What did you do today

[Zulch]

Very early on, I think the Colt factory put out some 1860s with 7 1/2 inch barrels. Very few though, even the McCulloch Colt was 8 inches.
The repros I have are all 8 inches.  That’s standard 1860.
Get your ruler out, Zulch.

Thank you G. Got the ruler out. You are absolutely correct.

[Captainkirk]

WRT the 1860...To my eyes, it looks a little more 'modern' (if you will) with it's sculpted, finely radiused lines than your typical C&B revolver (read; Walker, Dragoon, '51 Navy, Remington) but owning two of them (one Goonerized) I can't dispute that they are beautiful to behold, superbly balanced, and the creeping loading lever is a marvel in itself (no rattles to give you away to the Comanches!)
Like G, I was struck hard at the tender age of 9, where I decided right then and there that a 2nd Dragoon was in my future.

[Len]

Hi Len.  You can call Colt 60’s “beautiful” if you want to.  I’ve been doing that since I was about nine.  My own appreciation of their aesthetic qualities rages undiminished. ........

Hello G Dog. Thanks for your permission!
What I always liked, was the kind of fluid form of the round barrel just sneaking into the underbelly of the rammer. No octagonals, no sharp corners, no steps. I guess it was all drop forged (die forged). To mill that form out in the 1860ies would have been hard, no CNC and such.

[G Dog]

Hey Len - I didn’t mean to sound beneficent, as if I were granting some sort of dispensation.  I’ll defend our right to call 60’s “beautiful”, any time, because they are, bye gawd and boi-howdy they are.

[Clydesdale4x4]

I watched the whole thing (for my sins) and I agree with you, Zulch. 
That jitterbug on the vid made way too much about cap & balls not being firearms. He did try to clarify a little, but how many times did we hear “not a firearm, not a firearm”?  True, for sales, transfers and background checks.  But for every other aspect of criminal liability - they’re definitely firearms.  Felons who are not permitted to possess firearms can’t have a C&B because (wait for it) … it’s a firearm.  Can’t carry one or park it in your vehicle without a permit because it’s a firearm.  If you brandish one in a “rude, angry or threatening manner”,  it’s a firearm. If one robs the local hadji-mart using one, it gets charged as a robbery with a firearm enhancement. I’ve done that,
(not the robbery but adding the enhancement as another count in the complaint) and it’s good for another eight or ten years.  If  DeKiefrie is a previously convicted felon, that’s count three and so on.  The biggest misconception in our sport is that because, for a couple of narrow purposes, cap and ball is not a firearm - it’s not a firearm generally.  Try walking one into a courthouse.

And when I became a felon in 1993 in the great state of Idaho for... (wait for it, Nah, not screwing children, nope, no armed robbery? Heroin? Ninja please...) Driving w/o Privileges, yup sober as a judge all three times, (3!!!!!) just suspended, and on my way to work, all but the last, (in the city they say ya get pulled over for DWB, Driving While Black, here? It's DWP, Driving While Poor- which is why I maintained my suspension for so long, food before SR-22, Rent before SR-22, etc.) when I was on my way back from the drug store with medicine for my sick infant...

I was allowed per the rules of my probation to have BlackPowder firearms and a crossbow.

I haven't paid attention, rights are restored, Hell, the crime is so old it's not even digitized, it's microfiche... but.

When did the laws change?

[WECSOG]

Let’s do an experiment. The next time you take a commercial flight, put one  unloaded (!) in your carry-on luggage,  let them scan the bag,
find the not a firearm and then let us know when you get out of jail.  The experience will be a real education for you.  As to felons, who can  only use one as a club … I won’t even bloody start. 

As they say in Kraut:
völliger Unsinn

Commercial flights have nothing to do with the topic at hand. Putting a kitchen knife in carry-on luggage would have the same result, whether one is a felon or not. Does that mean kitchen knives are illegal to own?
You mention the Internet. Are you not a guy on the Internet who is putting forth his opinion as fact? I did get my information on the Internet. Specifically, atf.gov. Here is what they have to say about it:

