tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2807403883562053852.post4851700502855422299..comments2024-03-27T08:40:31.785-06:00Comments on Clayton Cramer.: Possession of Muzzleloading Bullets A Crime in D.C.?Clayton Cramerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03258083387204776812noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2807403883562053852.post-45567094946333551862014-03-31T08:49:47.721-06:002014-03-31T08:49:47.721-06:00What's bizarre is that by prosecuting this rid...What's bizarre is that by prosecuting this ridiculous case, they've made the appeal very much a slam dunk.Cincinnatushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10424218376882403880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2807403883562053852.post-40211206419583648102014-03-28T17:48:47.703-06:002014-03-28T17:48:47.703-06:00"Why would any rational person live in D.C.?&..."Why would any rational person live in D.C.?"<br /><br />It's not completely clear that any rational person actually lives there. But, surely at least 3-5% of the DC population is rational. It's also not clear from the reporting that Mr. Witaschek lived there - perhaps he only had an office there.<br /><br />It seems somewhat ironic that <b>by far</b> the biggest abuser of 2nd Amendment rights [thus far -- NY, CT, and CA are trying to catch up] is the U.S. Government. It is illegal to carry a firearm onto most U.S. government property, for example, including Post Offices, a fact that I find very inconvenient.Henryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15569206003851743608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2807403883562053852.post-47675241112265094082014-03-28T12:23:43.927-06:002014-03-28T12:23:43.927-06:00Note that ATF did not claim "these are bullet...Note that ATF did not claim "these are bullets for DC's purposes"; the DC prosecutor's team simply found a list from the ATF of muzzleloaders that "could be converted" to fire modern ammunition and waved it around as if it was somehow relevant.<br /><br />ATF has many problems, but they do not appear to have actually had anything directly to do with this travesty.<br /><br /><a href="http://law.justia.com/codes/district-of-columbia/2012/division-i/title-7/subtitle-j/chapter-25/unit-a/subchapter-i/section-7-2501-01.html" rel="nofollow">D.C. Code § 7-2501.01</a>, however, defines such muzzleloaders as "antique firearms", <i>explicitly excludes them</i> from the category "firearms", and bans posession of bullets as part of the ammunition ban which applies <i>only to firearms, not antique firearms</i>.<br /><br />One complication is that the DC definition applies only to pre-1898 muzzleloaders <i>and replicas</i>; by their definitions a modern-styled muzzle-loader is a regulated firearm.<br /><br />Problem is, of course, since he had no firearm, the bullets were not for any <i>specific</i> arm...<br /><br />DC's code needs to be fixed. By Congress.<br />Sigivaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16152366541957466049noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2807403883562053852.post-45088495673168687352014-03-28T11:19:27.934-06:002014-03-28T11:19:27.934-06:00This is as bad as the "attempted attempted ra...This is as bad as the "attempted attempted rape" case we read about in Criminal Law class in Law School.<br /><br />That was, IIRC, a case from Mississippi, a Southern State, and during the Jim Crow 20's. I note that D.C. was a slave-holding area ante bellum, and was segregated thanks to President Wilson, so legal horse **** like this in D.C. is nothing new, but you'd think that with modern judges this wouldn't happen anymore.Windy Wilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01951254236693386401noreply@blogger.com