Are felons prohibited from owning muzzle loaders?


PDA






NG VI
March 8, 2011, 02:02 AM
Like cap and ball revolvers and all the other muzzle loading firearms, I know they are not considered firearms by the ATF but how does that work, do they run afoul of the law anyway by the components they load with or by state-by-state laws regarding what constitutes a "loaded" firearm?

It seems to me that if the federal government doesn't consider something a firearm individual states should be cool with people possessing them too, regardless of status as a felon. Personally I think it should take more than just any middling serious violation of the law or any accusation of domestic abuse (almost anything, actually anything at all if one member of the relationship gets upset, literally ANYTHING counts as a domestic assault) for someone to forfeit their right to own firearms for life. Them's the rules though, all you can do is hope you never wind up in a position where you could potentially get charged with a felony offense. It's easier than you might think.

If you enjoyed reading about "Are felons prohibited from owning muzzle loaders?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
WardenWolf
March 8, 2011, 02:42 AM
Felons are prohibited from owning deadly weapons in general, I believe. Not just specifically firearms. And a muzzleloader certainly qualifies for this.

nalioth
March 8, 2011, 02:58 AM
Felons are prohibited from owning deadly weapons in general, I believe.If that were so, they'd not be able to own automobiles, kitchen cutlery, golf clubs, etc.

Under federal law, felons cannot own firearms.
Under federal law, guns made prior to 1898 and muzzle-loading copies of same are not considered firearms.

Cosmoline
March 8, 2011, 03:01 AM
Depends on state and local laws, not to mention the conditions of parole. It can get pretty complex

Deus Machina
March 8, 2011, 03:33 AM
Federally, they're not prohibited.

You never hear about someone robbing the local 7-11 with a Brown Bess, though, even if they're prohibited from anything more. Black powder thus gives otherwise honest convicted felons a way to go hunting or have fun, while the violent felons ignore prohibitions anyway.

Tommygunn
March 8, 2011, 12:22 PM
I recall years ago listening to the G. Gordon Liddy radio show when Liddy once spoke about being an ex con (due to his participation in Watergate, for those of you in Rio Linda) he was prohibited from owning guns. He said there was an exception; blackpowder revolvers, and as a result he kept a repro Colt 1851 around for self defense. He also said that his wife owned a number of guns which he had unofficial access to.

Rail Driver
March 8, 2011, 12:39 PM
He also said that his wife owned a number of guns which he had unofficial access to.

This is admission of yet another felony on both the wife and the husband's parts. Allowing a felon access (official or not) to firearms is a felony. Should a family member living in my home commit a felony and get convicted, I'd have to make certain ALL my guns are locked up and I would have to be the only one with access to the safe. Even then, it can get tricky dealing with different localities. While it's fully within the law, some jurisdictions are more strict in enforcement than others.

Joe Demko
March 8, 2011, 12:45 PM
Check your state weapons laws. Do they differentiate between cartridge and muzzle loading guns for criminal purposes? What are the conditions of parole?

Black powder thus gives otherwise honest convicted felons a way to go hunting or have fun,

Cite?

NavyLCDR
March 8, 2011, 12:48 PM
Cite?

In Federal law it's 18 USC 921:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000921----000-.html

(3) The term “firearm” means
(A) any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive;
(B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon;
(C) any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; or
(D) any destructive device. Such term does not include an antique firearm.

(16) The term “antique firearm” means—
(A) any firearm (including any firearm with a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system) manufactured in or before 1898; or
(B) any replica of any firearm described in subparagraph (A) if such replica—
(i) is not designed or redesigned for using rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition, or
(ii) uses rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition which is no longer manufactured in the United States and which is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade; or
(C) any muzzle loading rifle, muzzle loading shotgun, or muzzle loading pistol, which is designed to use black powder, or a black powder substitute, and which cannot use fixed ammunition. For purposes of this subparagraph, the term “antique firearm” shall not include any weapon which incorporates a firearm frame or receiver, any firearm which is converted into a muzzle loading weapon, or any muzzle loading weapon which can be readily converted to fire fixed ammunition by replacing the barrel, bolt, breechblock, or any combination thereof.

That's why you can walk into a sporting goods store, in most states, pick a muzzle loading rifle, shotgun or pistol off the shelf, take it to the normal cashier, pay and walk out with it with no paperwork or background check required. You can also have them delivered to your doorstep via mail order. Some state laws do regulate muzzle loaders as firearms, though.

