Author Topic: Winchester Cannons  (Read 809 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Dresden

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 78
Winchester Cannons
« on: March 12, 2013, 04:04:36 AM »
I see there are Winchester cannons for sale, they appear to be bored straight through, I thought the ATF considered that a short shotgun, has the ruling changed, or a special blank required, just curious.


Dresden

Offline Double D

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12609
  • SAMCC cannon by Brooks-USA
    • South African Miniature Cannon Club
Re: Winchester Cannons
« Reply #1 on: March 12, 2013, 05:16:51 AM »
Some where way back on the board, in a post by Wes  Pilley , better known as Powder Keg is letter from ATF defining signal guns.   

George did the actual scan in and posting of Wes' letter.  Here is George's post.  If you click on the the blue  ATF letter you will be taken to the actual letter that answers this question. 

We finally have an answer from the ATF on this subject.  I am posting instead of Powder Keg since I put the letter images on my web server.  The response is three pages long, but in large print so it won't take long to read.  There are links at the bottom of each page to the following page.

ATF Letter

Offline Indygunworks

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 333
  • Gender: Male
Re: Winchester Cannons
« Reply #2 on: March 12, 2013, 05:52:19 AM »
DD, per that letter it makes it sound like the other cannons would be destructive devices, as they are intended to expel a projectile by means of explosives, and have a bore greater than 1.5 inch's...
 
Do you have a link to where that has been discusses so I may read up on the opposite ruling?

Offline Dresden

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 78
Re: Winchester Cannons
« Reply #3 on: March 12, 2013, 06:04:16 AM »
Thanks Guys,
The letter was helpful


Dresden

Offline Double D

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12609
  • SAMCC cannon by Brooks-USA
    • South African Miniature Cannon Club
Re: Winchester Cannons
« Reply #4 on: March 12, 2013, 06:09:21 AM »
DD, per that letter it makes it sound like the other cannons would be destructive devices, as they are intended to expel a projectile by means of explosives, and have a bore greater than 1.5 inch's...
 
Do you have a link to where that has been discusses so I may read up on the opposite ruling?

Your assumption is wrong and is a perfect example why Legal opinions and discussion of the law are not allowed on this board.   

Pull out your copy of the GCA 68 and NFA and look up antiques.  GCA for guns under .50 inches and NFA for over .50.  Very simplified and generalized if it is original or a replica and it was made in or before 1898 or made before 1899 and is a muzzle loader, uses an antique ignition system and or is a breech loader using fixed ammunition that is not available in commerce it may be considered an antique and not a firearm. 

That is a very none legal explanation which is not binding in any court.  If you must have a proper legal definition then write a letter to ATF  and ask.

Anything anyone else may pos,t and including what I just posted my be dead wrong....get the right answer from ATF.

And one other thing that I fail to mention all to often when the subject comes.  Even though you get a letter form ATF, you still need to check with your State and local jurisdictions to see if the have additional or restrictive laws. 


Offline Indygunworks

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 333
  • Gender: Male
Re: Winchester Cannons
« Reply #5 on: March 12, 2013, 06:48:53 AM »
thanks, took me a while to find it.... thats what i thought to be true, but its nice to read it in print.

Offline Double D

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12609
  • SAMCC cannon by Brooks-USA
    • South African Miniature Cannon Club
Re: Winchester Cannons
« Reply #6 on: March 12, 2013, 03:37:37 PM »
thanks, took me a while to find it.... thats what i thought to be true, but its nice to read it in print.

Legally authortative print...not something from some rube on the internet.  That's why we say never trust the internet even what is written here.

Offline Indygunworks

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 333
  • Gender: Male
Re: Winchester Cannons
« Reply #7 on: March 13, 2013, 04:44:58 AM »
Nope, not some guy on a forum, but on the ATF's website on a PDF of the National Firearms Act (over 1.5 inch bore) and also the specifics in the Indiana Code, which is worded almost identical to the atf's definition of antiques.

Offline Cannoneer

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3950
Re: Winchester Cannons
« Reply #8 on: March 13, 2013, 08:01:59 AM »
I see there are Winchester cannons for sale, they appear to be bored straight through, I thought the ATF considered that a short shotgun, has the ruling changed, or a special blank required, just curious.
Dresden

Dresden,
If I understand your question correctly; there are blank shell firing signal/salute cannons that do have larger diameter shell chambers than the bores of the barrels, while others are manufactured with barrels that are "bored straight through",  meaning that the whole length of the bore from muzzle to breech is the same diameter. Even if DoubleD chastises me, I'm going to go out on a limb, and say that the ATF doesn't make any legal distinctions between these two types of barrel designs on black powder blank shell firing signal/salute cannons.

As far as special blanks required goes: If you have a salute gun with the first type of barrel mentioned, then you have to load it not only with the correct gauge size, but also the right length to fit the chamber. With my 10 gauge salute gun I can, and do load 3½-inch shells, because it has an equal bore size the length of the barrel.

 
RIP John. While on vacation July 4th 2013 in northern Wisconsin, he was ATVing with family and pulled ahead of everyone and took off at break-neck speed without a helmet. He lost control.....hit a tree....and the tree won.  He died instantly.

The one thing that you can almost always rely on research leading to, is more research.