Can a person prohibited by law from possessing a firearm acquire and use a black
powder muzzle loading firearm?
The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) prohibits felons and certain other persons from possessing
or receiving firearms and ammunition (“prohibited persons”). These categories can be found at
18 U.S.C. § 922(g) and (n) in http://www.atf.gov/files/publications/download/p/atf-p-5300-4.pdf.
However, Federal law does not prohibit these persons from possessing or receiving an antique
firearm. The term “antique firearm” means any firearm (including any firearm with a matchlock,
flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system) manufactured in or before 1898.
The definition includes any replica of an antique firearm if it is not designed or redesigned for
using rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition, or uses rimfire or conventional
centerfire ammunition which is no longer manufactured in the United States, and which is not
readily available in ordinary channels of commercial trade. Further, any muzzle loading rifle,
shotgun, or pistol which is designed to use black powder or black powder substitute, and which
cannot use fixed ammunition, is an “antique firearm” unless it (1) incorporates a firearm frame or
receiver; (2) is a firearm which is converted into a muzzle loading weapon; or (3) is a muzzle loading weapon which can be readily converted to fire fixed ammunition by replacing the barrel,
bolt, breechblock, or any combination thereof. See 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3), (a)(16).
Thus, a muzzle loading weapon that meets the definition of an “antique firearm” is not a firearm
and may lawfully be received and possessed by a prohibited person under the GCA.
In addition, the GCA defines the term “ammunition” to mean “ammunition or cartridge cases,
primers, bullets, or propellant powder designed for use in any firearm.” Because an “antique
firearm” is not a “firearm,” it would be lawful for a prohibited person to receive or possess black
powder designed for use in an “antique firearm.” Also, the Federal explosives laws do not make
it unlawful for a prohibited person to acquire and possess black powder in quantities not
exceeding fifty pounds if it is intended to be used solely for sporting, recreational, or cultural
purposes in “antique firearms.” See 18 U.S.C. § 845(a)(5)
By contrast, a prohibited person may not receive or possess black powder firearms that can be
readily converted to fire fixed ammunition by replacing the barrel, bolt, breechblock, or any
combination thereof. ATF has classified certain muzzle loading models as firearms. All of these
models incorporate the frame or receiver of a firearm that is capable of accepting barrels
designed to fire conventional rimfire or centerfire fixed ammunition. These muzzle loading
models do not meet the definition of “antique firearm” as that term is defined in 18 U.S.C. §
921(a)(16), and are “firearms” as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3). Furthermore, as firearms,
these and similar models, regardless of the barrel installed on the firearm or provided with the
firearm, are subject to all provisions of the GCA. Persons who purchase these firearms from
licensed dealers are required to fill out a Firearms Transaction Record, ATF Form 4473, and are
subject to a National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) check. Felons and
other prohibited persons may not lawfully receive or possess these firearms or ammunition.
The following is a list of weapons that load from the muzzle and are classified as firearms, not
antiques, under the GCA, because 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
• PB 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 frequently changes. There may be other muzzle loaders also
classified as firearms. As noted, any muzzle loading weapon that is built on a firearm frame or
receiver falls within the definition of a firearm provided in 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3).
Finally, even though a prohibited person may lawfully possess an antique firearm under Federal
law, State or local law may classify such weapons as “firearms” subject to regulation. Any
person considering acquiring a black powder weapon should contact his or her State Attorney
General’s Office to inquire about the laws and possible State or local restrictions.

Source: https://www.atf.gov/resource-center/docs/0813-firearms-top-12-qaspdf/download

[G Dog]

The defendants that I’ve prosecuted for BP  “non-firearm” offenses should’ve had you as their defense attorney.  Maybe then they would have beaten the bum rap, but I doubt it. 

Citing a ton of legislation is not the same as understanding  what it means.  Have you ever read even one case interpreting this stuff? Legislation means what the courts interpret it’s meaning to be.  You may not like the results but wishful thinking is not legal analysis. After reading your effort-post, it’s clear you don’t have a clue. 

One more time :  For a very narrow range of purposes (purchase,sales, transfers, background checks, shipping) black powder guns are not considered to be firearms.  For a vary broad range of purposes, the criminal liability type, they are  firearms.  That’s just how it is. Trying to wish away reality changes nothing.

[WECSOG]

The defendants that I’ve prosecuted for BP  “non-firearm” offenses should’ve had you as their defense attorney.  Maybe then they would have beaten the bum rap, but I doubt it. 

Citing a ton of legislation is not the same as understanding  what it means.  Have you ever read even one case interpreting this stuff? Legislation means what the courts interpret it’s meaning to be.  You may not like the results but wishful thinking is not legal analysis. After reading your effort-post, it’s clear you don’t have a clue. 

One more time :  For a very narrow range of purposes (purchase,sales, transfers, background checks, shipping) black powder guns are not considered to be firearms.  For a vary broad range of purposes, the criminal liability type, they are  firearms.  That’s just how it is. Trying to wish away reality changes nothing.

\
Wow. Way to completely make up a straw man argument. Here, let me help you out with a quote of my original post that you had such a problem with:

Federally, a c&b revolver is not a firearm... until you put that conversion cylinder in it. So a felon had better just keep it c&b. I'm not sure how the feds would view a felon owning the cylinder and a revolver it fits (but not assembled into the gun), but it's a moot point because possession of ammo for it is also forbidden.

States can and often do have more restrictive laws on the issue. And, carrying it is a state issue. In a lot of states, if you load it and carry it it's a firearm.

Where in that did I mention anything about it being A-OK for a felon to go ahead and commit crimes with a C&B revolver? If you must argue and try to belittle someone, please leave me out of it because I never said anything even remotely resembling what you are arguing against.

