Carry What You Can

imported post

Are you sick of having to disarm to be legal in D.C.? The recent OCer use of a single action pistol to stop the massacre at the Golden Circle Foodmart in Richmond has me thinking.

In D.C. the law uses the federal definition of firearm. Therefore antique firearms, or replicas thereof are not firearms.
From the DC code:

§ 7-2501.01. Definitions [Formerly § 6-2302]...

...(3) "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;

Any replica of any firearm described in subparagraph (A) if such replica:

Is not designed or redesigned for using rim-fire or conventional center-fire fixed ammunition; or

Uses rim-fire or conventional ammunition which is no longer manufactured in the United States and which is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade....

...(9) "Firearm" means any weapon which will, or is designed or redesigned, made or remade, readily converted or restored, and intended to, expel a projectile or projectiles by the action of an explosive; the frame or receiver of any such device; or any firearm muffler or silencer; provided, that such term shall not include:



(A) Antique firearms; or ...



Cite:
[url]http://weblinks.westlaw.com/toc/default.aspx?Abbr=dc%2Dst%2Dweb&Action=ExpandTree&AP=N3CDC68D0913A11DB9BCF9DAC28345A2A&ItemKey=N3CDC68D0913A11DB9BCF9DAC28345A2A&RP=%2Ftoc%2Fdefault%2Ewl&Service=TOC&RS=WEBL8.11&VR=2.0&SPa=DCC-1000&fragment#N3CDC68D0913A11DB9BCF9DAC28345A2A[/url]

This gun is pretty good protection and as far as I can tell, legal in D.C.







[/b]
1861 Navy .36 w. Walnut Grips (steel) 1861 Navy model steel frame single action black powder revolver in .36 calibre with steel backstrap and trigger guard, European walnut grips and 8" round barrel.

imported post

§ 7-2501.01,[font="Verdana,Helvetica"][font="Verdana,Helvetica"]Title 7. Human Health Care and Safety, [/font][/font][font="Verdana,Helvetica"][font="Verdana,Helvetica"]Subtitle J. Public Safety, [/font][/font][font="Verdana,Helvetica"][font="Verdana,Helvetica"]Chapter 25. Firearms Control, [/font][/font][font="Verdana,Helvetica"][font="Verdana,Helvetica"]Unit A. Firearms Control Regulations[/font][/font] is prefaced by "[font="Verdana,Helvetica"][font="Verdana,Helvetica"]As used in this unit the term:" Therefore, the definition of a firearm that you cited, which excludes antique firearms, only applies to Unit A of Title 7, Subtitle J, Chapter 25.

[/font][/font]§ 22-4501, Title 22. Criminal Offenses and Penalties, Subtitle VI. Regulation and Possession of Weapons, Chapter 45. Weapons and Possession of Weapons contains the following definition:

(2A) Firearm means any weapon, regardless of operability, which will, or is designed or redesigned, made or remade, readily converted, restored, or repaired, or is intended to, expel a projectile or projectiles by the action of an explosive. The term firearm shall not include:
(1) A destructive device as that term is defined in § 7-2501.01(7);
(2) A device used exclusively for line throwing, signaling, or safety, and required or recommended by the Coast Guard or Interstate Commerce Commission; or
(3) A device used exclusively for firing explosive rivets, stud cartridges, or similar industrial ammunition and incapable for use as a weapon.

Click to expand...

I'm afraid even the single-action, black-powder revolver would violate various sections of Title 22, Chapter 45.

I have not found any prohibition of bb or pellet guns in the DC code, though I would expect the prohibition to be there somewhere. Not that I would ever do it (I'm not that crazy or naive), but does anyone know the legal status of carrying bb/pellet guns in DC?

imported post

(3) A device used exclusively for firing explosive rivets, stud cartridges, or similar industrial ammunition and incapable for use as a weapon.

I can't have explosive bullets, but can have explosive rivets. Anyone know where
to buy 45 cal explosive rivets?
Might also fall under the no longer manufactured and normal channels exemptions.
I've never seen them at wall mart.

But it doesn't matter, the only crime in our capital is you evil PA, & VA guns
sneaking over the river. So you don't need to worry about gangsters.

imported post

virginiatuck wrote:

§ 7-2501.01,[font=Verdana,Helvetica][font=Verdana,Helvetica]Title 7. Human Health Care and Safety, [/font][/font][font=Verdana,Helvetica][font=Verdana,Helvetica]Subtitle J. Public Safety, [/font][/font][font=Verdana,Helvetica][font=Verdana,Helvetica]Chapter 25. Firearms Control, [/font][/font][font=Verdana,Helvetica][font=Verdana,Helvetica]Unit A. Firearms Control Regulations[/font][/font] is prefaced by "[font=Verdana,Helvetica][font=Verdana,Helvetica]As used in this unit the term:" Therefore, the definition of a firearm that you cited, which excludes antique firearms, only applies to Unit A of Title 7, Subtitle J, Chapter 25.

