We have uploaded the audio from the most lucid of our three phone calls with the Canadian Firearms Centre and it can be found here:
The RCMP have made statements indicating there may be internal machinations working to declare that all Ruger 10/22 magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds are now prohibited devices. This definition is the result of the RCMP determining that all 10/22 magazines are “inherently designed for the [10/22] handgun.”
Calibre learned of the story through the following release from the Moncton Fish & Game Club, and confirmed the story through a series of three phone calls to the Firearms Centre to ensure the consistency of the information we were being told. The press release follows, with our own information gleaned from the trio of phone interviews below.
“The Moncton fish & Game Association (MFGA) has just learned today, that ALL large capacity magazines (more than 10 rounds) for the Ruger 10/22 are now considered Prohibited Devices under the Firearms Act.
From what we have been told at the moment, these large capacity magazines will fit certain specific handguns (pistols) thereby creating a situation where the pistol capacity now exceeds the 10 round limit on handguns. Individuals, who for an example, have a Butler Creek 25 round magazine for their 10/22 must now have the magazine “pinned” to 10 rounds, leave the magazine at home, or turn it in for destruction by the RCMP.
This does not affect those with Remington rim fire rifles or other manufacturers. Apparently this is unique to the Ruger 10/22.
Our Range Manager has been in contact with the RCMP-CFO and some form of official notification will be forthcoming in the weeks ahead. As soon as we get official word we will pass it along. We advise our Association members not to use or destroy the large capacity magazines for their 10/22s until we get the official wording and more technical information from the RCMP-CFO.
The MFGA wants to thank Green Diamond Outfitters for letting us know about this new regulation as they received a visit from the CFO earlier today, and were required to pull some inventory from their shelves in order to not violate the new regulations.
Apparently Cabela’s and Bass Pro were going to be visited by the RCMP as well to review their stock.
We are providing this information as a courtesy in order to ensure people do not run afoul of the law.
Moncton Fish & Game Association”
In our own follow up research, we have learned that distributors of some 10/22 magazines, such as the GSG drum magazine, have not been informed of this change. The distributor of the popular Butler Creek Hot Lips and Steel Lips magazines was unavailable for comment at the time of writing. Furthermore, we have learned not all retailers have been made aware of the change, with many independent gun retailers still currently stocking the effected magazines. However, larger national chains such as Cabela’s were informed, and as such have pulled all effected magazines from store inventory.
Unfortunately no public bulletin has been released, but staff at the Canadian Firearms Centre have been furnished with what we can only assume is an early draft of the bulletin, which clarifies the RCMP position that all 10/22 magazines are handgun and was read to Calibre staff in precisely the same manner in a trio of phone calls to the CFC earlier today: “Were .22 calibre long rifle magazines originally designed for rifles? No. .22 calibre long rifle magazines originally designed for 10/22 platform rifles are also inherently designed for the handgun.”
The logic here is grossly negligent, ignoring the simple fact many of the 25-round capacity 10/22 magazines predate the 10/22 Charger pistol’s creation, which in turn creates an obvious conflict with the existing Bulletin 72 that clearly states “that the maximum permitted capacity of a magazine is determined by the physical characteristics of the firearm it is designed or manufactured for.” In other words, a magazine designed in the 1970s for a rimfire carbine cannot possibly be considered “designed” for a handgun that first appeared in 2007. At least, not without Marty McFly involved.
However, due to the lack of formal public notice in the form of a Special Bulletin or otherwise, and the unchanged status of the legal regulations, Tony Bernardo and the CSSA suggests anyone in possession of a potentially effected magazine await further instructions.
We will be in contact with additional resources over the coming days and will continue to stay on this story until it is resolved.