Ammo Mix

Discussion for firearms and less-lethal equipment.
User avatar
FredGassitt
Regular Member
Posts: 121
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 10:26 pm
Contact:

Ammo Mix

Postby FredGassitt » Mon Jul 13, 2009 1:25 pm

Howdy;

we seized a prohibited handgun off a guy trying to cross into Canada, and I am intrigued by the ammo he was carrying. 11 rounds, all 9mm (it was a 9mm handgun); ten of them were hollow point, one was a regular full metal jacket, round point. They were loose in his pocket, and the firearm wasn't loaded.

So why the mix? is there some logic or theory as to perhaps putting the round point first, or did it just so happen that those were the 11 rounds the guy managed to scrape together, or is there some other explanation? In any case, the firearm is seized, and after a stay at the Queen's hotel the guy's on his way back to the US... this is just to satisfy my curiosity.

Tks

User avatar
Dave Brown
Site Admin
Posts: 1783
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

Re: Ammo Mix

Postby Dave Brown » Mon Jul 13, 2009 1:51 pm

Fred, we don't discuss any firearms related issues that may impact officer safety here on the public forums. We don't know who you work for, what you do or even if you are not some kid who just likes to play first-person-shooter video games. If you are what I think you are, then you will understand our caution.

Yes, there is a technical reason for that, but the two questions that come to mind are: if the rounds were loose in his pocket, what makes you think the FMJ round was going to be fired first; plus, if you seized the firearm, why didn't you also seize the ammunition? It is not legal to import hollow-point handgun ammunition into Canada, nor is it legal to shoot it out of handguns. (It is, of course, perfectly legal to own, to sell and to commercially import - as there are many rifles chambered for the same cartridges - but I am sure you know that already.)

User avatar
FredGassitt
Regular Member
Posts: 121
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 10:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Ammo Mix

Postby FredGassitt » Mon Jul 13, 2009 2:33 pm

Dave;
thanks for the answer... that's what I get for not taking the time to register on the appropriate forum (note to self: register for Law Enforcement Private Discussion!). No worries. I was just expecting to hear that it's some kind of urban-legend lore that if you load certain ammo in a certain order, it has such and such an effect, or whatever.

BTW we seized the ammo as evidence. Also, it (hollow point) is no longer prohibited for importation, PM me if you'd like the link to the info.

Cheers

User avatar
Dave Brown
Site Admin
Posts: 1783
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

Re: Ammo Mix

Postby Dave Brown » Mon Jul 13, 2009 2:44 pm

Thanks for understanding.

Yes, it is a bit of an urban legend among some American gun owners, and has as much legitimacy as the old 'slice the nose of a bullet to make your own expanding bullet design' but there are some things that we think are more legend and they turn out to be real.

For example, I just got back from up north, teaching folks how to best handle shotguns when used for bear defense, and even I learned something new about shotgun ammunition. You know it's a good day on the shooting range or in the classroom when both teacher and student walk away with new knowledge.

And please send me that link. If hollow-point handgun ammunition is no longer prohibited for importation, I have to change a LOT of Powerpoint CFSC/CRFSC slides! That's the first I have heard of this.

User avatar
CBR600F4i
Seasoned Member
Posts: 280
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2004 8:56 am
Location: British Columbia
Contact:

Re: Ammo Mix

Postby CBR600F4i » Mon Jul 13, 2009 2:56 pm

I'd be interested in hearing about the legalities of hollow-point ammunition. I was told by an employee at a reputable gun store in Ontario about a year and a half ago that the purchase and possession of hollow point handgun ammunition was no longer prohibited. Importation laws might be entirely different. I haven't looked at the legislation myself to verify the accuracy of this information - nor do I really care. If true, I'm personally glad to see the relaxation of laws pertaining to firearms and ammunition.

Although, I suspect most target shooters wouldn't spend extra money for hollow point ammunition just to punch holes in paper.
Last edited by CBR600F4i on Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Dave Brown
Site Admin
Posts: 1783
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

Re: Ammo Mix

Postby Dave Brown » Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:00 pm

As far as I know, the hollow-point handgun ammunition prohibition was never part of the Firearms Act. It existed under the Explosives Act, for some strange reason, and may have been one of the most senseless prohibitions ever. I can not think of a person ever charged with this offense in Canada, nor is there any technical reason why this was first enacted.

It is most assuredly NOT for officer-safety reasons, and the only place legally-owned handguns are fired in Canada is at licenced shooting ranges anyway.

