gun laws question
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
what is US gun law on muskets and muzzle loaders and breech loaders? are they as restricted as case ammo firearms? what about in the euros?
>>28547158 there not technically considered a firearm in us law
>>28547158
According to US law muzzleloaders are antiques, not firearms.
Anyone over 18 can buy them.
In Europe the same usually applies, but the guns in question have to be actual antiques, not reproductions.
That is to say they have to be manufactured before like 1890.
>>28547180
then what about the ones that are actually made in the past years within 3 years time?
>>28547178
Old, antique ones aren't.
New production guns are still legal guns.
You should really stop being this dumb.
>>28547158
Barring some retarded state law I'm unaware of, firearms that do not utilize a metallic cartridge are completely unregulated and be delivered straight to your door. This includes your typical muzzle-loaders, cap and ball revolvers, breech loaders like the Kammerlader, and rifles that use non-metallic cartridges such as the Dreyse and early Sharps. Anything so long as it doesn't use metallic cartridges. Well, there are some weird laws and ATF rulings pertaining to muzzleloaders that use electric ignition of the power, but I think that pertains to hunting, not ownership.
Furthermore, firearms produced prior to 1898 (I also see 1899) are unregulated as well, even if they use metallic cartridges. This does not extend to modern reproductions, however, so if you, say, buy a reproduction Colt SAA, you'd have to purchase that like a regular handgun.
>>28547199
>New production guns are still legal guns.
Not in the US.
Any gun with an "antique firing system" is not a firearm.
So even those new inline muzzle loaders made out of stainless steel and plastic are technically antiques.
>>28547199
Say I commissioned some gunsmith who is expert in antique firearms a flintlock pistol. Would that still be a firearm?
>>28547180
>>28547199
"Antiques" and firearms that do not utilize a metallic cartridge are two distinct categories that are often confused, but both fall under the same umbrella of being wholly unregulated firearms.
Example: I can purchase a modern cap and ball pistol that was made just yesterday and have it delivered straight to my door. It's an unregulated firearm.
I could not, however, purchase a modern, reproduction Colt SAA and have it delivered straight to my door. It's a regulated firearm.
I COULD, however, have an antique Colt SAA made pre-1899 delivered straight to my door. It is unregulated.
>>28547199
In the fact that you can order them online with no 4473, ie there technically not firearms. Dummy
>>28547246
>but both fall under the same umbrella of being wholly unregulated firearms.
I should probably clarify this definition: when I say "unregulated firearm", I am just referring to the fact that what you are purchasing is, by proper definition, a firearm that is not regulated.
Legally, however, these devices are not considered "firearms" at all. Keep in mind that states will often have their own definition of what constitutes a firearm, and something like a cap and ball revolver could potentially fall under that umbrella, meaning you shouldn't get any ideas about trying to conceal carry a cap and ball without a license or something. Could it technically be fine? Yeah, but I wouldn't try it.
>>28547199
No muzzle loaders are not legally firearms even if they were made yesterday. State laws may vary.
You should really stop calling people dumb when you have no idea what your talking about.
>>28547235
http://dixiegunworks.com/
>>28547199
>being any nations citizen
>thinking you have the right to do what you want with your money, body, property, etc
You're a fucking slave to the state, OP. You pay taxes on every dollar you earn, and every dollar you spend is around %70 taxes.
Learn your goddamn place.
Of course fun isn't allowed.
Regardless of legality, they will find some excuse to steal your shit.
Every time.
>>28547303
So if it's not the Fed that's being a tyrant, it's the state. If it's not the state, it's an organization.
You can't win.
The jackasses are everywhere.
>>28547246
>>28547201
what about if I produce something like this in a number of units for my friends and I and as well as for an uncle living in UK?
http://www.ctmuzzleloaders.com/ctml_experiments/lorgir_pistol/lorgir_pistol.html
>>28547340
>>28547356
Holy shit, calm down their Mr.Sovereign Citizen. OP asked about guns, not about your take on the relationship between citizen and state.
Please take your unsolicited ramblings to /pol/.
>>28547198
A genuine cap and ball revolver made in 1860 and a modern reproduction made yesterday are treated identically in US federal law. Both are antiques, not firearms. They do not require background checks, you can buy them online with your mom's credit card and have them sent straight to your door.
As >>28547246 says however guns that fire metallic cartridges are treated differently.
Cartridge guns made before 1899 are antiques and are usually treated the same way as the previously mentioned muzzleloaders.
Identical replicas made after 1899 are however firearms.
A pre-1899 can however become a firearm under certain circumstances.
For example if you buy a shotgun made in 1880 that fires centerfire cartridges and saw it down so that the overall length is under 26 inches, and the barrel/s are shorter than 18 inches you've committed a felony, just as if you sawed off a brand new shotgun the same way.
HOWEVER, if you did it to a new, or antique MUZZLE LOADING it would not be a crime, since the weapon has an "antique firing system" and is not considered by the ATF to be a firearm regardless of length.
It's weird, but unless you fuck around and modify antique guns you're unlikely to be charged with a crime.
>>28547158
Got mine shipped to me in the mail via USPS.
>>28547394
Politics, individual rights, and the relationship between citizens and the authorities is, and probably always will be related to firearms.
>why do you NEED a spear, helot?
>why do you NEED a crossbow, peasant?
>why do you NEED a cannon, Texas?
>why do you NEED a machinegun, citizen?
>>28547199
/k/, where idiots spout false info proudly
>being this boldly retarded
>>28547379
So long as it doesn't use metallic, self-contained cartridges, you're fine. Electronic ignition is kind of a strange area, though, so you might want to do some reading on that. There's probably no problem with it seeing as their ARE electronically ignited muzzleloaders on the market, and I think any determinations regarding it most likely applies to hunting (I'm fairly certain some states ban electronic ignition for hunting), but yeah, otherwise, you're probably good to go.