[/font][/font]§ 22-4501, Title 22. Criminal Offenses and Penalties, Subtitle VI. Regulation and Possession of Weapons, Chapter 45. Weapons and Possession of Weapons contains the following definition:

(2A) Firearm means any weapon, regardless of operability, which will, or is designed or redesigned, made or remade, readily converted, restored, or repaired, or is intended to, expel a projectile or projectiles by the action of an explosive. The term firearm shall not include:
(1) A destructive device as that term is defined in § 7-2501.01(7);
(2) A device used exclusively for line throwing, signaling, or safety, and required or recommended by the Coast Guard or Interstate Commerce Commission; or
(3) A device used exclusively for firing explosive rivets, stud cartridges, or similar industrial ammunition and incapable for use as a weapon.

Click to expand...

I'm afraid even the single-action, black-powder revolver would violate various sections of Title 22, Chapter 45.

I have not found any prohibition of bb or pellet guns in the DC code, though I would expect the prohibition to be there somewhere. Not that I would ever do it (I'm not that crazy or naive), but does anyone know the legal status of carrying bb/pellet guns in DC?

Click to expand...

section 22-4513 excludes antique handguns.

imported post

Thundar wrote:

virginiatuck wrote:

§ 7-2501.01,[font="Verdana,Helvetica"][font="Verdana,Helvetica"]Title 7. Human Health Care and Safety, [/font][/font][font="Verdana,Helvetica"][font="Verdana,Helvetica"]Subtitle J. Public Safety, [/font][/font][font="Verdana,Helvetica"][font="Verdana,Helvetica"]Chapter 25. Firearms Control, [/font][/font][font="Verdana,Helvetica"][font="Verdana,Helvetica"]Unit A. Firearms Control Regulations[/font][/font] is prefaced by "[font="Verdana,Helvetica"][font="Verdana,Helvetica"]As used in this unit the term:" Therefore, the definition of a firearm that you cited, which excludes antique firearms, only applies to Unit A of Title 7, Subtitle J, Chapter 25.

[/font][/font]§ 22-4501, Title 22. Criminal Offenses and Penalties, Subtitle VI. Regulation and Possession of Weapons, Chapter 45. Weapons and Possession of Weapons contains the following definition:

(2A) Firearm means any weapon, regardless of operability, which will, or is designed or redesigned, made or remade, readily converted, restored, or repaired, or is intended to, expel a projectile or projectiles by the action of an explosive. The term firearm shall not include:
(1) A destructive device as that term is defined in § 7-2501.01(7);
(2) A device used exclusively for line throwing, signaling, or safety, and required or recommended by the Coast Guard or Interstate Commerce Commission; or
(3) A device used exclusively for firing explosive rivets, stud cartridges, or similar industrial ammunition and incapable for use as a weapon.

Click to expand...

I'm afraid even the single-action, black-powder revolver would violate various sections of Title 22, Chapter 45.

I have not found any prohibition of bb or pellet guns in the DC code, though I would expect the prohibition to be there somewhere. Not that I would ever do it (I'm not that crazy or naive), but does anyone know the legal status of carrying bb/pellet guns in DC?

Click to expand...

section 22-4513 excludes antique handguns.

Click to expand...

Not all...

§ 22-4513: Except as provided in § 22-4502, § 22-4504(b), and § 22-4514(b), this chapter shall not apply to toy or antique pistols unsuitable for use as firearms.

Click to expand...

Would you carry antique pistols unsuitable for use as firearms for self-defense?

(reference)

imported post

Ever see what a flare gun will do at close range? It ain't pretty... but it's real effective.

imported post

That would be so legal! and carriable, either CC or OC and it would be affective. make sure to bring extra ammo, so you can signal the cops to come and draw the chalk line around the bad guy!!!!

imported post

2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:

That would be so legal! and carriable, either CC or OC and it would be affective. make sure to bring extra ammo, so you can signal the cops to come and draw the chalk line around the bad guy!!!!

Click to expand...

Just be careful you don't start a fire with that thing. A stray flare in DC could be a disaster.

imported post

After reading this thread: http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-231322.html

It makes me think a legally configured flare gun would not be so useful.

