Assault Rifle

I'm concerned about the definition of an assault rifle and the effect that it may have on the Lee Enfield in the future. The biggest problem I see is the 10 rd. magazine. I understand there used to be a source for a 5 rd. magazine. Do you think there is any chance of that coming back?

Perhaps you or someone could teach us how?

I imagine should the worthless, incompetent, vile, feces brained, inept, Nazi/Communist politicians inflict this; someone will start making 5 round magazines

In canada it has to have select fire from semi to auto  to meet the deffinition of assault rifle. but the rcmp and gov will call any "black gun" an assault rifle aswell as all AR's. he!! even the sks is called an assault rifle by the rcmp. they are using the media to change assault rifle to any semi auto rifle that is used by a military within the world. lee enfields will never be on the list. canada aslo has 5 round max mag laws On semi's.(and 5 rounds max in any centerfire for hunting), and no limit on boltaction guns. also chain fed guns are fine where they are not in a mag. they dont count. so get your sks firing chain fed ammo and your fee and clear.

Rimfire rifles have no limit on ammo in your mag/drum. you can have 10,000 rounds loaded in a drum lol. but rimfire pistols have a ten round max limit. as do al pistols in canada.

i think those that hunt will find what they need , 

Shamu wrote: I think it'll be a cold day in he!! before they manage to wangle the assault rifle rubbish on a C&R bolt action.

I picked up a five round capacity magazine at a gun show in the fall. It was in-scripted Parker- Hale, I attempted to put into a No. 1 Mark III rifle, it wasn't the right fit. So referenced, the Parker - Hale .303, to discover, it was model on the No. 4 Mark I. So I got out my Mark I and tried it. It fit fine. It would appear at some point they must have made a minor adjustment to the magazine receiver port, in moving from the Mark III's to the Mark I's. I've had no problem switch the ten round mags between the two rifle, but this five round mag appears to be only design to work in the Mark I's. As far as the capacity of the magazine making the .303 less of an assault firearm I shouldn't worry. To my knowledge the Pattern 1914's were only ever design to hold five round. What gave the .303 its assault potential was the ability to be loaded with strip clips. They say that in the hands of a well trained soldier they were good for 60 rounds a minute. Switching out magazines won't get you that rate of fire, so I can only image it was reached by the use of strip clips. On the Mark III, the loading ring gives them strip clip loading ability, in the Mark I and the Pattern 1914 dipoles were engineered into the receiver above the magazine to facilitate the use of these clips. I've seen many cases, where in an effort to sportorizes these firearms, in particular the Pattern 1914, the dipoles for the strip clips have been ground away. I've even come across a Mark III's where the loading rings have been removed. Where this has happen these rifles become rather insipid for the purposes of making an assault. The same holds true, if you don't have a supply of strip clips, for rifles inwhich this capacity has not been ruined. Hope this will ease your mind.