Joe Demko
March 8, 2011, 12:59 PM
That's why you can walk into a sporting goods store, in most states, pick a muzzle loading rifle, shotgun or pistol off the shelf, take it to the normal cashier, pay and walk out with it with no paperwork or background check required. You can also have them delivered to your doorstep via mail order. Some state laws do regulate muzzle loaders as firearms, though.

That's all federal law for commerce involving such guns. You did not provide a cite about the legality of a convicted felon possessing one. Keep in mind that the most felons are convicted by state courts and there are 50 states with 50 sets of laws. A good start on providing such a cite would be to find one that differentiates between muzzle loading and modern arms for criminal purposes. e.g. in such a hypothetical place, the muzzle loading gun would not be considered a weapon.

NavyLCDR
March 8, 2011, 01:04 PM
That's all federal law for commerce involving such guns. You did not provide a cite about the legality of a convicted felon possessing one.

There is no Federal law that permits a felon to possess a muzzle loading gun. There is no law that permits a felon to possess a can opener, or a pair of shoes, either.

As I stated, there are some state laws that prohibit felons from possessing black powder and muzzle loading firearms. But there is no Federal law prohibiting such possession.

The definition of legal, in America, is an act which is not prohibited by law. The challenge is not for us to provide a statute that makes something legal. The challenge is for you to provide a statute which prohibits it.

bikemutt
March 8, 2011, 01:07 PM
For WA at any rate: http://wdfw.wa.gov/enforcement/faqs.html

"Q. Can a felon have a muzzleloader for hunting?
A. If the felon has had his/her rights restored through the court of sentencing, yes the felon may use a muzzleloader to hunt. If the felon has NOT had his/her rights restored through the court, then the felon may NOT possess a pistol, shotgun, muzzleloader, or other firearm. The felon can hunt with archery gear but not firearms."

NavyLCDR
March 8, 2011, 01:12 PM
^^^ and that is because of Washington's definition of a firearm:

RCW 9.41.010
Terms defined.

Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, the definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter.

(7) "Firearm" means a weapon or device from which a projectile or projectiles may be fired by an explosive such as gunpowder.


and the subsequent prohibition of firearms possession in WA State law:

RCW 9.41.040
Unlawful possession of firearms — Ownership, possession by certain persons — Penalties.


(1)(a) A person, whether an adult or juvenile, is guilty of the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm in the first degree, if the person owns, has in his or her possession, or has in his or her control any firearm after having previously been convicted or found not guilty by reason of insanity in this state or elsewhere of any serious offense as defined in this chapter.

(b) Unlawful possession of a firearm in the first degree is a class B felony punishable according to chapter 9A.20 RCW.

However, it is still legal, AT THE FEDERAL level, for a felon to possess a muzzle loading rifle in Washington, but it is illegal at the state level.

jon_in_wv
March 8, 2011, 01:12 PM
And bikemutt, the state law does not effect federal laws even within your state. A person may be ok under state law and still be prosecuted and imprisoned under federal law. It is much more common that you would think.

nalioth
March 8, 2011, 01:20 PM
A modern muzzleloader is NOT an antique firearm under federal law and yes felons are prohibited from possessing muzzle loaders under federal law. No knowing the law and saying it doesn't exist are not the same thing.So NavyLT colluded with Cornell University to tell us stories?

Cosmoline
March 8, 2011, 01:23 PM
A modern muzzleloader is NOT an antique firearm under federal law

A modern muzzleloader is defined within the "antique" exemption and thereby not a firearm. Do you have a cite for the *FEDERAL* law barring felons from owning muzzleloaders?

NavyLCDR
March 8, 2011, 01:23 PM
A modern muzzleloader is NOT an antique firearm under federal law

According to 18 USC 921 (16)(C) you are mistaken. Since you didn't read post #9, I'll post it again for you:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000921----000-.html

(16) The term “antique firearm” means—

(A) any firearm (including any firearm with a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system) manufactured in or before 1898; or

(B) any replica of any firearm described in subparagraph (A) if such replica—
(i) is not designed or redesigned for using rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition, or
(ii) uses rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition which is no longer manufactured in the United States and which is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade; or

(C) any muzzle loading rifle, muzzle loading shotgun, or muzzle loading pistol, which is designed to use black powder, or a black powder substitute, and which cannot use fixed ammunition. For purposes of this subparagraph, the term “antique firearm” shall not include any weapon which incorporates a firearm frame or receiver, any firearm which is converted into a muzzle loading weapon, or any muzzle loading weapon which can be readily converted to fire fixed ammunition by replacing the barrel, bolt, breechblock, or any combination thereof.