As for the applicability of the codes against antique firearms here are some links to some codes specified in 4513:

Link to 22-4502:

http://weblinks.westlaw.com/result/...UE&ss=CNT&sskey=CLID_SSSA2088623521248&vr=2.0

Link to 22-4504:
http://weblinks.westlaw.com/result/...ault.wl&rs=GVT1.0&service=Search&sp=DCC-1000&

Link to 22-4514
http://weblinks.westlaw.com/result/...ault.wl&rs=GVT1.0&service=Search&sp=DCC-1000&

The three links specify that they apply to imitation firearms, but not necessarily antique firearms.

However, 22.4514 (b) specifies

(b) No person shall within the District of Columbia possess, with intent to use unlawfully against another, an imitation pistol, or a dagger, dirk, razor, stiletto, or knife with a blade longer than 3 inches, or other dangerous weapon.

Click to expand...

I would say an antique firearm would qualify as an other dangerous weapon. I suppose you wouldn't have intent to use unlawfully against another perhaps though.

antique pistols unsuitable for use as firearms.

Click to expand...

Also, I wonder if this would mean that it would have to be incapable of firing to be "unsuitable for use as firearms" or if being antique is the criteria for it being "unsuitable."

imported post

Thundar wrote:

This gun is pretty good protection and as far as I can tell, legal in D.C.








1861 Navy .36 w. Walnut Grips (steel) 1861 Navy model steel frame single action black powder revolver in .36 calibre with steel backstrap and trigger guard, European walnut grips and 8" round barrel.

Click to expand...

Pretty close to what James Butler "Wild Bill" Hickok used (Model 1851 Navy), and it was certainly effective in his hands. But that was Wild Bill.

imported post

Shotgun wrote:

Thundar wrote:

This gun is pretty good protection and as far as I can tell, legal in D.C.








1861 Navy .36 w. Walnut Grips (steel) 1861 Navy model steel frame single action black powder revolver in .36 calibre with steel backstrap and trigger guard, European walnut grips and 8" round barrel.

Click to expand...

Pretty close to what James Butler "Wild Bill" Hickok used (Model 1851 Navy), and it was certainly effective in his hands. But that was Wild Bill.

Click to expand...

I have one... an 1851 Navy .36. It's effective enough in my hands as well. Wars were fought with these things. 'Just a bit slow (and complicated) to load.

imported post

Felid`Maximus wrote:

antique pistols unsuitable for use as firearms.

Click to expand...

Also, I wonder if this would mean that it would have to be incapable of firing to be "unsuitable for use as firearms" or if being antique is the criteria for it being "unsuitable."

Click to expand...

That really is the big question, isn't it?

IMHOunsuitable cannot be the condition or "operability" of the antiquepistol that makes it suitable or not suitable. The firearm definition in this section says as much.

I would argue that it would refer to the use of modern ammunition, because as we know antique firearms or replicas that do not use fixed cartridges are not firearms.

imported post

There are so many references to definitions and exceptions that it may be easier to understand if I replace those defined words with their definitions, and read the code like that.

§ 22-4501(2A) [For the purposes of this chapter, the term:] "Firearm" means any weapon, regardless of operability, which will, or is designed or redesigned, made or remade, readily converted, restored, or repaired, or is intended to, expel a projectile or projectiles by the action of an explosive.

§ 22-4501(6) [For the purposes of this chapter, the term:] "Pistol" shall have the same meaning as provided in § 7-2501.01(12).

§ 7-2501.01[font="Verdana,Helvetica"](12) [/font][As used in this unit the term:] [font="Verdana,Helvetica"]"Pistol" means any firearm originally designed to be fired by use of a single hand or with a barrel less than 12 inches in length.[/font]

§ 7-2501.01[font="Verdana,Helvetica"](9) [/font][As used in this unit the term:] [font="Verdana,Helvetica"]"Firearm" means any weapon, regardless of operability, which will, or is designed or redesigned, made or remade, readily converted, restored, or repaired, or is intended to, expel a projectile or projectiles by the action of an explosive; the frame or receiver of any such device; or any firearm muffler or silencer; provided, that such term shall not include:[/font]
[font="Verdana,Helvetica"](A) Antique firearms;

[/font]§ 7-2501.01(3) [As used in this unit the term:] "Antique firearm" means:
(A) Any firearm (including any firearm with a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system) manufactured in or before 1898; and
(B) Any replica of any firearm described in subparagraph (A) if such replica:
(i) Is not designed or redesigned for using rim-fire or conventional center-fire fixed ammunition; or
(ii) Uses rim-fire or conventional ammunition which is no longer manufactured in the United States and which is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade.