As far as shipping to your Uncle living in the UK...that's an entirely separate issue I know nothing about. Probably safe to err on the side of "no", but do your research.
>>28547446
Yeah, okay, your point?
I said OP asked for a clarification on gun laws, not for your unsolicited bullshit rambling. My point still stands.
If you want to share your really interesting and unique thoughts, make your own thread instead of barging into some random one and talking about something off-topic.
>>28547498
My point was to get OP to realize how stupid the question is.
It's like the saying, "if you have to ask how much it costs, you can't afford it".
"If you have to ask if it's legal, then it's illegal."
And it is. Literally everything is illegal in America.
>>28547462
If I make a full auto black powder rifle that uses paper cartridges...
Is that legal?
What about a semi auto with one of those trigger attachments?
>>28547539
Okay, well, fair enough. I see a bit more where you're coming from now. I should clarify that I never entirely disagreed with your point to start with, but discussing alternative modes of governance (or a lack thereof) kind of starts to transcend to /pol/-oriented topical territory.
That said, the laws pertaining to OP's question are fairly clear-cut, at least on a federal level.
>>28547446
why you need a chip skynet?
>>28547568
It's an interesting concept, for sure. I've thought of this myself at times. An alternative would be using a "chamber-block" like the old harmonica guns used. I think you'd have a very difficult time making a reliable fully-automatic rifle that used paper cartridges.
That said, I'm not entirely sure. I would envision that someone has probably asked before, and the fact that we don't see any full-auto blackpowders on the market today is the answer.
I mean, all things considered, so long as the hypothetical full/semi auto did NOT utilize metallic cartridges, from a purely legal perspective, it should be 100% fine. It's not considered a firearm and is not subject to any of the rules that regulate firearms. I would not be surprised if the ATF pulled its typical bullshit and tried to construe a reason why it's a machine gun anyway, though.
Pic related, old full auto cap and ball revolver rifle.
A 72-year-old retired schoolteacher in Millville, New Jersey, is facing the possibility of spending 10 years in state prison for possessing a 250-year-old antique pistol.
Gordon Van Gilder's legal nightmare began when he was pulled over by a Cumberland County deputy sheriff last November and told the deputy there was a flintlock pistol in the glove compartment, National Review reports.
http://www.newsmax.com/US/new-jersey-antique-gun-police/2015/02/18/id/625579/
>>28547683
That's why you don't tell shit to the police.
>>28547739
Gun owners beware: DC man faces jail for having empty shotgun shell
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/01/23/gun-owners-beware-dc-man-faces-jail-for-having-empty-shotgun-shell-96062
Home invasion thanks to ex-wife.
so why havnt you ordered your cap and ball revolver through the internet yet /k/?
it was good enough to fight the civil war with, not good enough for you?
>>28547831
They're pretty fun. I got a .44 Remington, surprisingly accurate gun.
>>28547831
I have a Pietta 44 cal New Model army 5.5" and a howell conversion cylinder in 45 colt. It actually shoots pretty well and I got the pistol on sale at cabellas. Both items came straight to th e house. My Ruger Blackhawk is a better pistol, of course. But the NMA works.
>>28547831
Because id rather spend my money on the p64 i ordered earlier this week. I wouldnt mind having one but theres other things higher up on the list.
>>28547831
Because I don't live in a free country.
>>28547831
I'm a huge fan of Black powder firearms. About to pick up a Pedersoli Hawken at the end of this month.
>>28547831
Because I am saving up for a schofield to shoot black powder cartridge in.
>>28547568
it won't work.
There's a reason semi-auto and full-auto rifles didn't come into existence until metallic cartridges and smokeless powder was invented.
>>28547539
How to spot the moron
>>28547831
Live with parents, and I hit my "maximum" amount of guns I can own as per their rules.
>>28548058
Stop buying guns and spend the money on your independence. Cut the umbilical cord already.
>>28548058
Ain't a gun legally.
>>28548287
Good way to get kicked out of your parents house. Start sentences with 'actually' or 'technically'.
>>28547158
>Urge to own muzzle loading pistols increases
Jesus these are some fine, fiiiine looking shooters.
>>28548345
>not already owning some kind of home made muzzle loading gun to shoot cans with in the back yard
wat
>>28548633
Whoa you gave me an idea. Whats the legality of a silenced blackpowder gun?
Or one that is integrally suppressed so you cant take it off?
>>28547221
That being said there are a few muzzle loaders that do require a 4473, but that is because they are built on a platform that is easily convertible to a "firearm." The Mossman 500 muzzle loader comes to mind.
>>28548778
just use a plastic pop bottle
is this an improved arms thread or classic ballistic ball shot, pre rifling.
>>28550746
no, just thread about gun laws of different countries regarding muzzle loaders or breech loading muskets that doesn't use metal case for ammo
>>28547683
Christie pardoned him.
>>28548778
The silencer would still be an nfa item
>>28547158
depends on your state, NJ considers them assault weapons but the rest of the country they can be mail ordered to your door
>>28547645
you could always do like the original gatling gun and use pre loaded chambers that cycle through and maybe something like a maynard tape prime system, i think the reason we don't see them is because its easier to build a compressed air mg and most inventive types have gone that route or tried to do shit like coil guns
>>28547158
Even in the Socialist Republic of Britbongistan we can own black-powder weapons.
>>28547180
>treating Europe as a single country
There is literally nothing in common between the gun laws of some countries here FFS.
>>28554069
how the fuck is black powder weapon assult weapon?! do jersey people think they can tactical reload like a M4?
In NY black powder pistols do not have to be registered on your pistol permit as long as you don't have the materials to fire them
So you can have the gun without pistol permit as long as you have no balls