[Bishop Creek]

I first watched that video about a year ago, I admit that it irritated me that he kept repeating that it was not a firearm. G Dog is right for all intents and purposes it is a firearm as D Dog so carefully explains and actually is considered a firearm under every gun law known to man as soon as you put a conversion cylinder in it. And yes, it appears to be a Howell's or Taylors conversion cylinder. 

(In case anyone is wondering, I was replying to Zulch's post from July 24th, mistakenly believing it was posted today).

[G Dog]

WECSOG —
Whatever, dude.  I’m at a loss as to what sort of point you’re trying to make beyond that it’s OK for a convicted felon, prior to whatever rehabilitation a State may allow, to be in possession of a C&B because a C&B is not a firearm.  That’s what you quoted yourself as saying and what I said was bullshit.  Still do.  So, let’s try it this way: do what they tell first semester law students to do - identify the issue.  What have I said that you believe to be untrue? Then (the hard part), why. 

As far as strawmen and feeling belittled  go - can’t help much with that.  Maybe find a safe-space, have a cookie.

[WECSOG]

WECSOG —
Whatever, dude.  I’m at a loss as to what sort of point you’re trying to make beyond that it’s OK for a convicted felon, prior to whatever rehabilitation a State may allow, to be in possession of a C&B because a C&B is not a firearm.  That’s what you quoted yourself as saying and what I said was bullshit.  Still do.  So, let’s try it this way: do what they tell first semester law students to do - identify the issue.  What have I said that you believe to be untrue? Then (the hard part), why. 

As far as strawmen and feeling belittled  go - can’t help much with that.  Maybe find a safe-space, have a cookie.

Don't "whatever dude" me. My original point was that a felon should not consider getting a conversion cylinder for his c&b revolver, because that would make it a firearm. And, that some state laws are more stringent than federal law, so the convicted felon should look at his state laws for guidance. I stated exactly those points, and nothing else.

You immediately took me to task and started pointing out all kinds of crimes that would get anyone (not just a convicted felon) an enhanced sentence even if he was carrying a water pistol.
 
Here's the thing: I couldn't care less what you think. Just because you have a problem with federal law as I cut and pasted, with source link, from a BATFE document, is no skin off my teeth. That's your problem. Although if you are a federal cop or a lawyer working in a federal court, that's a pretty big problem, albeit not necessarily uncommon. But again, your problem, not mine.

I would suggest working on that reading comprehension, though.

[WECSOG]

WECSOG —
Whatever, dude.  I’m at a loss as to what sort of point you’re trying to make beyond that it’s OK for a convicted felon, prior to whatever rehabilitation a State may allow, to be in possession of a C&B because a C&B is not a firearm.  That’s what you quoted yourself as saying and what I said was bullshit.  Still do.  So, let’s try it this way: do what they tell first semester law students to do - identify the issue.  What have I said that you believe to be untrue? Then (the hard part), why. 

As far as strawmen and feeling belittled  go - can’t help much with that.  Maybe find a safe-space, have a cookie.

Oh, and by the way: this latest was the first post where you claimed that the BATFE document is incorrect. And here are quotes of everything else you said about it, as proof. Just in case you decide to pretend otherwise. Because you already claimed that you had been saying that from the first. As you can see here, that is completely untrue.
Here's what you were saying before:

One more time :  For a very narrow range of purposes (purchase,sales, transfers, background checks, shipping) black powder guns are not considered to be firearms.  For a vary broad range of purposes, the criminal liability type, they are  firearms.  That’s just how it is. Trying to wish away reality changes nothing.

And where specifically did I mention using it for any "criminal liability" purpose?
Answer: nowhere.

The defendants that I’ve prosecuted for BP  “non-firearm” offenses should’ve had you as their defense attorney.  Maybe then they would have beaten the bum rap, but I doubt it. 

Citing a ton of legislation is not the same as understanding  what it means.  Have you ever read even one case interpreting this stuff? Legislation means what the courts interpret it’s meaning to be.  You may not like the results but wishful thinking is not legal analysis. After reading your effort-post, it’s clear you don’t have a clue. 

One more time :  For a very narrow range of purposes (purchase,sales, transfers, background checks, shipping) black powder guns are not considered to be firearms.  For a vary broad range of purposes, the criminal liability type, they are  firearms.  That’s just how it is. Trying to wish away reality changes nothing.

“Federally, a c&b revolver is not a firearm... until you put that conversion cylinder in it. So a felon had better just keep it c&b”. WECSOG

Ok, this is the Internet but there it is again - the same GD’d statement on nine wheels.  You make me think of Psalms 115,  SOG.

Let’s do an experiment. The next time you take a commercial flight, put one  unloaded (!) in your carry-on luggage,  let them scan the bag,
find the not a firearm and then let us know when you get out of jail.  The experience will be a real education for you.  As to felons, who can  only use one as a club … I won’t even bloody start. 

As they say in Kraut:
völliger Unsinn

[Captainkirk]

Let's agree to disagree, fellers. Don't want to lock this thread, ok?

[G Dog]

Whew, boy.  I’m in complete accord with that, mi capitán.

[WECSOG]

Same here.