§ 22-4504(a) No person shall carry within the District of Columbia either openly or concealed on or about their person, a pistol, without a license issued pursuant to District of Columbia law, or any deadly or dangerous weapon capable of being so concealed.

§ 22-4513 Except as provided in § 22-4502, § 22-4504(b), and § 22-4514(b), this chapter shall not apply to toy or antique pistols unsuitable for use as firearms.


Let's see if I can make sense of this rubbish they call code. By taking the text of 22-4504(a), I first substitute the word "pistol" with the definition from 7-2501.01(12). This definition uses the word "firearm," though since "firearm" has its own definition in 22-4501(2A) that pertains specifically to Title 22, Chapter 45, I use that definition instead of the definition of "firearm" that pertains only to Title 7, Chapter 25, Unit A. It may also be a valid argument that [font="Verdana,Helvetica"]the definition of "firearm" that is used in the "pistol" definition should be derived from 7-2501.01(9) instead of 22-4501(2A). At this time I think it should be from 22-4501(2A). The definition of "firearm" for the purposes of Title 22, Chapter 45 is intentionally different from the other title(s).[/font] Thus the authors intended for the code within Title 22, Chapter 45 to include "antique firearms." Additionally, the exception from 22-4513 is applied to this section because it is not 22-4502, 22-4504(b), nor 22-4514(b). Again, the definition of "firearm" from 22-4501(2A) is substituted for the word "firearms" used in 22-4513. The words "antique pistol" are also replaced with definitions from Title 7 because these words are not defined in Title 22, therefore they may have the same meaning as defined elsewhere in the code. The only such place is Title 7.

Finally, the only way I can conceive of an antique pistol being unsuitable for use as a weapon, regardless of operability, would be if it were disassembled. If it is assembled, it can be used as a weapon because an observer would have no way of knowing whether or not is is capable of firing. If an observer reasonably believes that it's a real gun and capable of expelling a projectile by the action of an explosive, then for all intents and purposes it is suitable for use as a firearm as defined in 22-4501(2A). So I posit that disassembled antique firearms are excepted from the majority of Title 22, Chapter 45; assembled antique firearms are not excepted.


No person shall carry within the District of Columbia either openly or concealed on or about their person, [ any weapon, regardless of operability, which will, or is designed or redesigned, made or remade, readily converted, restored, or repaired, or is intended to, expel a projectile or projectiles by the action of an explosive [font="Verdana,Helvetica"]originally designed to be fired by use of a single hand or with a barrel less than 12 inches in length, except [/font]toy or any firearm (including any firearm with a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system) manufactured in or before 1898; and any replica if such replica is not designed or redesigned for using rim-fire or conventional center-fire fixed ammunition; or uses rim-fire or conventional ammunition which is no longer manufactured in the United States and which is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade[font="Verdana,Helvetica"][/font] unsuitable for use as any weapon, regardless of operability, which will, or is designed or redesigned, made or remade, readily converted, restored, or repaired, or is intended to, expel a projectile or projectiles by the action of an explosive.[font="Verdana,Helvetica"]], without a license issued pursuant to District of Columbia law, or any deadly or dangerous weapon capable of being so concealed.


[/font]

imported post

Actually... the District remains in direct civil rightsviolations of the 2nd Amendment... and all of this other 'clutter' is the proof of the pudding. I look forward to the day when Federal Marshalls take that entire criminal enterprise which passes for the DC City government out of the buildings in handcuffs... and the Constitution prevails.

imported post

I would concentrate on the word "Explosive" in that statute.

"Firearm" means any weapon which will, or is designed or redesigned, made or remade, readily converted or restored, and intended to, expel a projectile or projectiles by the action of an explosive; the frame or receiver of any such device; or any firearm muffler or silencer; provided, that such term shall not include:

Click to expand...

Modern ammuntion is not filled with an explosive powder, it is by defenition a propellant, The only explosive I am aware of is "GOEX" blackpowder. and when is the last time you have seen that on the shelves? Most everyone moved to Hodgdons muzzleloader propellant.

The primer or percussion cap may be considered an actual explosive due to the "Fulminate of Mercury" used in them is an actual explosive compound (a veryunstable explosive when manufactured at home)

imported post

Nutczak wrote:

I would concentrate on the word "Explosive" in that statute.

"Firearm" means any weapon which will, or is designed or redesigned, made or remade, readily converted or restored, and intended to, expel a projectile or projectiles by the action of an explosive; the frame or receiver of any such device; or any firearm muffler or silencer; provided, that such term shall not include:

Click to expand...