Can you explain WHY a modern muzzle loading firearm would not fit into paragraph (C) above, which starts with the words "ANY muzzle loading...."

NavyLCDR
March 8, 2011, 01:33 PM
So NavyLT colluded with Cornell University to tell us stories?

and the US House of Representatives too!

http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/18C44.txt

-CITE-
18 USC Sec. 921 02/01/2010

-EXPCITE-
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 44 - FIREARMS

-HEAD-
Sec. 921. Definitions

-STATUTE-
(a) As used in this chapter -
(16) The term "antique firearm" means -
(A) any firearm (including any firearm with a matchlock,
flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system)
manufactured in or before 1898; or
(B) any replica of any firearm described in subparagraph (A) if
such replica -
(i) is not designed or redesigned for using rimfire or
conventional centerfire fixed ammunition, or
(ii) uses rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition
which is no longer manufactured in the United States and which
is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial
trade; or

(C) any muzzle loading rifle, muzzle loading shotgun, or muzzle
loading pistol, which is designed to use black powder, or a black
powder substitute, and which cannot use fixed ammunition. For
purposes of this subparagraph, the term "antique firearm" shall
not include any weapon which incorporates a firearm frame or
receiver, any firearm which is converted into a muzzle loading
weapon, or any muzzle loading weapon which can be readily
converted to fire fixed ammunition by replacing the barrel, bolt,
breechblock, or any combination thereof.

Give me a couple days and I'll have ALL the gun control laws fixed..... :D

I am on convalescent leave from knee surgery right now and have lots of free time....

deadin
March 8, 2011, 01:57 PM
(i) is not designed or redesigned for using rimfire or
conventional centerfire fixed ammunition,

So if a restricted person owns a replica Cap & Ball revolver, it is legal under Federal and may be legal under State law. However if that restricted person then buys a conversion cylinder for it, (Which also requires no "paper work")
have they then run afoul of Federal law? (Constructive possession, at least.)

Have there been any prosecutions under these circumstances?

quatin
March 8, 2011, 02:06 PM
I'm not up for digging through Texas state laws, but I remember in a hunters education course pamphlet which said that convicted felons may use a muzzle loader to hunt.

george d dennis
March 8, 2011, 02:13 PM
slingshot only

cleardiddion
March 8, 2011, 02:17 PM
Here in Florida the FWC says that felons may use pre1898 or replicas thereof black powder arms to hunt.

Deus Machina
March 8, 2011, 02:26 PM
So if a restricted person owns a replica Cap & Ball revolver, it is legal under Federal and may be legal under State law. However if that restricted person then buys a conversion cylinder for it, (Which also requires no "paper work")
have they then run afoul of Federal law? (Constructive possession, at least.)

I would say that, yes, they have broken the law. Unless there is a law that still classifies it as an antique, they have just come into possession of a 'modern' firearm. It would be essentially the same as one buying an AR upper, then heading into their friend's machine shop with a block of aluminum and the blueprints for the lower.

Have there been any prosecutions under these circumstances?

Probably a couple, but I can't cite. As a rule, a felon willing to knowingly break the prohibition on firearms is more likely to buy one off the black market than to construct a single-action revolver. I would hardly be surprised if a few convicted but gun-loving people have tried this without thinking it through, though.

Joe Demko
March 8, 2011, 03:15 PM
There is no Federal law that permits a felon to possess a muzzle loading gun. There is no law that permits a felon to possess a can opener, or a pair of shoes, either.

...and most felons were still convicted by state courts and you have entirely failed to address whether any of the 50 states would be all okey-dokey with a convicted felon walking about strapped with a Colt's Navy. In this, as with all discussions regarding firearms law, what the feds have to say isn't all that matters.

Deus Machina
March 8, 2011, 03:22 PM
Federal laws are binding no matter the court, and local laws are binding to their area. A felon tried in Florida is still a felon in Arizona, but is no longer bound to Florida law.

It would depend on the state, but I'm pretty sure all 50 states consider a black powder revolver to be a weapon if not a 'true firearm,' and sure that most of them have laws against convicted felons carrying a dedicated weapon, aside from occasionally a 'defensive weapon' such as a baton or pepper spray.

No, I can't speak for all. Arizona or Alaska, for example, may allow it if they don't prohibit felons from carrying things like aforementioned 'defensive weapons' and group a BP gun into the same range that those occupy. But in general, crimes committed with any deadly weapon are tried at the same level (aside from those states that differentiate between firearms and other weapons) and cap and ball revolver will at least be grouped in with 'deadly weapons'. So, in most cases no, there won't be any difference if someone holds up a store with a Colt Navy model or a Glock, and they're very likely to be free to carry the former.

Onward Allusion
March 8, 2011, 03:26 PM
NavyLT (http://www.thehighroad.org/member.php?u=23237)
Quote: Cite?
In Federal law it's 18 USC 921:
<SNIP>

I've read your other research/posts. You are scary good. Wow.

NavyLCDR
March 8, 2011, 04:16 PM
...and most felons were still convicted by state courts and you have entirely failed to address whether any of the 50 states would be all okey-dokey with a convicted felon walking about strapped with a Colt's Navy. In this, as with all discussions regarding firearms law, what the feds have to say isn't all that matters.

Montana for one. Wyoming is number two.

I've read your other research/posts. You are scary good. Wow.

I've got a lot of free time, and a black belt in Google-fu.:D Thank you for the compliment.

Joe Demko
March 8, 2011, 04:26 PM
Montana for one.

*sigh* Cite?

Look, I am trying to keep people from making bad decisions here based on something they think they understand based on what some guy said on some website.

NavyLCDR
March 8, 2011, 04:31 PM
*sigh* Cite?

You are kidding right? Show us where it is illegal for "a convicted felon walking about strapped with a Colt's Navy." in Montana. I'll even get you started on your quest, should you desire to prove me wrong:

http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/mca/45/8/45-8-313.htm

45-8-313. Unlawful possession of firearm by convicted person. (1) A person commits the offense of unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted person if the person purposely or knowingly purchases or possesses a firearm after the person has been convicted of:
(a) a felony for which the person received an additional sentence under 46-18-221; or
(b) an offense under the law of another state or of the United States that is equivalent to an offense that when committed in Montana is subject to an additional sentence under 46-18-221.
(2) A person convicted of unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted person shall be imprisoned in a state prison for not less than 2 years or more than 10 years.
(3) A person who has been issued a permit under 45-8-314 may not be convicted of a violation of this section.

Now, your challenge is to show us where, in Montana or Federal law, a Colt Navy 1851 cap and ball revolver, or replica of one, is a firearm. I showed you in post #9 where Federal law declares it NOT to be a firearm. Now, where DID I put that Jeopardy soundtrack....

Joe Demko
March 8, 2011, 04:39 PM
It doesn't matter if it is a firearm. It matters if it is a deadly weapon. Does Montana allow convicted felons to possess deadly weapons?

In Pennsylvania, for example:

Title 18 Pa.C.S.A 2301 "Deadly Weapon"

Any firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, or any device designed as a weapon and capable of producing death or serious bodily injury, or any other device or instrumentality which, in the manner in which it is used or intended to be used, is calculated or likely to produce death or serious bodily injury.

NavyLCDR
March 8, 2011, 04:46 PM
It doesn't matter if it is a firearm. It matters if it is a deadly weapon. Does Montana allow convicted felons to possess deadly weapons?

Yes, unless they are a prisoner or in a youth facility:
http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/mca/45/8/45-8-318.htm

Joe Demko
March 8, 2011, 04:54 PM
The state of Montana does not (http://www.cor.mt.gov/Facts/pandp.mcpx)appear to agree with you. You are "some guy." I am the same. Before tucking that smoke wagon in his belt, a fellow would be very well advised to seek proper legal counsel. Especially if he is a convicted felon.

NavyLCDR
March 8, 2011, 05:07 PM
The state of Montana does not appear to agree with you. You are "some guy." I am the same. Before tucking that smoke wagon in his belt, a fellow would be very well advised to seek proper legal counsel. Especially if he is a convicted felon.

Too bad that the link you posted refers only to probation and parole. A person can be a convicted felon and not be on parole or probation. And, I notice you still fail to produce an actual statute.

Joe Demko
March 8, 2011, 05:10 PM
I quail before the might of the image you pulled from somebody else's website.

Can the fellow, especially a convicted felon, who goes about carrying a deadly weapon on your say-so depend on you for legal representation or remuneration for same?

NavyLCDR
March 8, 2011, 05:12 PM
Can the fellow, especially a convicted felon, who goes about carrying a deadly weapon on your say-so depend on you for legal representation or remuneration for same?

Nope. And that has nothing to do with the argument at hand.

Joe Demko
March 8, 2011, 05:15 PM
You're still "some guy." Not all convicted felons are on parole, but not all convicted felons ever get off parole, either. Perhaps people to whom this is a matter of personal importance should still find legit legal counsel rather than rely on your over confident pronouncements.

NavyLCDR
March 8, 2011, 05:21 PM
Perhaps people to whom this is a matter of personal importance should still find legit legal counsel rather than rely on your over confident pronouncements.

I never argued otherwise or disagreed with that. I simply rose to the challenge that you placed before me.

xcheck
March 8, 2011, 05:23 PM
There is an additional reseach step that needs to be taken. In many states the law is silent on the possession of a BP gun, thereby seemingly allowing possession, however felons are banned from possessing the black powder itself as it is an explosive. As a result, the felon may have the replica firearm, but is left with it as little more than a decoration as they may not possess the means to operate the BP firearm.

mgmorden
March 8, 2011, 05:49 PM
Does Montana allow convicted felons to possess deadly weapons?

As has been mentioned earlier in the thread, somethign being illegal in an opt-in proposition, not an opt-out.

It's not about what the law allows, it's what it DISALLOWS.

Federal law disallows convicted felons from owning firearms. The Federal definition of a firearm does not include pre-1898 cartridge arms (but not replicas thereof) nor any muzzleloading firearm.

Your individual state MAY impose stricter regulations, but if they don't, then it's not against the law.

thorn726
March 8, 2011, 06:02 PM
Federally, no by state, sometimes

NG VI
March 8, 2011, 06:04 PM
Alright guys, for the purpose of the question, assume that the person is a felon, did not harm anyone, and completed their full sentence already.

Someone on parole for the rest of their life is a whole other situation.

Lot of good discussion so far, thanks for the assists NavyLT, appreciate the answers.

Remo223
March 8, 2011, 06:14 PM
There is an additional reseach step that needs to be taken. In many states the law is silent on the possession of a BP gun, thereby seemingly allowing possession, however felons are banned from possessing the black powder itself as it is an explosive. As a result, the felon may have the replica firearm, but is left with it as little more than a decoration as they may not possess the means to operate the BP firearm.
This law may only apply to TRUE black powder. The modern imitation stuff is more difficult to get it to explode. I remember when I was into hobby cannons years ago, you had to have a special license to sell real black powder(the stuff that smokes when you burn it) and I think you had to sign a book when you purchased it. Nearly all gunshops refused to carry it. There were strict rules to follow in the way you stored it because static electricity would set it off. You couldn't store it in plastic containers for instance.

WardenWolf
March 8, 2011, 07:54 PM
Do you really think a judge and / or jury is going to go along with such a mere technicality? That's ultimately what it will boil down to. If any question arises, the person WILL go down on a weapons violation charge, considering that a black powder revolver is, for its first six shots, functionally no different than a modern single action cartridge revolver, and a muzzle-loading rifle is no different than a single shot cartridge rifle. How the law strictly defines a firearm is one thing. How the courts see it is another.

ConstitutionCowboy
March 8, 2011, 07:56 PM
If you abide the Constitution, no one is prohibited any arms whatsoever.

Woody

Tommygunn
March 8, 2011, 08:36 PM
He also said that his wife owned a number of guns which he had unofficial access to.

This is admission of yet another felony on both the wife and the husband's parts. Allowing a felon access (official or not) to firearms is a felony. Should a family member living in my home commit a felony and get convicted, I'd have to make certain ALL my guns are locked up and I would have to be the only one with access to the safe. Even then, it can get tricky dealing with different localities. While it's fully within the law, some jurisdictions are more strict in enforcement than others.

This would depend upon local law and what is meant by "unofficial access" -- which was MY term, NOT G. Gordon Liddy's. What if Mrs. Liddy kept her guns secured in a safe, which might seem adequate to keep her incredibly dangerous ex-con Watergate burglar husband, G. Gordon, from handling her gun(s), except he knew how to "crack" the safe, given how notorious he is.
What if by "unofficial access" he meant he is law abiding and DOES NOT TOUCH the guns -- except in situations where his or his wife's life would depend on him grabbing one of HER weapons instead of his Colt Navy?
There's a lot of "wiggle room.";)

jonmerritt
March 8, 2011, 08:43 PM
In iowa a felon can not have a black powder firearm either, be it a muzzle loader or what ever.

clutch
March 8, 2011, 08:48 PM
Terms defined.

Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, the definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter.

(7) "Firearm" means a weapon or device from which a projectile or projectiles may be fired by an explosive such as gunpowder.



Not to bust chops but smokeless ammo is not an explosive. This would prohibit black powder but allow modern cartridge arms. Just poking fun at whoever drafted that law :neener:

Clutch

Rail Driver
March 8, 2011, 08:48 PM
There's a lot of "wiggle room."

Not if the ATF or local LEOs are knocking on your door. Just my $0.02, nothing more. I'm not a lawyer yet (still working on it) but I know enough not to push the envelope where the ATF is concerned (for the most part) and where firearms are concerned. Sure it's jurisdiction dependent. I should have specified, however in those jurisdictions in which it matters, they're not likely to be lenient.

Owen Sparks
March 8, 2011, 08:52 PM
I once asked a similar question about carrying a black powder revolver concealed. The answer I got in short is that there are no federal laws against concealed carry of ANY weapon but local and state laws are wide and varying. This is probably similar.

Jim K
March 8, 2011, 09:05 PM
Unless there has been a change, it is legal for a felon to possess antique firearms under federal law. State or local laws may vary. (18 USC 921 specifically exempts antique firearms from the definition of firearms for that Title.)

Most states generally follow the federal law in regard to purchase and possession of firearms, but I know of no state or jurisdiction that makes any exception for antique arms or any distinction between antique and modern arms in their weapons carry laws, or in laws concerning armed robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, etc.

Jim

thorn726
March 8, 2011, 09:58 PM
Alright guys, for the purpose of the question, assume that the person is a felon, did not harm anyone, and completed their full sentence already.

Someone on parole for the rest of their life is a whole other situation.

only by a hair, really. A felon is a felon is a felon, unfortunately. Yes, parole may carry a few more restrictions but in the case of firearms, they are negligible.

California, of course, makes sure to include muzzle loaders in the definition of firearm in various ways >>"firearm" also includes
any rocket, rocket propelled projectile launcher, or similar device
containing any explosive or incendiary material whether or not the
device is designed for emergency or distress signaling purposes:
(1) Section 16750.
(2) Subdivision (b) of Section 16840.
(3) Section 25400.
(4) Sections 25850 to 26025, inclusive.
(5) Subdivisions (a), (b), and (c) of Section 26030.
(6) Sections 26035 to 26055, inclusive.
(d) As used in the following provisions, "firearm" does not
include an unloaded antique firearm:
<<<BUT does not include UNLOADED antiques- by definition, once loaded it is a firearm, unloaded it is not. Given that gunpowder could be construed as ammo, and that weapon parts and ammo are included in the Federal ban, you can assume they are included in state bans as well
again Fed law says OK, states vary.

Remo223
March 8, 2011, 10:05 PM
At my concealed carry class, the instructor told us we don't need a permit to carry on our own property. This includes our front yard. And also in any vehicle that is a domocile...as in campers and motorhomes. I said "what about tents?" The instructor said you can have weapons and firearms in your tent too.

I said "ok, then how about this?": "I take a pup tent, and roll it up in the shape of a holster and wrap it with duct tape. then strap it to my waist and put my revolver in it. Then walk around town. You said I could do it right?"

He wouldn't answer me.

mgmorden
March 8, 2011, 11:22 PM
Do you really think a judge and / or jury is going to go along with such a mere technicality?

Hate to be blunt, but the entire legal profession basically boils down to technicalities. Federally, and in most states, muzzleloaders are not considered firearms. Federally, and in most states, black powder substitutes are legally considered propellants, NOT explosives (and that's a legal distinction that is specifically codified).

The law is the law. As always you have to check your own state laws, which makes the question a bit difficult to discuss in the hyopthetical sense as to really delve into it we'd need to focus on the specific state in question.

