I’m a traditionalist muzzleloader hunter. But when I hear “loophole “ that just illicits a negative tone to most audiences these days. They had breech loading non metallic cap or flint ignited firearms back in the day. It’s not my cup of tea but I’m not going to drag someone else’s rights away just cause I don’t like it. I don’t see those engineers thinking about “how do I work around this law?” to me they just took up where the old inventor’s left off .
I don't care what kind of technology muzzle loader use, but they should still have a separate season for bows only Just more proof that F&G never know wtf they're doing
"Loophole" triggers me too. You tell us what that law is, and we engineer to comply with the law, and Karen's scream "we don't want you making that, we passed a law!" We show how we complied and they call it a "loophole" SMH
@@dragonhealer7588 “Gun show loop hole” is my biggest peeve. I’m 43 and have gone to gun shows since I could walk with my dad. The vast vast majority of people taking guns to sell/trade are hunting rifles maybe a few ar 15s since they are more common but they make it sound like any felon can easily buy gun of their choice in minutes. The ATF is routinely at every show as well
The "Gun Worm" you showed is actually a patch worm and is used for retrieving lost cleaning patches, you'd use a different device that looks more like a screw called a Ball Puller. The patch worms you showed would not be able to hold onto the lead very well for reliable removal, and even the Ball Puller sometimes came out of the ball due to the softness of the lead.
@@robertkalinic335 No, not usually. It is far more common (and easier) to discharge the firearm than to pull out the ball. Where I worked we'd pull balls out all the time, usually when the flash channel would get plugged so the gun wouldn't go off, or sometimes people forgot to pour in their powder charge.
These have been used for over 160 years (Smiths Carbine...) and been in legal in reproductions, and 1862 Gatling gun that used muzzle-loaded reusable cartridges. Still, the ATF does change their mind at will on long-settled things all the time now.
@@D_Boone It does - because many federal regulations on firearms do not apply to muzzle loaders. Felons can own them, no background check requirements, you can sell them across state lines without federal government involvement, etc. Maybe the video focuses on local/state regulations, but the ATF definitely factors in. For instance, suppressors/silencers are heavily regulated by the ATF. But they're defined as things meant to / easily adaptable to reducing the report of a firearm. A suppressor on a muzzle loader isn't a suppressor to the ATF, unless it's removable and easily adaptable to a firearm. Sooooo, we had some pretty fun black powder rifles that had suppressors built in as part of the barrel. ATF couldn't do anything about it (well, without ignoring or redefining the law like they usually do). All that to say... Making sure it has nothing to do with the ATF is sometimes the point.
It's fucked up the ATF just changes their minds they aren't even legally supposed to be able to set up guidelines or laws they are simple to enforce laws and taxes. They shouldn't even be making these regulations just enforcing them.
The Smith carbine was a rifle. It was a breach loaded rifle. This is claiming to be a muzzle loader. These are 2 different things. The whole point of this video is talking about it being classified as a muzzle loader.
@@psibug565 True, but one of the large problems is when you have actual regulation that doesn't make sense. The "assault weapons ban" mentioned in the video is an excellent example. There are always three parts to any regulation. Rules as written, what the drafter said it would do, and what the drafter wants it to do. Ideally all three are the same, but firearms and technology seem to always have none of them match. Either through ignorance or ulterior motives.
@@arthurmoore9488 The problem here is that it makes sense. It's just arbitrary. They don't want too many people hunting during that time, so they limit them to inconvenient weapons. But the details of why it's inconvenient don't matter, and exactly how inconvenient it needs to be isn't obvious. So now they're wondering if the most convenient form of a generally inconvenient weapon is sufficiently inconvenient.
As long as you have to ram the bullet down the barrel from the (Muzzle) it is a Muzzleloader. I don't think you're going to have to worry about the new Firestick propellent charges very long, if it bothers you. They are stupid expensive and really not all that much easier or practical and I'll be willing to bet they go away very soon.
I guess you're surprised to see that the Traditions Nitrofire muzzleloader is still around a year later since you said it wouldn't be around long. As a matter of fact, they're so popular they're on back order in most stores.
@@ditchdigger93 I personally don't like them you can't tailor loads and only have the 1 brand of firestick. It's not any easier to load then a couple pellets down the barrel, I mean you are already putting the bullet in the muzzle anyways.
@@leecrumble3921 Just saw an add for them priced at $28.00 per five rounds. That's my main reason for not going for that. Makes for an awful expensive day at the range.
There are decreasing numbers of hunters and not enough deer are being taken each year. Michigan, for example, is allowing modern firearms use during muzzleloading season in 1/3 of the state just to get more hunters out in the field. Although I don’t use these, this makes cleaning much easier, especially if no shot is taken. The cleaning process is the biggest reason hunters don’t like muzzleloading.