Modern ammuntion is not filled with an explosive powder, it is by defenition a propellant, The only explosive I am aware of is "GOEX" blackpowder. and when is the last time you have seen that on the shelves? Most everyone moved to Hodgdons muzzleloader propellant.

The primer or percussion cap may be considered an actual explosive due to the "Fulminate of Mercury" used in them is an actual explosive compound (a veryunstable explosive when manufactured at home)

Click to expand...

Small arms ammunition is a Class C Explosive 49 CFR Smokeless powder is an 'explosive' 27 CFR, 29 CFR

imported post

Nutczak wrote:

I would concentrate on the word "Explosive" in that statute.

"Firearm" means any weapon which will, or is designed or redesigned, made or remade, readily converted or restored, and intended to, expel a projectile or projectiles by the action of an explosive; the frame or receiver of any such device; or any firearm muffler or silencer; provided, that such term shall not include:

Click to expand...

Modern ammuntion is not filled with an explosive powder, it is by defenition a propellant, The only explosive I am aware of is "GOEX" blackpowder. and when is the last time you have seen that on the shelves? Most everyone moved to Hodgdons muzzleloader propellant.

The primer or percussion cap may be considered an actual explosive due to the "Fulminate of Mercury" used in them is an actual explosive compound (a veryunstable explosive when manufactured at home)

Click to expand...

If the laws, and their definitions of firearms, were written with the word propellant in place of explosive, then firearms would include air guns such as bb, pellet, paintball, blowguns and even nerf guns.

imported post

Does anyone have any thoughts any carrying a blue or orange "training drone", rather than simply an empty holster as a form of protest while in the District?

It does not expel any projectile of any type by any means, and is simply a chunk of plastic (just like my holster), except that it happens to be shaped the same as my daily carry piece.

Could there possibly be some inane restriction on such an item?

imported post

gnbrotz wrote:

Does anyone have any thoughts any carrying a blue or orange "training drone", rather than simply an empty holster as a form of protest while in the District?

It does not expel any projectile of any type by any means, and is simply a chunk of plastic (just like my holster), except that it happens to be shaped the same as my daily carry piece.

Could there possibly be some inane restriction on such an item?

Click to expand...

The short answer would be that you can probably do so within the law. However, I wouldn't do it myself nor would I advise it of anyone else. OC has its merits as a crime deterrent when it's a real firearm capable of being used as a firearm. All bets are off when you OC a fake. I don't know what the repercussions are. Maybe it'd be a good thing for a potential criminal to think you have a firearm; or maybe that plan could backfire somehow. I'll have to do some thinking before I comment too much.

Two things I can say for sure is that an empty holster is honest; a plastic look-alike is dishonest.

And if you carry it in DC daily, you will likely be harassed by the police daily. Because of the law in DC, and their oath to uphold it, they are somewhat obligated to ensure that it is not a real gun and that you do not have a real gun on your person. People will think you have a real gun, even though you don't. I might understand carrying it to a gun-rights protest, march, or rally, etc...


Here are the references that I found in DC code of imitation firearms:

§ 22-4502. Additional penalty for committing crime when armed.
(a) Any person who commits a crime of violence, or a dangerous crime in the District of Columbia when armed with or having readily available any pistol or other firearm (or imitation thereof) or other dangerous or deadly weapon (including a sawed-off shotgun, shotgun, machine gun, rifle, dirk, bowie knife, butcher knife, switchblade knife, razor, blackjack, billy, or metallic or other false knuckles):

§ 22-4504. Carrying concealed weapons; possession of weapons during commission of crime of violence; penalty.
(b) No person shall within the District of Columbia possess a pistol, machine gun, shotgun, rifle, or any other firearm or imitation firearm while committing a crime of violence or dangerous crime as defined in § 22-4501. Upon conviction of a violation of this subsection, the person may be sentenced to imprisonment for a term not to exceed 15 years and shall be sentenced to imprisonment for a mandatory-minimum term of not less than 5 years and shall not be released on parole, or granted probation or suspension of sentence, prior to serving the mandatory-minimum sentence.

§ 22-4513. Exceptions.
Except as provided in § 22-4502, § 22-4504(b), and § 22-4514(b), this chapter shall not apply to toy or antique pistols unsuitable for use as firearms.

§ 22-4514. Possession of certain dangerous weapons prohibited; exceptions.
(b) No person shall within the District of Columbia possess, with intent to use unlawfully against another, an imitation pistol, or a dagger, dirk, razor, stiletto, or knife with a blade longer than 3 inches, or other dangerous weapon.

imported post

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum16/20062-3.html

I thought this issue was already resolved? Was the above thread a hoax?