PDA

View Full Version : CCFR Press Release - 50 Beowulf Magazine Opinion



CivilAdvantage
11-18-2015, 11:12 AM
RCMP PROVIDE OPINION ON .50 BEOWULF MAGAZINE
Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights
November 18, 2015
For Immediate Release

Ottawa, ON - Recently the RCMP Specialized Firearms Support Services provided a written opinion to a vendor regarding the .50 Beowulf five round magazine. They have taken the view that these magazines meet the definition of a prohibited device under the Criminal Code. One important perspective on this issue is that this is an opinion only; the RCMP does not have the legal authority to classify anything as prohibited. The problem with our system in Canada is that while acting on this opinion, the RCMP can make arrests, seize property, recommend charges and no substantive recourse is available to the average citizen outside of the criminal law system. The Crown may play a part in this mess by approving charges based on their inability to determine whether a crime has been committed, and therefore refer the matter to a court. This is not a new problem.

While the impact of this situation is unclear at present the CCFR will continue to develop initiatives related to our mandate, which is to educate the public so that they may understand the ineffectiveness of such regulations to keep the public safe while playing a widely destructive role in the lives of innocent, trusted Canadians. Even though this issue is negative, the CCFR will use it to illustrate the arbitrary and patronizing nature of these regulations in an attempt to make supporting them politically unpopular.


Contact :
Rod M. Giltaca
President/ Président
Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights / Coalition canadienne pour les droits aux armes à feu
P.O. Box 91572 RPO Mer Bleu / C.P. 91572 CSP Mer Bleu
Ottawa, Ontario K1W 0A6 / Ottawa (Ontario) K1W 0A6

RangeBob
11-18-2015, 11:19 AM
from elsewhere


2015/11/15
Alberta

THE OFFICERS WERE VERY COURTEOUS TO US AND WE HARBOUR NO RESENTMENT TOWARD THEM.

Alright so a little back story, Me and a couple of friends were out target shooting today on Crown Land in Central Alberta. On the way back we set upon a MASSIVE Fish and Wildlife check stop. They asked us if we had any firearms on board, which we declared, and they searched our car. When they got to my friend's Tavor, they found the .50 calibre Beowulf magazines he was using that day. They then charged him with Possession of a Prohibited Device x3. Both we and they were very courteous, and let us go with us keeping all our guns, PALs and ammo, they just confiscated the .50 calibre magazines, and my friend was given a Promise to Appear.

The officer's reasoning was that because he had magazines for his Tavor that held more than 5 rounds, regardless of calibre, they were prohibited devices. But RCMP Special bullet 72, point 4 states that:

"4. Magazines designed for one firearm but used in a different firearm

The maximum permitted capacity of a magazine is determined by the kind of firearm it is designed or manufactured for use in and not the kind of firearm it might actually be used in. As a consequence, the maximum permitted capacity remains the same regardless of which firearm it might be used in."

They didn't really pay attention to this and went ahead with the charges.

Because these magazines were designed for a .50 beowulf rifle, but just so happen to fit in my friend's Tavor should be irrelevant, as the magazines are designed to hold 5 rounds of .50 beowulf, and 14 rounds of .223 just so happen to fit. The officers told my friend that they will be doing research into this matter, and if they find that they are in the wrong they will drop the charges and return the magazines.

If that does not happen, I was wondering if anyone can point us to any other legal resources other than this RCMP special bulletin, such as previous overturned court cases, etc.

[It was PCV magazines that were the prohib device]

Thanks very much in advance.

Drache
11-18-2015, 11:26 AM
Isn't this a repost of the post Aztech Armoury already did? Since it was they would were the ones who contacted the RCMP and got the original email? :p

chrisc
11-18-2015, 03:05 PM
from elsewhere

Couldn't we get behind this charge, win it and set legal precedent to finally answer this question?

3MTA3
11-18-2015, 03:23 PM
..Because these magazines were designed for a .50 beowulf rifle, but just so happen to fit in my friend's Tavor should be irrelevant, as the magazines are designed to hold 5 rounds of .50 beowulf, and 14 rounds of .223 just so happen to fit. The officers told my friend that they will be doing research into this matter, and if they find that they are in the wrong they will drop the charges and return the magazines...

If they are not sure, then why charge and confiscate? Seems like there should be some means of redress, if the charge is withdrawn.