Rechambering an antique to 25 acp

[H Wally]

Title says it all.

On the one hand, it's an antique and therefore not a firearm. 25 acp isn't on the list so it's fine for antique status.

On the other hand, 25 acp is an arbitrarily prohibited pistol caliber.





SO -> I argue that an antique, not being a firearm, is exempt from a law that pertains to firearms.

Discuss/What's your opinion?



NOTES
1) You can rechamber antique pistols to anything not listed on the no-go list, and they will remain antiques.
2) The verifiers are closed so I can't ask them, hence why I'm tossing this one to the peanut gallery to discuss. Plus this is way more entertaining.
3) Not looking for opinions on how the cops will choose to interpret the whole deal. I'm looking for the correct interpretation of the law, not whether or not it'll attract attention, hassle, problems etc. Once again, referring to #2, I'd ask the verifiers but they aren't open.

 

[tactical870]

it's an antique and therefore not a firearm. 25 acp isn't on the list so it's fine for antique status.

You said it. Perfectly legal. The law also says all .32 calibers are prohib but .32 rf in an antique gun is fine. If it's pre 1898, handgun, and can fire a 25 acp it's all good.

 

[Rudy H]

3) Not looking for opinions on how the cops will choose to interpret the whole deal. I'm looking for the correct interpretation of the law, not whether or not it'll attract attention, hassle, problems etc.

I thought of this before. Technically it may(should) be legal. But if you got into a situation where it had to be put to a test (brought to court) it would cost you win or lose.

And if you think that a judge would have to declare it legal then you should read The Plain Meaning Rule and Other Ways to Cheat at Statutory Interpretation and Statutory Interpretation in the Supreme Court of Canada.

Technically a prohibited handgun that does not have a barrel is not a prohibited handgun. Read the law and you will see this. But that's not how it works in the end. In 2000 I had a court case where the judge used circular logic to decide that it still was prohibited.

And as far as an opinion you get from a verifier it is not worth much (legally). Something written from the RCMP might be helpful to cut off legal problems but that is not guaranteed.

 

[H Wally]

You said it. Perfectly legal. The law also says all .32 calibers are prohib but .32 rf in an antique gun is fine. If it's pre 1898, handgun, and can fire a 25 acp it's all good.

It's actually that 32rf rule that got me thinking on this too, since it's a very well embedded exception to the arbitrary .25 and .32 prohib rule.

I thought of this before. Technically it may(should) be legal. But if you got into a situation where it had to be put to a test (brought to court) it would cost you win or lose.

And if you think that a judge would have to declare it legal then you should read The Plain Meaning Rule and Other Ways to Cheat at Statutory Interpretation and Statutory Interpretation in the Supreme Court of Canada.

Technically a prohibited handgun that does not have a barrel is not a prohibited handgun. Read the law and you will see this. But that's not how it works in the end. In 2000 I had a court case where the judge used circular logic to decide that it still was prohibited.

Yep, I'm well aware that in court it would be subject largely to the mindset of the judge. Like most of my trains of thought this one will probably reach a dead end, but every so often they turn up gold, so it's worth following.

Rather I'm looking for a basis to get a written ok from the rcmp techs or the antique verifiers so I would have something to cover my butt if I went down this road.

 

[Rudy H]

Regulations Prescribing Antique Firearms
7. A handgun manufactured before 1898 that is capable of discharging centre-fire cartridges, other than a handgun designed or adapted to discharge 32 Short Colt, 32 Long Colt, 32 Smith and Wesson, 32 Smith and Wesson Long, 32-20 Winchester, 38 Smith and Wesson, 38 Short Colt, 38 Long Colt, 38-40 Winchester, 44-40 Winchester, or 45 Colt cartridges.

"antique firearm" means

(a) any firearm manufactured before 1898 that was not designed to discharge rim-fire or centre-fire ammunition and that has not been redesigned to discharge such ammunition, or

(b) any firearm that is prescribed to be an antique firearm;

You might get screwed on the redesigned clause.

 

[41 Colt]

You can have 3" barreled antiques, so why not ones in .25 or .32ACP?

