22 LR ammo boxes have a warning That's 2200 yards so how far is the limit they are trying to set with a shotgun?
RR

You think you are telling me something I do not know? If you read my post you will see that it may just be perception of the people in populated areas that caused the shotgun only areas. However, it doen't matter. Each state has the right to set regulations regarding legal firearms for hunting and the question is, is the firearm in question an attempt to circumvent those regulations that are in place. You can call a cow a goose, however, that doesn't make it a goose. You can call a rifle a shotgun, but it doesn;t make it a shotgun.

:throw: Really? A long range shooter such as yourself really want's to try saying that? Hell I can take my super speed compound Gorilla bow strung at 95 pounds, elevate it to a 35 degree angle and take out a human being 550 yards away with a damn good bit of luck and no wind. That's about the same argument that you just posted. What's POSSIBLE and what's PROBABLE are 2 VERY different questions. A POSSIBLE accidental shooting at a great distance from a .22l is HIGHLY improbable. While a POSSIBLE accidental shooting from a large caliber firearm such as these at a great distance is HIGHLY more probable. Now granted, these range limitations that are imposed upon us in the shotgun only states are more for perceived safety and not actual reality, the inherent limited range of a slug is a bit safer in populated areas.

you really don't get it do you? ponder on it awhile and I'll enlighten you
RR

I do believe you are the one needing enlightenment youngin since you have obviously missed the points made by several of us. You seem to be just wanting to argue.

My problem isn't with these firearms he is making. Hell more power to him (pun intended :patriot: ) I just feel that using these firearms in regulated areas for shotgun only is just too much. They completely negate the restrictions imposed. Whether those restrictions are based off of perceived safety or actual safety is a moot point. The point is, the restrictions are there and these firearms, while cutting edge and creative as hell, are way beyond the perceived safety limitations to range. Plain and simple. Too the point. Hopefully you are now enlightened.

Ed, I'm seriously NOT trying to say that your firearms are not fantastic creations and hell if I was about 10 years younger (as well as 4 or 5 shoulder injuries less) I would more than likely be right there with you making them, shooting them, and having a blast (hey another pun! Go figure :p ) As I said a few weeks ago, I have my share of big bore T-Rex slaying bolder throwers. I just don't feel that they should be allowed in a shotgun only regulated area. Just my opinion bud. Keep on making them as they are interesting and ingenious.

I cut out most of your post to save space, and because it's all irrelevant drivel.

Yes, indeed, the federal government definition for firearms is what states are bound to use for firearms classification. If they choose to refute that definition, then the courts require that they provide their own assessment standard, made public, which has not been established by any state in our union.

Do not confuse REGULATION with DEFINITION. Firearm classification is DEFINED by the federal government, so a DEFINED shotgun is still DEFINED as a shotgun in all 50 states. That's federal law that the states CANNOT violate those definitions and try to re-DEFINE what constitutes a given firearm class.

Now, the states are allowed to REGULATE what they allow for ownership and hunting use, but they are NOT allowed to change the DEFINITION of the firearm. A state can say that they won't allow single projectile shotguns, rifled barrels, high cap magazines, laser sights, night vision, or even purple painted guns, but they cannot change the defined classification of the firearm.

When you get your FFL, they'll teach you that.

Look sunshine, by the way the word is drivel, not dribble, a state can designate what firearms are legal and the law can dictate what a firearm must be to be legal in that state. Don't try to blow smoke up my keister, I used to write some of those definitions both for law and regulation. I have not confused anything, definitions of legal weapons are in both regulations and in the law for use in hunting. You would be better served not trying to tell someone who was involved in setting regulations and law what the states can and cannot do. You may know a lot about firearms, no doubt about that, however, you know little about the laws governing hunting in individual states.


For example, to be legal for the flintlock muzzle loader season in PA a firearm had to have a flintlock ignition system described by the following regulation: 1) Permitted devices. It is lawful to hunt deer during the flintlock muzzleloading deer season with a flintlock muzzleloading firearm. The firearm must be an original or similar reproduction of muzzleloading firearm manufactured prior to 1800. The firearm’s ignition mechanism must consist of a hammer containing a naturally occurring stone that is spring propelled onto an iron or steel frizzen which, in turn, creates sparks to ignite a priming powder. The firearm must have open sights and be a .44 caliber or larger single-barrel long gun or a .50 caliber or larger single-barrel handgun that propels single-projectile ammunition.

