Is a railgun a firearm?

Status
Not open for further replies.
3

30mag

Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2008
Messages
671
Location
Where West meets South, Texas
So, suppose I were to make a railgun... and it were fully automatic.
Would that be the business of the BATFE?
Because, since it doesn't use expanding gases to fire a projectile... it's not a firearm, right?
 
NotALawyerBut:
In theory, yes, but you forget the BATF makes up their own rules.
If you go and ask them, they may make up a rule to cover it!

Reminds me I still need to read Catch-22
 
Nope, the BATFE would still make it their business sans expanding gas. They don't care about muzzleloaders or airsoft and they operate on expanding gas/pressurized.

It is the effectiveness of the armament and the threat it poses to the elected powers that makes it the business of the BATFE.
 
As much as we'd like our laws to be clear and absolute, there's always going to be gaps for unforeseen circumstances and technologies simply because the Legislature is fallible (or even corrupt) and resources are limited.

Example: Draft a statute that says "No vehicles in the Park" or "No sleeping on trains"... do you throw the EMT in jail for driving an ambulance to the camper with a heart attack... or a mom for "aiding and abetting" her infant in sleeping on her shoulder? Common sense says that the statute wasn't comprehensive in including a reasonable exception for these cases. So similar reasoning would prevail over rail guns and their inclusion as firearms.

In cases where the statute has gaps or conflicts, either the legislature can amend it quickly (and, btw, can made the statute act retroactively except, usually, with criminal statutes), the judiciary can apply an intentional or tailor-made interpretation, or an administrative agency can claim jurisdiction and regulate.

I guarantee if a viable repeating railgun is commercialized, used in a crime, or even privately but notoriously (say, people start making them and putting up Youtube vids, but do nothing but harmless target shooting) there will be consequences shortly after.

Attempting to exploit legal loopholes, generally, isn't a viable long-term tactic (this is counter intuitive for us gun folk, because manufacturers regularly skirted state AWBs and the Federal AWB using technicalities, but that's an exception to the rule).
 
A "rail gun," as I understand the term, uses electromagnetic force to propel a projectile, not explosions or expanding gases. It should not be under BATFE's purview, but I am sure most of the rest of the alphabet would want to get in on it.
 
The problem you will haev with railguns, other than rail erosion, is making them fully automatic will require a HUGE power source and capacitors. I am messing around with trying to make a coilgun (railgun with no rails sorta) and found out how hard it would be to make it FA. If you can make FA, it depends whether the ATF would classify it a gun in the first place. (as for that, ask them)
 
What's the ATF's definition of "firearm"? If a railgun doesn't fit, build it, and include patents. When or if they prosecute, sue them blind.

That's how the system works. Don't be afraid to make it your friend.
 
I want to say that I've seen an ATFE letter to the effect that they do not regulate railguns, but I can't produce a citation. It was reprinted in a book with the ATFE potato gun letter, I believe. If I see it again, I'll add a link.
 
Build a powerful full auto railgun and you'll have enough money you won't have to worry about the ATF.
Click to expand...

Call the Navy. You'd have saved them 10 years of development. They'll keep the ATF of your back for sure
 
I've pruned the poly ticks and general 'loss of liberty' rants, so we can keep this thread focused and open.

If your post disappeared, well, that should be a not-so-subtle hint that your contributions were not on track.

Carry on.
 
BATF, probably not. However, the nuclear people would be interested in the power supply you would need to run the thing.

Seriously, should you develop a practical device described rest assured your state legislature would have a midnight emergency session to put the weapon under it's control and regulation.
 
heron: "Probably covered under "destructive device."

Bingo.

Still, one day an unregulated, effective weapon will appear, and it will then be regulated under new statutory or regulatory authority generated to deal with the situation.

About a decade ago I lived in Maryland. At that time, Maryland had no open container law, so I used to drive by the local PD with a can of beer in my hand. Yes, it was immature, but when you live in a nanny state like Maryland you tend to do these things to stay sane. They instituted an open container law. So I bought a moped. Maryland had no moped law. It was a motorcycle, or if it had pedals, it was a bicycle. That's right -- legally, a 49cc Slovenian Tomos Targa Top Tank moped with pedals was a bicycle. Among other things, this meant an eccentric, rebellious and immature fellow like me could ride his moped at full tilt through shopping centers, parks, cemeteries, jogging trails, schoolyards, municipal plazas, and et cetera, spreading fear and mayhem in his oily-exhaust wake. I left Maryland before they could fix the moped situation.
 
Probably a destructive device category. There are no loopholes as far as the ATF is concerned. The way a government organization can implement new rules without going through the beauracracy is beyond me at this point but at least it is an example of government efficiency even if it is at our expense.
 
(f) Destructive device. -- The term "destructive device" means...(2) any type of weapon by whatever name known which will, or which may be readily converted to, expel a projectile by the action of an explosive or other propellant, the barrel or barrels of which have a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter, except a shotgun or shotgun shell which the Secretary finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes
Click to expand...
A railgun is not a destructive device unless it has a bore of greater than .5"

The term "machinegun" means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.
Click to expand...
If it were FA, it seems that it could be classified as a machine gun though.
 
However, the nuclear people would be interested in the power supply you would need to run the thing.
Click to expand...

Seriously, I'm not talking about a railgun that would replace a 155mm howitzer.... just a small one. Capacitors could be used to store the energy required to run it. A massive amount of electricity would not be required, just complex circuitry and a bunch of capacitors.

The 155mm won't come until I get the bugs in my fusion generator worked out...
duh.
 
Last edited:
I think the power supply is easily within the reach of just about anybody (for a rifle-caliber single-shot railgun). Capacitors and circuitry for control, but could be easily supplied by a few car batteries. Time between shots would probably depend more on the capacitors and control than on gross battery power.

There are all-electric motor scooters for sale that run on 5 small 12-volt batteries and have a top speed of 45 mph.
 
ATF = Alcohol, tobaco, Firearms.

As long as your rail gun doesn't run off alcohol, smoke tobaco, or use fire to propell your projectile it will not be regulated by the ATF.

Of course, the ATF could have an R added to their name to eventually regulate rail-guns. but that won't happen until someone makes a good one.
 
A "rail gun," as I understand the term, uses electromagnetic force to propel a projectile, not explosions or expanding gases. It should not be under BATFE's purview, but I am sure most of the rest of the alphabet would want to get in on it.

Good luck on that one. They make up the rules as they go.
 
IMO if a little piece of metal is expelled out of a barrel with enough destructive force, The ATF will have jurisdiction over it...period. This is regardless of the propellant.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

U
  • Locked
Wonder when this will become a big story: man creates 3D printed Railgun at home
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Arizona_Mike
A
T
  • Locked
How about a 10 megajoule railgun?
2 3
Replies
56
Views
2K
Stevie-Ray
Stevie-Ray
T
  • Locked
Railguns Getting Closer
2
Replies
45
Views
2K
Warren
W
N
  • Locked
Practical Manportable Railguns
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
TexasVet
T
N
  • Locked
Gauss Weapons
2
Replies
29
Views
1K
AJ Dual
A
Back
Top