First let me apologize for this post being so long .
As well as high jacking this thread .
I really didn�t mean to do that . But I think it�s a subject that we all need to consider and talk about .
Its not about modern vs. traditional . Its about both . Its about us all .
Hell its not even about banning smokeless powder for muzzle loading . As I have said before . . There is no reason why smokeless cannot be used when done properly .
All im saying is lets take a minute and look back over the development in the last 20 years . Then look ahead and ask ourselves if we are ready for the consequences.
All I ask is that we think about as truly i believe it will effect us all .
.
Thats why NO ONE offers that design anymore. Its why all H&R muzzleloader breach plugs NOW have threads. I never said all break actions were dangerous
Actually the big reason is that the Federal laws state that in order to qualify as a non FFL weapon , the design cannot be readily converted to center fire .
Savage ran into that with the early ML10 design which is an . Bad bull also had this issue . But they chose to go a different route and just make a FFL required rifle .
Ill get to more of that in a second .
If it loads from the muzzle ONLY its a muzzleloader PERIOD. It may not be traditional but its a muzzleloader as defined by law. Its not a form 4473 firearm.
The difference is one is a firearm and the other is not since it can not be loaded from the breach with a current production cartridge.
Being capable of loading from the breech with a "current" production cartridge has nothing to do with it . its any avalable fixed ammunition which includes BP loads . . Nor does loading from the muzzle . It has to do with the frame or receiver .
Please re -read 18 U.S.C. � 921(a)(16)
Take note of the following in section C
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.
Im not going to get into a traditional vs. modern argument with you. It has nothing to do with that . What im trying to tell you is that if we as a shooting discipline , read as ALL muzzle loading people , don�t start policing ourselves and stop interpreting things out of context , we are going to end up sucking pond water and IMO will have no right to complain when the fed does the same thing . Which by the way they are already doing .
When the ATF say
�ATF has previously determined that certain muzzle loading models are firearms and subject to the provisions of the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA). All of these guns incorporate the frame or receiver of a firearm that is capable of accepting other barrels designed to fire conventional rimfire or centerfire fixed ammunition. Therefore, these muzzle loading models do not meet the definition of �antique firearm� as that term is defined in the above-cited � 921(a)(16) and are �firearms� as defined in 18 U.S.C. � 921(a)(3)
Furthermore, as firearms, the models described above, as well as other similar models, regardless of installed barrel type, are subject to all provisions of the GCA. Persons who purchase these firearms from licensed dealers are required to fill out ATF Form 4473 and are subject to a National Instant Background Check System (NICS) check. Convicted felons and certain other persons are prohibited from receiving and possessing these firearms.
The following is a list of weapons that load from the muzzle and remain classified as firearms, not antiques, under the purview of the GCA since they incorporate the frame or receiver of a firearm:
Savage Model 10ML (early, 1st version).
Mossberg 500 shotgun with muzzle loading barrel.
Remington 870 shotgun with muzzle loading barrel.
Mauser 98 rifle with muzzle loading barrel.
SKS rifle with muzzle loading barrel
RPB sM10 pistol with muzzle loading barrel.
H&R/New England Firearm Huntsman.
Thompson Center Encore/Contender.
Rossi .50 muzzle loading rifle.
This list is not complete and it frequently changes; therefore, there may be other muzzle loaders also classified as firearms. As noted, any muzzleloader weapon that is built on a firearm frame or receiver falls within the definition of a firearm provided in � 921(a)(3).
Now I ask you . Who in the hell is the ATF to determine anything. They are enforcement not courts .
Now maybe you missed it so ill bring it up again .
I have a bone stock Pieta reproduction of a colt 1860 . it�s considered a muzzleloader and no form 4473 is required .
How long do you think its going to be with the current gun ban push , before the ATF realizes that and a whole hand full of other black powder revolvers , fall under what I just posted above ?
Do you realize that there are people who are suggesting that ALL muzzleloaders , traditional and modern should be required to be sold through an FFL with full back ground and registration. that�s not just production guns either. There is talk of even requiring SN# and registration , on muzzleloaders made by those who make traditional long rifles like myself .. �NOTE : im not one of them � frankly I think its stupid and just another attempt by the Anti�s to track us all down .
But frankly I see a day when there is a very real chance that�s going to happen �IF� its not already being implemented with obamas new gun laws .
Why exactly do you think they are doing that Overkill ?
I can achieve over 2500fps with BH209 and a 200gr ST, are you suggesting BH209 should be banned also? Are you suggesting a ML can be banned based solely on how much fps or fpe it can generate?
I can break over 2300fps with T7 and a 200gr SST. Should it be banned also? That can even be done without a 209 primer.
Load data for Pyro pellets claims over 2400fps with a 155gr bullet in a 45cal sabot. Should it be banned also? Thats similar to a 7mm-08 at the muzzle.
I know,,,, lets ban all powders except real BP and require you to use heavy conicals so its impossible to break 1500 fps. Oh... but wait those are effective killers too. Oops those loads can beat a 45/70 405gr trap door load.
Darn it, i thought i had the solution.
Why do you think you had a solution , what you just did was prove my point .
Why would you stop at allowing real Black powder when it also will produce the same load for the 45.70.
In fact we can get very near those same muzzle velocities from in a 36 or 45 cal shooting a round ball . Do you think a 71 gr, RB want kill you at just over 2200ftps ????
What do you think I would get if I used that same charge an stuck a 139 grain , 6mm boattail with a sabot down that bore ???
The more and more we push the point where more and more shooters pushing center fire performance, realizing just what these guns are capable of ,the easier its going to be to simply disregard keeping muzzle loading guns separate from all these regulations.
Even more so once the use of smokeless powder becomes popular .
Why , because more an more people are going to start looking at the actual numbers . Thus making that comparison.
So folks don�t think im harping just on modern guns, please bear with me just a few minutes longer .
Currently we are seeing folks wanting to ban high capacity magazines .Were not talking 20 and 30 round clips . We are now down to talking 10 .
Just a few days back I posted a link to modern air rifles . Most of you probably past right over that .
But do you realize that the Girandoni air rifle as used by Lewis and Clark in their famous expedition, by that time the design it was some 20 - 30 years old and in fact had been designed and used in combat . It also carries a large 21 round magazine which loads a new ball with the simple push of a slide lever . The magazine also loads the balls at the breech . So no need to ram a ball home
The rifle is also said to be able to fire up to 40 rounds without and noticeable loss in performance .
Which even at 100 yards is more then adequate enough to putting a 44 cal round through a 1 inch pine board .
Its rate of fire is said to be as great as 22 rounds in 30 seconds . that info can be checked through the NRA web site
how many of you realized that . I would bet not many . Most likely because you never thought about it or looked
Granted , right now we are talking low base smokeless powders that produce in the ball part of BP. But its not going to stay that way as its realized that so much more is capable .
Once again im not talking about banning anything . Im also not talking modern vs. Traditional . What im saying is we better start thinking about where exactly it is we are heading and why . For if we don�t we better not cry when the anti gun groups start crawling up our back side with a microscope and thus realize that they have us all by the Nuts