User avatar
Bald Man
Lord of the Poobahs
Posts: 1238
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 10:12 am

Re: Ammo Mix

Postby Bald Man » Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:47 pm

Dave Brown wrote:As far as I know, the hollow-point handgun ammunition prohibition was never part of the Firearms Act. It existed under the Explosives Act, for some strange reason, and may have been one of the most senseless prohibitions ever. I can not think of a person ever charged with this offense in Canada, nor is there any technical reason why this was first enacted.

It is most assuredly NOT for officer-safety reasons, and the only place legally-owned handguns are fired in Canada is at licenced shooting ranges anyway.


Is it possible this law under the Explosives Act was influenced by the prohibition of hollow point ammunition under the Geneva Conventions for Military combat use?

User avatar
Dave Brown
Site Admin
Posts: 1783
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

Re: Ammo Mix

Postby Dave Brown » Mon Jul 13, 2009 5:35 pm

Personally, I thought it might be a knee-jerk reaction to some perceived mentality that hollow-points were 'evil.' Who knows? It is one of those obscurities in Canadian law that existed for decades and no one knows why it was first enacted.

I would LOVE to find out for certainty what the status is right now, though.

User avatar
Bald Man
Lord of the Poobahs
Posts: 1238
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 10:12 am

Re: Ammo Mix

Postby Bald Man » Mon Jul 13, 2009 5:38 pm

Dave Brown wrote:Personally, I thought it might be a knee-jerk reaction to some perceived mentality that hollow-points were 'evil.' Who knows? It is one of those obscurities in Canadian law that existed for decades and no one knows why it was first enacted.

I would LOVE to find out for certainty what the status is right now, though.


Well, I think that's why it does exist under the Geneva Conventions because HP ammo is or was preceived to be an evil ammunition design when in fact FMJ is probably worse because it more often doesn't stop in it's intended target.

User avatar
Dave Brown
Site Admin
Posts: 1783
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

Re: Ammo Mix

Postby Dave Brown » Mon Jul 13, 2009 7:02 pm

It's actually "The Hague Convention on Rules of Warfare," enacted in 1907 at The Hague in Holland that outlawed 'expanding bullets.'

This, of course, has no application to handgun ammunition in Canada because a) we are using it exclusively for target shooting, and b) we are not a military force using it in warfare.

I am not going to get into the debate as to which ammunition leads to more attrition in warfare, hollow-point or FMJ, because this is not relevant to the discussion at hand.

Burick
Veteran Member
Posts: 150
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 10:29 pm
Contact:

Re: Ammo Mix

Postby Burick » Mon Jul 13, 2009 7:42 pm

http://cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/publications/dm- ... 1-eng.html (paragraph 5)

Restrictions no longer apply to hollow point ammunition. It has been that way for at least the past year, if memory serves.

User avatar
Bald Man
Lord of the Poobahs
Posts: 1238
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 10:12 am

Re: Ammo Mix

Postby Bald Man » Mon Jul 13, 2009 9:41 pm

Dave Brown wrote:It's actually "The Hague Convention on Rules of Warfare," enacted in 1907 at The Hague in Holland that outlawed 'expanding bullets.'

This, of course, has no application to handgun ammunition in Canada because a) we are using it exclusively for target shooting, and b) we are not a military force using it in warfare.

I am not going to get into the debate as to which ammunition leads to more attrition in warfare, hollow-point or FMJ, because this is not relevant to the discussion at hand.


I knew there was some international law prohibiting it from military use. Obviously this International law has no impact on Canada law. All I'm saying is perhaps our government in the past was some what influenced by the The Hague Convention on Rules of Warfare that we adopted similar laws in Canada regarding civilian possession of HP handgun ammo. Glad to see the prohibition lifted. At the end of the day, a bullet is a bullet and it will kill you.

User avatar
Dave Brown
Site Admin
Posts: 1783
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

Re: Ammo Mix

Postby Dave Brown » Tue Jul 14, 2009 1:00 am

LOL! Yeah, but I would argue that a bullet is a bullet and at the end of the day, both will penetrate cardboard.

(Criminals who use handguns to commit crimes probably never did worry too much about the Explosives Act anyway.)

Thanks to everyone for bringing this to my attention!

User avatar
Bald Man
Lord of the Poobahs
Posts: 1238
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 10:12 am

Re: Ammo Mix

Postby Bald Man » Tue Jul 14, 2009 9:02 am

edit

User avatar
FredGassitt
Regular Member
Posts: 121
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 10:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Ammo Mix

Postby FredGassitt » Tue Jul 14, 2009 10:41 am

Well Burick beat me to the reference, although I was going to post a link to D-19-13-2 (http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/publications ... 2-eng.html), paragraph 69 but it is word for word the same as what Burick posted.

Cheers


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests