail.constantcontact.com/TEAM-CSSA-and-CSAAA-JOIN-TO-ENABLE-LEGAL-ACTION.html?soid=1124731702303&aid=U1AJXd1stas ETOBICOKE, ONTARIO – The Canadian Shooting Sports Association (CSSA), representing recreational firearms owners, has joined with the Canadian Sporting Arms and Ammunition Association (CSAAA), representing firearms business owners, to empower legal action against the recent decision by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Firearms Program to prohibit several brands of imported 10/22 extended capacity rifle magazines. <>

" A Federal Court Class Action on behalf of all persons, individuals, dealers and distributors who now possess cartridge magazines to fit the Ruger 10/22 that can contain more than 10 cartridges will be commenced. The purpose of the action is to seek a judgement that these magazines are not prohibited, to declare the magazine capacity restrictions void as unconstitutional or in the alternative to force a buy-back of each at full retail value. A claim for the intentional infliction of mental distress due to the fear of police action and criminal charges will be included." Individuals are advised not to use, transfer, dispose of, alter or modify, or transport these magazines at this time.
  • At this time, due to the controversy, importers, dealers and individual owners are advised to stop sales and transfers of all 10/22 high capacity (over 10 rounds) rifle magazines. Businesses are cautioned not to attempt to “pin” magazines unless their license specifically authorizes work on prohibited magazines.**
We are advising against businesses or their customers surrendering or returning these magazines to anyone at this time. If you are the consumer owner of one of these magazines your participation in the action is very much desired. THERE IS NO FEE FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION BUT DONATIONS TO THE ACTION ARE WELCOME.

DONATIONS CAN BE MADE AT: 10/22 +10 Class Action Donation From consumer owners we need: A communication informing us of your willingness to participate in a class action lawsuit; Brands and models of 10/22 +10 round capacity magazines currently in inventory and the value of the inventory; Digital copies of product packaging, manufacturers’ or distributors’ product sales information, product press releases; Any information, actions or comments by your Chief Firearms Officer, Inspectors, RCMP or any other law enforcement agency.

Consumer owners interested in joining the class action, are asked to email the above information to the CSSA at classaction@cssa-cila.org.

For more information call the CSSA at 905-571-2150. From business owners we need: A communication informing us of your willingness to participate in a class action lawsuit; Brands and models of 10/22 +10 round capacity magazines currently in inventory and the value of the inventory; Digital copies of any product packaging, manufacturers’ or distributors’ product sales information, product press releases you may possess; Any information, actions or comments by your Chief Firearms Officer, Inspectors, RCMP or any other law enforcement agency.

Business owners interested in joining the class action, are asked to email the above information to the CSAAA at csaaa.legalaction@gmail.com.

For more information call the CSAAA at 705-875-2302.
commented 2016-08-05 19:57:10 -0400
The area in re-interpretation is (SOR/98-462). The title of the document gives a clear insight into its “clear, concise” nature. Within what we now simply call “the regulations,” the sections pursuant to general magazine capacity are as follows, with the particular sections speaking to the legality of 10+ round 10/22 magazines highlighted:

Section 3: (1) Any cartridge magazine
(b) 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.

(2) Paragraph (1)(a) does not include any cartridge magazine that
(a) was originally designed or manufactured for use in a firearm that
(i) is chambered for, or designed to use, rimfire cartridges.

Note that the phrase “for which the magazine was originally designed” refers not to the firearm the magazine was designed for, but rather, the cartridge the magazine was designed for. The latter clause, “that is designed or manufactured for use in” is the clause that actually determines the legal capacity of a magazine.

Also note that the issue is further muddied by subsection two, which limits the scope of paragraph (1)(a) to not include rimfire rifle magazines, but it should be noted that the RCMP’s allegation hinges upon the application of paragraph (1)(b), which is not limited in the regulations in a manner pursuant to the various 10/22 magazines available.

In short, our own (admittedly non-law-degree-equipped) understanding of the situation is that the Canadian Firearms Program is alleging all 10+ round magazines that will fit a 10/22 magazine well were designed or manufactured for pistols; such as the Teck-22 or Ruger Charger. It is an interpretation that would see all Ruger 10/22 magazines are subject to the capacity limits imposed by Section 2, Paragraph (1)(b). Note that this allegation does not require any changes to regulations, but rather represents a change in the application of the regulations, by way of the new alleged definition of 10+ round 10/22 magazines as “pistol,” or “dual-use” magazines.

However, as almost all of these magazines were designed prior to any “10/22 platform” pistol’s existence, and have been manufactured, marketed, and marked “for rifle use only,” the argument to the contrary seems obvious; that the magazines are manufactured and/or designed for use in rifles and, as such, not limited in their capacity.

http://calibremag.ca/1022-magazine-update/

There is also the argument that .22 RF Semi-auto, bolt, lever and pump tube magazine fed rifles are all capable of +10 rounds and when fed .22 shorts the mag capacity almost doubles. The rifles were deemed lawful and exempt from hi-cap mag restrictions because they were A) .22 RF, B) rifles – the same applied to clip fed .22 RF rifles until this “Re-Interpretation”
commented 2016-08-05 19:05:49 -0400
The police are using an untried reinterpretation of the law (essentially changing it and criminalizing millions of Canadians by police decree alone) which will never stand a legal test in court or in parliament.

The idiot who made this error has no idea the sxxt storm he has just brought down on his bosses.
Don’t throw your 10/22 clips out yet until the courts have have seen this re0interpretation.
commented 2016-08-05 18:57:07 -0400
This was/is clearly a beta test from the police state just to test the resolve of gun owners, once again perpetrated by a globalists government. Hell I read somewhere that there was only 600 ruger hand guns that used this exchangeable magazines in Canada. Ruger discontinued the manufacturing of this handgun because it was a piece of junk. The Stasi police should try doing their homework before trying to pull the wool over our eyes, once again it makes them look stupid and incompetent.
commented 2016-08-05 18:49:23 -0400
CANADIAN MONGREL
Your middle paragraph says it ALL !!!
commented 2016-08-05 18:17:16 -0400
The magazines are still available to Canadians. Just visit your nearest Mohawk Reserve, or other cross border reserve. The ammo is cheaper as well.

What the ruling proves is that Canada has reached the point Brussels is still dreaming about. We are governed by the unelected bureaucrats supported by an unelected Supreme Court enforced by unelected police. These same groups demand the disarmament of the populace, while extorting taxes to finance the regressive elites.

What is that type of socialism called again? National? Soviet? Maoist? Pol Pot? Viet Mingh? Castro? Chavez? Maybe keep it simple and just call it a police state.