(2) Prohibitions. While hunting deer during the flintlock muzzleloading deer season, it is unlawful to:

(i) Use manmade materials attached to the hammer or frizzen to create sparks.


A state can describe the qualifications of a firearm that is legal to use in a particular season, regardless of what the federal law calls the firearm. The feds have no athority to tell the states what is legal and illegal in a state to use for hunting purposes. A flintlock is not necessarily a legal flintlock and a muzzleloader is not necessarily a legal muzzleloader to hunt with in a particular state. This is one example. The long reach of the federal government does not extend to telling the states what firearm they must allow to be used for hunting in a particular state. If a state decides that the 24 ga. so called shotgun with a rifled barrel shooting a metal cartridge loaded with a bullet and not a rifled slug, metal or plactic hull, does not meet their definition of a legal weapon in their shotgun only areas, they have every legal right to do so. While the feds have the authority to define what is a shotgun, handgun or rifle for the purposes of buying and selling firearms, they don't get to tell individual states what they must allow for hunting in their state, unless the hunting is for a federally protected animal or bird, other than that it is a matter of states rights. You are confused, between sale of or the changing of hands of firearms with state hunting laws. Two entirely different animals!

I don't think Oldtimr needs to be schooled on this and I don't know why you're getting all over him in regards to his statements because what he has been saying all along, as well as what super hunt54 and I have stated regarding these firearms Ed is making, is exactly what you have just stated agreeing with him in your last paragraph! None of us have made any statements regarding the BATFE and their gun classifications, but rather what the individual states can accept or reject in regards to hunting in this particular thread.

Thanks for the catch - voice-to-type on my iPhone isn't always perfect.

Show me one single state law that REDEFINES a firearm classification, then we can talk.

What you outlined about the flintlock REGULATION does not change the DEFINED CLASSIFICATION of the firearm. It's still a muzzle loader, but PA REGULATES that only a certain type of muzzle loader is allowed.

PA isn't saying that a muzzle loader isn't a muzzle loader. They're only saying that a certain type of muzzle loader is allowed, and others are disallowed.

Shotgun only states are free to say "no brass cartridges" or "no rifled barrels" but that wasn't the conversation. Without a more specific regulation, a "shotgun only" law would NOT exclude a Savage 212 or one of Ed's 12ga from Hell rigs. Legally, it's a shotgun.

So again, show me ONE SINGLE STATE LAW that reclassifies a firearm - meaning a shotgun becomes a rifle, a rifle becomes a pistol, etc etc. that is in variance to the BATFE definition for that particular classification.

Statements were made that suggested a shotgun isn't a shotgun just because it has brass cartridges, a rifled barrel, and a single projectile:

The state can NEVER call it a rifle. States are free to decide that these models offer an unsporting advantage, so can change their law to reflect that "shotguns" with these certain characteristics are not allowed, or they can make "disallowed lists" that prohibits these specific firearms, and I would have no problem with that, but THE STATE CANNOT SAY THAT A CLASSIFIED SHOTGUN IS NOW CLASSIFIED AS A RIFLE!

States regulate all kinds of stuff, 6" barrel minimums, caliber minimums, kinetic energy minimums, poundage maximums and minimums on bows, etc etc. That's all well and good, but they cannot say that a shotgun is now a rifle.

Here's an example - several years ago, I was planning a hunting trip to a "non-rifle" state. They allowed shotguns and handguns, just no rifles. Now, I found out in my research that they didn't allow single shot rifles with barrels over 14" (maybe 12"?), eliminating contender or stryker type specialty pistols. THEY DIDN'T TRY SAYING THAT A HANDGUN WAS A RIFLE - but they deemed that there was an unsporting advantage for long barreled break or bolt action handguns, so they disallowed them BY REGULATION. They did not reclassify them as a different type of firearm.

A rifled barreled, brass cartridge shotgun might get disallowed, but it's still a shotgun - not a rifle.