Per the law, muzzleloaders have historically not been classified as firearms. The significance of this classification is that muzzleloaders are not subject to background checks, can be bought without going through a firearms dealer (i.e., you can mail order them), and felons can own them. In Wyoming, that just changed:
Supreme Court Says Muzzleloaders are Legally Firearms
The ruling comes in an appeal by a convicted felon who says he thought he was allowed to own a black powder rifle. Such rifles are excluded from the federal definition of firearms.
A spokesman for the Wyoming Game and Fish Department says the ruling will come as a blow to some Wyoming residents who have felony convictions in the past but who are now dedicated black powder hunters.
No details on the case. Anyone know?
Well, I already posted this
Well, I already posted this into Sayuncle's blog, but incase anyone's just reading here :
Found it on FindLaw [PDF].
Not quite sure what to think of it. I’m of the opinion that people we can’t trust with a muzzleloader shouldn’t get out of jail - I’ve been slashed by kitchen knives more often than I’ve been shot by a muzzleloader, that’s for damned sure, and I know knives are a bit easier to get a hold of. I just can’t see a single-shot gun being dangerous enough to justify the costs of applying the law, nevermind when you start comparing what an archery kit or even a bb gun could do. And having different definitions of ‘firearm’ as you cross state borders doesn’t make me happy, either.
The case looks interesting. Harris was not a poster child for the pro-gun side : he was convicted for robbery and aggravated robbery (can’t find out the exacts of those incidents), so I’d wager he wasn’t the ‘normal guy’ who got hit by a restraining order or standing in the wrong place at the wrong time. He also pretty clearly violated the big four rules of safety (and a couple of common sense) when he brought the gun to his shoulder and aimed through the scope at traffic (do not aim at anything you do not want to destroy, people!).
He was, however, clearly told by a sheriff that a muzzleloading, black powder weapon was not a firearm. And the court’s main holding, which keeps their whole case together, was that anyone of normal intelligence would assume a muzzleloader to be covered by the “firearm†law (while I think it’s safe to assume most sheriffs aren’t of normal intelligence, it’s not good when the courts admit it).