2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 111,973
- 52,245
- 2,290
This article explains either the stupidity of gun grabbers or their desire to trip up law abiding gun owners in complex laws that criminals will ignore, but that they can use to punish normal citizens who simply want guns for protection.....
Canadian Gun Laws Revealed - The Truth About Guns
Some Canadian gun laws are so stupid that they serve as a perfect illustration that most anti-gun laws are written by clueless people and don’t actually do much. Consider their magazine restrictions, for example . . .
It’s 10 rounds for handguns, and 5 rounds for rifles – except that restriction is on magazines themselves, not guns they’re inserted in, and not on how you use the magazine (the crime is “possession of a magazine capable of holding N rounds”, not “loading a magazine with N rounds” or “inserting the magazine with N rounds into gun X”).
So a Beretta CX4 carbine can be loaded with a Beretta PX4 pistol magazine with 10 rounds, and it’s not a problem. All that matters is what gun the magazine was designed for, which is a ridiculous idea for obvious reasons. So one company sells an AR-15 “pistol” (i.e. sans stock), and they make 10-round AR magazines that are specifically stamped as being for that pistol. Naturally, they fit any rifle that accepts AR mags just as well, including “unrestricted” ones like Robinson XCR or Kel-Tec SU-16. And it’s all perfectly legal.
But wait, it gets even better. What about magazines that can fit different calibers, with varying number of rounds depending on the caliber? For example, some .40 S&W mags can hold and reliably feed 9mm cartridges, and obviously they will fit more of them, so a legal .40 S&W 10-rounder can fir 12 rounds of 9mm.
So which mass shooting in recent times could not have been done with a pistol, or several pistols, defying the magazine limits....and how would you stop criminals from getting those magazines if they wanted them?
Canadian Gun Laws Revealed - The Truth About Guns
Some Canadian gun laws are so stupid that they serve as a perfect illustration that most anti-gun laws are written by clueless people and don’t actually do much. Consider their magazine restrictions, for example . . .
It’s 10 rounds for handguns, and 5 rounds for rifles – except that restriction is on magazines themselves, not guns they’re inserted in, and not on how you use the magazine (the crime is “possession of a magazine capable of holding N rounds”, not “loading a magazine with N rounds” or “inserting the magazine with N rounds into gun X”).
So a Beretta CX4 carbine can be loaded with a Beretta PX4 pistol magazine with 10 rounds, and it’s not a problem. All that matters is what gun the magazine was designed for, which is a ridiculous idea for obvious reasons. So one company sells an AR-15 “pistol” (i.e. sans stock), and they make 10-round AR magazines that are specifically stamped as being for that pistol. Naturally, they fit any rifle that accepts AR mags just as well, including “unrestricted” ones like Robinson XCR or Kel-Tec SU-16. And it’s all perfectly legal.
But wait, it gets even better. What about magazines that can fit different calibers, with varying number of rounds depending on the caliber? For example, some .40 S&W mags can hold and reliably feed 9mm cartridges, and obviously they will fit more of them, so a legal .40 S&W 10-rounder can fir 12 rounds of 9mm.
So which mass shooting in recent times could not have been done with a pistol, or several pistols, defying the magazine limits....and how would you stop criminals from getting those magazines if they wanted them?