The Definition of an Antique

The Criminal Code defines antique firearms as:

firearms manufactured before 1898 that were not designed or re-designed to discharge rim-fire or centre-fire ammunition, or I think this refers to muzzle loaders

firearms prescribed as antique firearms in the Criminal Code regulations. These are:

Black Powder Reproductions:

of flintlock, wheel-lock or matchlock firearms, other than handguns, manufactured after 1897; (All other reproductions must be registered and owners must have a firearm licence to possess them. For example, reproductions of percussion cap muzzle-loading firearms like American Civil War Enfield and Springfield rifles will be considered firearms and not antiques.)

Rifles:

manufactured before 1898 that can discharge only rim-fire cartridges, other than 22 Calibre Short, 22 Calibre Long or 22 Calibre Long Rifle cartridges;
manufactured before 1898 that can discharge centre-fire cartridges (whether with a smooth or rifled bore), have a bore diameter of 8.3 mm or greater, measured from land to land in the case of a rifled bore, with the exception of a repeating firearm fed by any type of cartridge magazine

Shotguns:

manufactured before 1898 that can discharge only rim-fire cartridges, other than 22 Calibre Short, 22 Calibre Long or 22 Calibre Long Rifle cartridges;
manufactured before 1898 that can discharge centre-fire cartridges, other than 10, 12, 16, 20, 28, or 410 gauge cartridges

Handguns:

manufactured before 1898 that can discharge only rim-fire cartridges, other than 22 Calibre Short, 22 Calibre Long or 22 Calibre Long Rifle cartridges;
manufactured before 1898 that can discharge centre-fire cartridges, other than a handgun designed or adapted to discharge 32 Short Colt, 32 Long Colt, 32 Smith and Wesson, 32 Smith and Wesson Long, 32-20 Winchester, 38 Smith and Wesson; 38 Short Colt, 38 Long Colt, 38-40 Winchester, 44-40 Winchester, or 45 Colt cartridges

 

[H Wally]

You might get screwed on the redesigned clause.

Read post 1 note 1 and the first half of section A that you bolded. The piece you quoted refers to muzzle loading cap and ball, flintlock or matchlock guns converted to cartridge guns.

 

[gallen270]

yeah, Ive gotta side with legal, I never thought of it as it applies to 12.6 .32's vs antique .32rf cartridges, but thats legal, so why wouldnt a .25acp be? the frame of the antique gun is the 'firearm', so anything built on it, that isnt on the prescribed 'no-go' list would be legal.

 

[DEZ]

antique status over rules .I HAVE AN ANTIQUE 32-44 S&W and have had it de-registered and have the rcmp antique status letter for it ones made after 1898 are listed as prohibs.

 

[H Wally]

Snap. That's what I wanted to hear. I forgot about 32-44... I even talked to them about that in the past... Doh!

Well, I'm all set then. I'm still going to double check on monday but with this info in hand it'll be pretty hard for them to say it isn't allowed (provided I get someone who hasn't been hired for their skills as a parrot).

 

[Rudy H]

Read post 1 note 1 and the first half of section A that you bolded. The piece you quoted refers to muzzle loading cap and ball, flintlock or matchlock guns converted to cartridge guns.

Yes I understand that. But you are looking at things from your perspective. A judge (who's job it is to tell us what the law really means) can take a broader view (and more restrictive). He/she could look at the legislation and tell us what the intent of the legislation in a broader context means.

I know that that section refers to muzzle loading cap and ball, flintlock or matchlock guns converted to cartridge guns. But ask yourself why were those conversions specifically excluded from being classed as an antique? If they wrote into law a clause to specifically exclude conversions then that would be considered by a judge.

The other thing to consider is that the Regulations Prescribing Antique Firearms are regulations and not laws. They can be changed by OIC. Loopholes can be filled. And when dealing with one specific problem they can go in and make other non-desirable (from our perspective) changes. The list of disallowed cartridges can be greatly expanded.

Like the T-97 issue that has been going on for the last couple of years. As long as the issue is small (few people taking advantage of it), and the issue does not attract much attention, it should be OK. But if more people jump on then there may well be a reaction to counter it. If someone used a converted antique gun criminally and argued it was classed as an antique I could easily see how a judge would say it wasn't so.

Like I said, I considered the same conversion as well. But before I would use a 25ACP I would look at other options. One is to take the 22 Hornet case and cut it down (length) to fit the antique. Rechamber and reline the barrel. This is a bit more work than using the 25ACP but in the long run it may cause less trouble since the 25ACP is an evil cartridge.

