Cutting the frame for a loading gate, and legality.

[noelf2]

A lot of c&b enthusiasts, including some who enhance and modify c&b guns for profit or fun, continue to repeat an internet myth regarding the modification of a frame with a loading port, specifically that it qualifies the modified frame, and subsequent use in any configuration of cartridge or c&b, as a "firearm" by ATF definition, forever. This is not true. An actual gunsmith, Gary Lee Barnes, who does these conversions professionally and is subject to ATF inspections has this to say:

"Every two years, and for 35+ years, I have an ATF agent here auditing my books. There have been over a dozen….
Each, and every time, I ask them THEIR take on what I do primarily as a gunsmith (conversions using Kirst parts). I do this because they don’t enforce LAWS, THEY ENFORCE CODES, and codes are open to ever changing mentalities and politics. Each and every time they have told me that “permanently altered to accept a cartridge does not mean cutting the port and that it means can no longer shoot as a cap and ball…….PERIOD

Feel free to quote me on that"

By all means, everyone should do what they think is right and prudent, especially if they do these modifications for others as an unlicenced craftsman. It sure can't hurt to go through an actual FFL for transfer (if one would even put a c&b gun in their bound book). It is not, however, a requirement.

 

[45 Dragoon]

" they don’t enforce LAWS, THEY ENFORCE CODES, and codes are open to ever changing mentalities and politics.

There's enough "scare" just right there depending on who hollers and from where. A broken package at the Post Office or Airport, . . .

It can take months even if it's just a plain C&B revolver for the sender. (That's no myth!)

As far as requiring ffl sending /receiving . . . for a few bucks more, there's no headache ( of course you can put a C&B revolver in the books! Some states require it for new c&b revolvers)

Mike

 

[noelf2]

There's enough "scare" just right there depending on who hollers and from where. A broken package at the Post Office or Airport, . . .

It can take months even if it's just a plain C&B revolver for the sender. (That's no myth!)

As far as requiring ffl sending /receiving . . . for a few bucks more, there's no headache ( of course you can put a C&B revolver in the books! Some states require it for new c&b revolvers)

Mike

Not really getting your point. Are you saying that a cap and ball revolver that's happens to have a groove cut in the frame would be handled differently by Joe Mailman if it fell out of the box? Or that when Joe Mailman calls the feds about a cap and ball gun, they will handle it differently because of a groove in the recoil shield? Either way, or any which other way, that is entirely beside the point.

The issue isn't what states require. It's the persistent myth that the "fed" requires it, which is just plain false. If it's your policy to do more than is federally required to feel secure in your transactions (i.e. not scared), I 100% support your right to do so. If I were a craftman doing this work for others, and not a credentialed/licensed professional with the requisite interaction with the BATFE to ensure legality, I would do the same as you. Err on the side of caution. But I know that cutting a loading port does not:
1) make the frame the same as an AR lower
2) make it so the gun, in cap and ball configuration, can never be sold without going through an FFL, or
3) make it so I have to keep the gun forever.

I think those are the main myths that crop up now and then. They are all BS.

 

[45 Dragoon]

That's fine Noelf2. You too can believe what you want. No, I'm saying a C&B revolver that falls out of a poorly packaged parcel gets to go through whatever red tape deemed appropriate at the time by whoever is in charge that doesn't know the mailing laws (or doesn't care). They can make things difficult just getting said revolver back. I sure wouldn't want to throw in a P.O. inspector that thinks an altered C.B. revolver is a "different animal" and decides to get the feds involved and the snowball grows from there! It may not matter to you but most folks would rather not deal with that scenario. It took my customer 3 mos. to get his revolver back from the USPS.
Sometimes it's hard enough trying to do things the right way.

Mike

 

[WestKentucky]

That's fine Noelf2. You too can believe what you want. No, I'm saying a C&B revolver that falls out of a poorly packaged parcel gets to go through whatever red tape deemed appropriate at the time by whoever is in charge that doesn't know the mailing laws (or doesn't care). They can make things difficult just getting said revolver back. I sure wouldn't want to throw in a P.O. inspector that thinks an altered C.B. revolver is a "different animal" and decides to get the feds involved and the snowball grows from there! It may not matter to you but most folks would rather not deal with that scenario. It took my customer 3 mos. to get his revolver back from the USPS.
Sometimes it's hard enough trying to do things the right way.

Mike

And that is the biggest reason that things should be done WELL. Joe Mailman probably doesn’t know the difference between a CB Remington and a Colt SAA. He finds a gun whether it be by X-ray, it is hanging out of a box or totally loose. 99% of the time they are throwing a flag and the whole scenario will be scrutinized by other persons which likely also are not well versed in arms.

Customer: Pack it right, and secure to send to the smith. keep records of markings numbers and condition. Insure the contents.
Smiths: Do the work in a way that is clearly legal. Be insured to protect from lawsuits that may arise to which you may be blamed even if your work was not faulty.
Smiths: repackage the gun as well as when it arrived or better. Padding and multiple layers of box and tape.

 

[Paul R Zartman]

Simple... viewing port when using as cap and ball, loading port when used as cartridge gun...

 

[Eyrie G. Dogg]

Noel, answer us this: If I cut a loading port, gated or otherwise, on one of my Pietta Colts or Remingtons, have I modified/altered the frame so as to accept fixed ammunition?

After doing the modification does it cease to be an "antique firearm" for Federal shipping and/or possession purposes or is there no change of status.?

If you choose to respond, please don't give us more hearsay.

 

[LaneP]

My understanding was: it doesn't matter whether the frame is ported for cartridge loading, it matters what the configuration is when shipped. If it only has the percussion cylinder installed it is a "non-firearm". If it is being sent somewhere with the cartridge conversion cylinder in place that readily accepts commonly available, fixed ammunition, it is now a firearm. Is this a correct assessment? I've never had a need to ship one anywhere but if I did "have to" I'd think I'd want to ship the conversion cylinder separately from the gun itself to minimize issues.

 

[Malachi Leviticus Blue]

Noel, answer us this: If I cut a loading port, gated or otherwise, on one of my Pietta Colts or Remingtons, have I modified/altered the frame so as to accept fixed ammunition?

After doing the modification does it cease to be an "antique firearm" for Federal shipping and/or possession purposes or is there no change of status.?

If you choose to respond, please don't give us more hearsay.

Easy and straight forward answer -
NO
cutting a loading gate obviously does NOT allow the revolver to accept fixed ammunition. (if it did there would be no need for conversion cylinders)

Does it cease to be an antique firearm? Also NO

See below, there is an A, B and C, but I've only listed C to make it simple.
It is either A, B, or C NOT A, B, and C

18 U.S.C., § 921(A)(16)

The term “Antique Firearm” means:

C. Any muzzle loading rifle, muzzle loading shotgun, or muzzle loading pistol, which is designed to use black powder, or black powder substitute, and which cannot use fixed ammunition.

Full paragraph below - however everything after "for the purpose of this paragraph" is irrelevant to this discussion

C. Any muzzle loading rifle, muzzle loading shotgun, or muzzle loading pistol, which is designed to use black powder, or black powder substitute, and which cannot use fixed ammunition. For purposes of this subparagraph, the term antique firearm shall not include any weapon which includes 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.

 

[noelf2]

That's fine Noelf2. You too can believe what you want. No, I'm saying a C&B revolver that falls out of a poorly packaged parcel gets to go through whatever red tape deemed appropriate at the time by whoever is in charge that doesn't know the mailing laws (or doesn't care). They can make things difficult just getting said revolver back. I sure wouldn't want to throw in a P.O. inspector that thinks an altered C.B. revolver is a "different animal" and decides to get the feds involved and the snowball grows from there! It may not matter to you but most folks would rather not deal with that scenario. It took my customer 3 mos. to get his revolver back from the USPS.
Sometimes it's hard enough trying to do things the right way.

Mike

Again, not seeing how that supports a federal code. That's just being cautious. You had said it was in BATFE code "in plain English" in another thread which is false.

 

[noelf2]

Noel, answer us this: If I cut a loading port, gated or otherwise, on one of my Pietta Colts or Remingtons, have I modified/altered the frame so as to accept fixed ammunition?

After doing the modification does it cease to be an "antique firearm" for Federal shipping and/or possession purposes or is there no change of status.?

If you choose to respond, please don't give us more hearsay.

Answer1: NOT if you have the c&b cylinder installed.
Answer2: NOT if you have the c&b cylinder installed.

Try reading the quote I posted up top from a qualified expert that does this work for a living, and has had direct contact with BATFE regarding this exact subject many times.

 

[45 Dragoon]

Nope, didn't say anything about code. What I read was their definition of what constitutes a "firearm". When a " non-firearm" becomes a "firearm". That was the info I wanted to know.

And you said, " . . . everyone should do what they think is right and prudent . . . " . That's exactly what I do.

Mike

 

[noelf2]

Nope, didn't say anything about code. What I read was their definition of what constitutes a "firearm". When a " non-firearm" becomes a "firearm". That was the info I wanted to know.

And you said, " . . . everyone should do what they think is right and prudent . . . " . That's exactly what I do.

Mike

Ok, so you said specifically:

"Good lord!! All you have to do is look it up under BATF. It's in plain English. Same as it was 14 yrs ago when I started looking at the cylinders. Once the frame is modified to allow use of the gate, it is the same as an AR lower. It has the serial # and it is the firearm all by itself . . . no need for a barrel, cyl, grip frame . . . the frame is the firearm . . . period."

ALL of that is wrong, especially the ...period. I just wanted to ensure, for posterity, that this sort of ignorance is well called out and the facts (not feels) can be googled, and others can cut their loading ports without the fear of it becoming a firearm requiring FFL transfers and such (at least at the time of this post).

 

[45 Dragoon]

Ummmm . . . never said "feel" this way or that . . .

and yes, according to what I read, that ^ is my interpretation of it. Just being cautious (as you suggested), apparently more ignorant than I thought I was and of course, spreading BS. Just pointing this out . . . for posterity.

Mike

 

[noelf2]

LOL... Doing what you THINK is right and prudent, which you admit to doing (and there's nothing wrong with that), is a "feels", and not based on requirements. Sort of like me, in that I wouldn't sell a handgun to someone under 21 even though it is legal. I just don't think it's right and prudent. That's just my feels, which I don't project on others (their business).

Let me ask you this... Are you certain that cutting a loading port on a c&b frame makes it a firearm same as an AR lower is? Or is that just your interpretation of a definition? I mean, jeez, I think that as many times Gary has had his bound book rifled through by the BATFE, and asked them this question, it might give a wise man some pause.

 

[45 Dragoon]

My understanding is: when the frame is modified to allow use of the loading gate in either makers gated conversions, that is when you have made the frame into a firearm. If using the gated setup as a "drop cylinder" (no frame mod ) then obviously there would be no change in classification. This is what I took from reading the ATF definitions pertaining to making a firearm. If I'm wrong, fine, nobody gets hurt. My lgs didn't seem to have any problems with my interpretation either. That's the reason I think what I think about this particular subject. I don't care to flirt or try to prove a point with USPS, ATF, State or local laws. If my interpretation goes too far for some, so sorry, but that will remain the procedure.

Mike

 

[noelf2]

Fair enough. My understanding is, you are wrong in your interpretation. The only people affected are those who are paying fees to an FFL when they don't have to, but if they are ok with it, macht nichts. Momma Foster never raised such a foolish child.

 

[45 Dragoon]

Lol . . .
Well you know, since I've introduced the coil/coil torsion spring action for these revolvers (Colt,Remington and ROA) and after several State Championships with all 3 platforms ( some multiple times) , I've always told my customers to "run um like a fool !!! I guess it just comes naturally . . .

Mike

 

[Don Van Winkle]

Let's all just say that if one uses a conversion cylinder and can go back to the C&B cylinder with a simple change; no harm/no foul. One cannot be wrong in thier opinion or their interpretation of any of the rules and such. That is why it is called an interpretation. Spending 30 years in the Navy has taught me that all instructions were open to interpretation no matter what. Yes, some heated discussions followed but that was always good. Nobody was EVER called wrong. I will not go to a conversion cylinder ever so I have no worries with my "58. I hope everyones New Year has gotten off on the right foot and 2022 is much better for all!!!

 

[noelf2]

Let's all just say that if one uses a conversion cylinder and can go back to the C&B cylinder with a simple change; no harm/no foul. One cannot be wrong in thier opinion or their interpretation of any of the rules and such. That is why it is called an interpretation. Spending 30 years in the Navy has taught me that all instructions were open to interpretation no matter what. Yes, some heated discussions followed but that was always good. Nobody was EVER called wrong. I will not go to a conversion cylinder ever so I have no worries with my "58. I hope everyones New Year has gotten off on the right foot and 2022 is much better for all!!!

Don't sound like the Navy I was in. lol.

 

[Don Van Winkle]

Don't sound like the Navy I was in. lol.

When were you in? I served from 1991-2021

 

[noelf2]

When were you in? I served from 1991-2021

June 1980 to April 1990 (I was a CTM), but retired in 2019 as an Army civilian. Worked for DOD my whole life. Hell, I was born on a military base in Africa.

 

[Ephraim Kibbey]

Thank you both for your service!

 

[Don Van Winkle]

June 1980 to April 1990 (I was a CTM), but retired in 2019 as an Army civilian. Worked for DOD my whole life. Hell, I was born on a military base in Africa.

I just retired as SKC but they changed the rate to LSC. Everything changed in the Navy to accomodate the milinal kids and not let us old Chiefs do what we learned. So happy to be retired.

 

[CraigC]

I think people get hung up on the "permanent modification" and focus on the cutting of the loading port. If cutting the loading port made the gun into a modern firearm, then the percussion versions of the 1873 would not even exist. They have a loading port, gate and a functioning ejector. That argument just doesn't hold water. The revolver still functions 100% as a percussion gun, it just has a lot more room for capping. It's the installation of the cartridge conversion kit that makes it into a "firearm". Doesn't matter if it's gated or not. Since this installation is not permanent and the revolver still functions as a percussion gun, then there's simply no other way to look at it.

This is totally different from the original cartridge conversions, where the guns were permanently modified to accept cartridges only.