Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

whats the definition of modern ammo?

Discussion in 'Blackpowder' started by andrewstorm, Jan 12, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. andrewstorm

    andrewstorm member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    Messages:
    634
    Location:
    land of the free,because of the brave
    Does this definition include blackpowder cartridges?:confused:
     
  2. Oyeboten

    Oyeboten Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Messages:
    3,696
    Definition for what purpose? Or, according to who's jurisdiction...is what will complicate this right off the Bat.


    Common Sense begins to suggest that 'Modern Ammo' would be 'Smokeless' ammo, then, Common Sense remembers that Smokelss Cartridges are now roughly 111 years old for Pistol, and, about 120 odd years going, for Rifle...and...


    So...I for one, do not know!
     
  3. WALKERs210

    WALKERs210 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,342
    Location:
    Heart of Dixie - Alabama
    When I had a discussion with an ATF agent about some things I need clarified, his reference as that if the shot/projectile, powder charge and primer were constructed to be loaded as a single unit then, regardless to BP or smokeless, it is concerned to be modern ammo. Could be wrong, I have been know to be wrong and have no problem admitting that I am.
     
  4. Shoot The Moon

    Shoot The Moon Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2010
    Messages:
    161
    Location:
    England at the moment
    UK firearms law treats guns chambered in 'obsolete calibres' differently to 'modern'. Here's a link to the list of what is considered obsolete. It's an eye opener regarding the diversity of calibres that were once available!

    http://www.david-squires.org.uk/Antiques.htm
     
  5. Jim Watson

    Jim Watson Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    21,999
    Agree with Walker. If it is a cartridge and you can buy it and shoot it, it is "modern."

    Navy Arms made up a few Henry reproductions in .44 rimfire that could be sold without the firearms paperwork of the shootable but inauthentic .44-40s, because .44 rimfire is long out of production.
     
  6. mykeal

    mykeal Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    5,147
    Location:
    Michigan
    There is no definition of 'modern' ammo in the BATFE regulations, at least that I can find. There is, however, a definition of 'antique' firearm, which includes a reference to the type of ammunition an antique firearm uses. It would be reasonable to infer a definition of 'modern' ammunition from that language:

     
  7. andrewstorm

    andrewstorm member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    Messages:
    634
    Location:
    land of the free,because of the brave
    straight answers anyone

    Here in the mitten,some gun shops sell pre 1899 antique firearms like the schmidt Rubin with out a redneck check,others wont even take a curio relic licence, black powder cartridges are not currently available to my knowledge in many calibers,if modern ammo is any cartridge currently loaded in the united states,why is the cut off date 1899 long after many black powder cartridges were invented and in use,one would think 1899 denotes the beginning of the modern age.in terms of firearms,also lately I have seen 1873 replicas that incorperates a blackpowder frame,if chamberd in a no longer loaded in the united states cartridge that was only loaded originally as a black powder round say .450 adams would It be considered antique?
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2011
  8. Pete D.

    Pete D. Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,103
    antiques

    A replica in any chambering, if manufactured after 1898, is a modern firearm.
    The date of manufacture determines whether it is subject to modern restrictions. The ammo it uses is secondary.
    I own an original 1873 Trapdoor Carbine. When I bought it, there was no check needed. I picked the gun off the rack, paid for it and walked out the door. Could have been a bottle of Cola.
    Pete
     
  9. mykeal

    mykeal Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    5,147
    Location:
    Michigan
    Pete - I posted the exact language in the Gun Control Act of 1968. What am I missing?
     
  10. andrewstorm

    andrewstorm member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    Messages:
    634
    Location:
    land of the free,because of the brave
    MYKE

    This is why I surfed the web and found a site called the pre 1899 gun.s F A Q,a good piece of information,PETE read my boy read!and absorb ,SEEMS PETE IS :confused:
     
  11. Pete D.

    Pete D. Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,103
    re pete

    Mykeal: I understand that you had quoted the exact idea in your post. Directly after that Andrew posted his question about replicas and the 450 Adams idea.
    I was attempting then to clarify what you had said as it applied to his question.
    (I dislike it also when someone posts an idea that I have already written, In this case, I was was trying to reinforce your idea.)

    Andrew: I did go to the FAQ website. Thank you. The only difference that I noticed was that the cut-off date was 1899 as opposed to 1898. If there is more that I need to absorb, please LMK and I will go and re-read.
    Pete
     
  12. mykeal

    mykeal Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    5,147
    Location:
    Michigan
    Pete D. - Your statement about the date of manufacture and type of ammunition used is incorrect. It does not clarify my post; in fact, it contradicts it. The law very clearly states that replicas manufactured after 1898 are considered antiques as long as they have not been altered to use modern ammunition. The date of manufacture is therefore irrelevant; the type of ammunition used is the only criteria that counts.
     
  13. GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL

    GENTLEMAN OF THE CHARCOAL Member.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,632
    Mr. MyKeal told ya'll exactly right in all aspects. MyKeal IS correct. The reason I happen to know that he is correct is because there just happen's to be a very attractive female BATF agent sitting here at my table right this very moment enjoying some pork sausage patties, eggs over medium, toast lightly buttered, hash browned potatoes, and washed down with plenty of dark roast coffee with cream and sugar..(My turn to cook breakfast)..I showed her the posts and asked her....
     
  14. Loyalist Dave

    Loyalist Dave Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2006
    Messages:
    1,832
    Location:
    People's Republic of Maryland
    This is correct, and CAS has caused some changes, for when old, not currently manufactured cartridges such as the .38-40, .32-20, .45 Schofield, and the .38 and .41 Colt, suddenly started back up to fit repro handguns for CAS, hanguns that were manufactured in those calibers after 1900 suddenly went from "antique" to "modern".
     
  15. Pete D.

    Pete D. Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,103
    Apologia

    Gentlemen: An apology on my part is in order - in fact, past due. I was embarrassingly mistaken. I have no excuse.
    My apologies to all who commented and especially to MyKeal and to Andrewstorm.
    Please accept them.
    It seems that I do have to go back and read things more than once quickly.
    Much chastened, I remain,
    Pete D.
     
  16. andrewstorm

    andrewstorm member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    Messages:
    634
    Location:
    land of the free,because of the brave
    Pete

    none necessary Pete , the cut off date of production antique firearm frames is 1 /1/1899 so all firearms that incorporate a frame manufactured before midnight DEC 31 1898,are considered antique,thus the ammo they originally were intended for,in my opinion any cartridge that after you shoot it you have to wait for the smoke to clear to see what you hit or not should be considered antique and not modern.:scrutiny:gentlemen of the charcoal kwit yer braggin:rolleyes:
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2011
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page