 

[dingus]

Rudy H wrote
( If someone used a converted antique gun criminally and argued it was classed as an antique I could easily see how a judge would say it wasn't so.)


Once a Antique is used in a crime it becomes modern if it becomes modern how can they charge you with ilegal use of a Antique
Its like what came frist the chicken or the egg kinda thing LOL

I agree people should use common sence or they will tighten up the regs or they could.
In a way they already have started by takeing the 38 M&H cartridge and saying guns chambered in 38 M&H will no longer get Perscribed antique status.
That was done in the back rooms of RCMP CFC
They claim its to close to a 38 S&W as a 38 S&W will go and fire in any 38 M&H (merwin & hulbert revolver)

So its already happened with one non listed caliber.

 

[trevj]

It doesn't "become modern". It IS still a firearm as far as the Criminal Code is concerned if used as a weapon to commit a crime.

Fair enough.

Cheers
Trev

 

[H Wally]

Yes I understand that. But you are looking at things from your perspective. A judge (who's job it is to tell us what the law really means) can take a broader view (and more restrictive). He/she could look at the legislation and tell us what the intent of the legislation in a broader context means.

I know that that section refers to muzzle loading cap and ball, flintlock or matchlock guns converted to cartridge guns. But ask yourself why were those conversions specifically excluded from being classed as an antique? If they wrote into law a clause to specifically exclude conversions then that would be considered by a judge.

The other thing to consider is that the Regulations Prescribing Antique Firearms are regulations and not laws. They can be changed by OIC. Loopholes can be filled. And when dealing with one specific problem they can go in and make other non-desirable (from our perspective) changes. The list of disallowed cartridges can be greatly expanded.

Like the T-97 issue that has been going on for the last couple of years. As long as the issue is small (few people taking advantage of it), and the issue does not attract much attention, it should be OK. But if more people jump on then there may well be a reaction to counter it. If someone used a converted antique gun criminally and argued it was classed as an antique I could easily see how a judge would say it wasn't so.

Like I said, I considered the same conversion as well. But before I would use a 25ACP I would look at other options. One is to take the 22 Hornet case and cut it down (length) to fit the antique. Rechamber and reline the barrel. This is a bit more work than using the 25ACP but in the long run it may cause less trouble since the 25ACP is an evil cartridge.

That's fair enough. So following the 22 hornet train of thought, I'd still need to be using common calibers with common barrels etc etc etc, so the next question is to shorten and neck the 22 hornet down to accept a 25acp or keep going to fit the original hornet bullet.

Part of the reason I liked the 25 acp is because it gave me thicker cylinder walls after the conversion and brass, bullets, dies etc were readily available. Converting the revolver will be about the same amount of work regardless of caliber, the problem is then reloading for it if it's chambered in some crazy wildcat cartridge. I suppose necking down to 22 hornet would solve the dies issue and bullets issue.

 

[tactical870]

Handguns:

manufactured before 1898 that can discharge only rim-fire cartridges, other than 22 Calibre Short, 22 Calibre Long or 22 Calibre Long Rifle cartridges;
manufactured before 1898 that can discharge centre-fire cartridges, other than a handgun designed or adapted to discharge 32 Short Colt, 32 Long Colt, 32 Smith and Wesson, 32 Smith and Wesson Long, 32-20 Winchester, 38 Smith and Wesson; 38 Short Colt, 38 Long Colt, 38-40 Winchester, 44-40 Winchester, or 45 Colt cartridges

25 acp isn't in here....

(b) any firearm that is prescribed to be an antique firearm;

And by the definition is a prescribed antique. We've already proven that antiques can be rechambered to non-exempt calibers. There have been lots on the EE in the past. I for one believe in following the letter4 of the law, not being scared of how someone elese might twist it. After all this is still supposed to be a free country....

 

[rboomsma]

Very well said.

I personally think when we start altering antiques to fire modern commercial rounds we are on a slippery slope. The government or the RCMP will eventually close the that loop hole and/or expand on the cartrages currently listed. It is only a matter of time, and it will ruin it for all of us.

Get into reloading and make your loads.

Yes I understand that. But you are looking at things from your perspective. A judge (who's job it is to tell us what the law really means) can take a broader view (and more restrictive). He/she could look at the legislation and tell us what the intent of the legislation in a broader context means.