788Ham
March 8, 2011, 11:48 PM
Joe Demko,

Why sir do you want to spend the time arguing with NavyLT, when you could be checking "your" state laws and statuet's? The man has asked many questions, but answering a question with another question is NOT answering his question to you. The LT said he had some time on his hands, but dang son, you expect him to have all laws for each state for you to kick thru? Get serious!

WardenWolf
March 8, 2011, 11:54 PM
Hate to be blunt, but the entire legal profession basically boils down to technicalities. Federally, and in most states, muzzleloaders are not considered firearms. Federally, and in most states, black powder substitutes are legally considered propellants, NOT explosives (and that's a legal distinction that is specifically codified).

The law is the law. As always you have to check your own state laws, which makes the question a bit difficult to discuss in the hyopthetical sense as to really delve into it we'd need to focus on the specific state in question.
On the other hand, they can argue intent of the law, and if a judge finds intent to be there, he can allow the case to proceed.

Tommygunn
March 9, 2011, 12:22 AM
There's a lot of "wiggle room."

Not if the ATF or local LEOs are knocking on your door. Just my $0.02, nothing more. I'm not a lawyer yet (still working on it) but I know enough not to push the envelope where the ATF is concerned (for the most part) and where firearms are concerned. Sure it's jurisdiction dependent. I should have specified, however in those jurisdictions in which it matters, they're not likely to be lenient.


G. Gordon Liddy is already a lawyer. You might suppose he knows about the laws in his jurisdiction, and what he can and cannot do.
Anyhow, I wouldn't be pushing envelopes where the BATFE is concerned, save for the fact I'd like to see them disbanded, decommissioned and expunged .... but that's another thread I guess.....

Joe Demko
March 9, 2011, 07:17 AM
Why sir do you want to spend the time arguing with NavyLT, when you could be checking "your" state laws and statuet's? The man has asked many questions, but answering a question with another question is NOT answering his question to you. The LT said he had some time on his hands, but dang son, you expect him to have all laws for each state for you to kick thru? Get serious!

I have checked my own state laws and did so previous to this thread. My point has been twofold:
1. Federal law isn't the final word on this. Each of the 50 states has their own laws and those must be taken into account. Anybody making a blanket pronouncement of "yes" is not looking at the whole situation.
2. If you are a person to whom this is personally important, you need legal advice from a lawyer who is familiar with your state and local laws. The man who represents himself has a fool for a client, but the man who relies on a layman's google-fu for legal answers is an even bigger fool. Yes, I am just some guy too; but don't let your decisions rest on which guy's answer you prefer to hear.

CoRoMo
March 9, 2011, 11:48 AM
Federal law isn't the final word on this. Each of the 50 states has their own laws...
Who said otherwise?
...making a blanket pronouncement of "yes"...
Who did that?

Did any post in this thread directly conflict with either of your two points?

NG VI
March 9, 2011, 11:55 AM
A lot of the responses seem to be in response to a felon committing felonies with a blackpowder weapon, that's not the topic of discussion, I like a little thread veer as much as the next guy but that direction is irrelevant and unproductive.

I guess I'll see about finding a list of states that specifically prohibit felons from exercising their federal right to own antique firearms.

CoRoMo
March 9, 2011, 11:59 AM
I agree. There's like three or more topics occurring within this thread.

deadin
March 9, 2011, 12:44 PM
I guess I'll see about finding a list of states that specifically prohibit felons from exercising their federal right to own antique firearms.

Enjoy!!

http://www.atf.gov/publications/firearms/state-laws/29th-edition/index.html

LemmyCaution
March 9, 2011, 03:07 PM
Vermont has no laws regarding convicted felons and weapons.

As far as the state of Vermont is concerned, Hannibal Lecter can walk through town with a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range, and no one gives a good golly.

In Vermont, one's possession of weapons, any weapons, (barring certain prohibited locations) is completely unregulated, if you are over 18 years of age.

The only limitation is federal law.

Busyhands94
March 9, 2011, 06:33 PM
black powder guns can be just as dangerous in the hands of criminals as cartridge firing guns. however you can buy black powder guns with no paperwork or other BS. i have ordered a blackpowder firearms before, i placed the order with my papa, 6 days later it came and was handed to me all wrapped up by my mailman. there was no paperwork, no forms to fill out, no waiting period. by law they are antiques, not firearms.

If you enjoyed reading about "Are felons prohibited from owning muzzle loaders?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!