I know that that section refers to muzzle loading cap and ball, flintlock or matchlock guns converted to cartridge guns. But ask yourself why were those conversions specifically excluded from being classed as an antique? If they wrote into law a clause to specifically exclude conversions then that would be considered by a judge.

The other thing to consider is that the Regulations Prescribing Antique Firearms are regulations and not laws. They can be changed by OIC. Loopholes can be filled. And when dealing with one specific problem they can go in and make other non-desirable (from our perspective) changes. The list of disallowed cartridges can be greatly expanded.

Like the T-97 issue that has been going on for the last couple of years. As long as the issue is small (few people taking advantage of it), and the issue does not attract much attention, it should be OK. But if more people jump on then there may well be a reaction to counter it. If someone used a converted antique gun criminally and argued it was classed as an antique I could easily see how a judge would say it wasn't so.

Like I said, I considered the same conversion as well. But before I would use a 25ACP I would look at other options. One is to take the 22 Hornet case and cut it down (length) to fit the antique. Rechamber and reline the barrel. This is a bit more work than using the 25ACP but in the long run it may cause less trouble since the 25ACP is an evil cartridge.

 

[H Wally]

Very well said.

I personally think when we start altering antiques to fire modern commercial rounds we are on a slippery slope. The government or the RCMP will eventually close the that loop hole and/or expand on the cartrages currently listed. It is only a matter of time, and it will ruin it for all of us.

Get into reloading and make your loads.

Agreed it's never a good idea to screw with the government, but at the same time, altering antiques to a current cartridge is nothing new and by no means uncommon. The fact is making loads of strange wildcat cartridges is a hassle and limits the value of the gun, because it is so difficult to reload for.

I'm in favour of a middle ground, chamber in what's safe, but don't wave it under the nose of every LEO and politician out there.

 

[Rudy H]

Very well said.

I personally think when we start altering antiques to fire modern commercial rounds we are on a slippery slope. The government or the RCMP will eventually close the that loop hole and/or expand on the cartrages currently listed. It is only a matter of time, and it will ruin it for all of us.

(I'm glad it made some sense. I struggle when it comes to writing.)

This also is my fear. As long as we don't attract too much attention with antiques things should be able to continue as they are now. Once you start pushing on the boundries too much there will be an oposite reaction.

25 acp isn't in here....

And by the definition is a prescribed antique. We've already proven that antiques can be rechambered to non-exempt calibers. There have been lots on the EE in the past. I for one believe in following the letter4 of the law, not being scared of how someone elese might twist it. After all this is still supposed to be a free country....

Yes and 10 round pistol mags are legal in semi-auto rifles. 40 calibre handgun mags that hold 13 rounds of 9mm are legal to use. 8.5" barreled pump shotguns are legally non-restricted (??from memory??). Bullpup guns are legal (but don't get caught with a BP stock). T-97 anyone?

Yup, keep pushing on the edges and we will have a new set of laws taking care of the situation. And while they are at it they will make prohibited a lot more semi-autos. Why should they stop at the original points of concern.

The letter of the law is not good enough. The intent of the law is what is mainly looked at by judges now. I have read too many court decisions that left me shaking my head on firearm laws.

These were done to convert 12(6) guns to other than 25/32 calibre cartridges.
32 ACP -> cut and necked down 22 Hornet, 25 ACP -> 25 ACP case necked down to 22 calibre

The RCMP no longer accepts new conversions like this though (for 25/32 cal 12.6).

 

[rboomsma]

will[/B] be an oposite reaction.

My greatest concern is that people are getting into antiques to re-chamber to modern ammuntion to circumvent restricted and prohibited laws. It has nothing to do with they love of antique guns. This will bite us all in the ass eventually

 

[tactical870]

The RCMP no longer accepts new conversions like this though (for 25/32 cal 12.6).

My understanding is that they are being challenged regarding this as it is perfectly legal to do so....

The letter of the law is not good enough. The intent of the law is what is mainly looked at by judges now. I have read too many court decisions that left me shaking my head on firearm laws.

The intent of the law seems to be to prohibit private firearms ownership...... I dunno about you guys but I prefer to follow the letter of the law, rather than the government's intent.....