People killed off most of the natural predators (i.e. wolves) so we find ourselves with our ecosystems out of balance. While re-introducing them is a lofty goal, it's also not possible in a lot of cases e.g. because they have too much impact on agriculture. In places without much of a hunting culture or commercial harvest (e.g. Australia, where I live) it's often necessary for the government to pay contractors to go out and do population control on the larger grazers, especially if they are introduced species (like deer and horses, in our case).
I use to hunt when I was younger. We were a poor rural family and dear fed us through the winter. As I have gotten older, and more financially secure, its not something that really interests me. I don't enjoy shooting other living things, and preparing the carcus is defiantly not something I ever got any pleasure out of. For me it was just something that had to be done in order to have meat January - April. I don't begrudge someone who enjoys it, or even gets utility out of it, and I always encourage responsible hunters whenever I see them, but as we have become a more city orientated country I think you will continue to see hunting decline as a recreation.
The other issue is the lack of public land that you can hunt on in general. If you live in a city (like 80% of Americans do now) you'd have to drive up to 100 miles to go hunt. With the cost of gas you could've just went and bought some venison from the butcher.
Hunting predators and bucks only are the two biggest reasons for exploding deer populations. Every state I've been to has an unhealthy ratio of does to bucks and few predators to speak of to deal with the excess number of does and fawns.
So far as I'm aware most inline muzzleloaders can be unloaded through the breach. It's one of the advantages of the design. The Firestick is just a complication, not to mention an added expense. As far as I'm aware it offers no real advantage over standard inline other than to get people huffy about what appears to be a cartridge that gets inserted in the breach. Also, the "gun worm" images you showed aren't for removing the projectile, they're for removing the patch. You need a bullet puller to remove the projectile, the patch worm will just break if you try to screw it into lead. I'm adverse to your use of the term "loophole". If gun manufacturers alter their designs to make them compliant with the law they're not abusing anything, they're simply following the law.
“Loopholes”… the term has unfortunately been morphed into a negative and pejorative term used to describe “getting away with breaking the law on a technicality”, when this isnt what it used to mean. In this case, the firestick, like the forearm brace, forced reset trigger, and other otherwise creative innovations were all specifically designed to fit legally inside the letter and spirit of firearms laws, making them indeed, loopholes.
@@johncaccamo G'day, You're almost correct. A Loophole Was/is the Concealed/camouflaged Orifice..., through which and behind from whence Snipers endeavour to Kill their Targets. Between WW-1 and WW-2, the idea arose of Carefully Crafting a Legal Theory, Aiming to make a finely calculated Claim, at Law, by Utilising some perceived Gap in any Legislation, which Enables one to Remain within the LETTER of the Law, While Shitting from a great height, Onto the SPIRIT, of Whatever Legislation, the "Loophole" is Perceived to exist Within. Hence "Loophole Theory"..., Arose & became popular. And if one considers the Biblical Prohibition against Usury..., There is always the Deuteronomy Loophole....(!). Whereby Godtheory prohibits Charging or paying Interest on Loans, because "No man should charge Interest against their Brother..." To which the Talmudic Chamber of Commerce replied, Fine, all Jews can have Interest-free Loans, But all the Goyim will pay through the nose... And then Jesus said, "All men are brothers, The Deuteronomy Loophole is Bullshit !" And Mohamed agreed with Jesus. But then the Christians wanted to be Different to the Moslems, so they Adopted the Deuteronomy Loophole..., too. Bump-Stock Triggers, which Enable Semi-Sutomatic Firearms to Operate at Cyclic-Fire rates Equivalent to those of the Mil.Spec. Fully Automatic versions of the Same Weapons.... Shoot through Loopholes in the Law. This Breech-fed "Muzzle-Loader" Appears to be A fairly Typical example of AmeriKan Loophole Marketing Jism. Talking arrant nonsense & pure Bullshit, wall to wall And ten feet tall, Then Affecting confected Pearl-clutching "Outrage" When called out on their Bullshit Content. These things are Designed to Permit Breechloading Gunners to Continue to Hunt after the Breechloading "Season" Finishes...; Without the Breach loading "Hunter" ever needing to Learn How to safely use an Actual Muzzle-Loader, in order to actually Comply with the SPIRIT of the Law. Such is life, Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !
@@rokronroff G'day, Nope, Not "sadistic' At all. Look up "Free Verse" & "Blank Verse". And if ye Thunk that ALL Poetry must rhyme All the thyme With purrrfuct rhythm & metre, Then please feel free To backtrack Moi....(!), Unto my "Warbles In The Wilderness...." Playlist. Fair warning...., In 1997, the Environment Centre, Armidale Appointed me To be Their Poet-In-Residence.... Whereinat, a month later, I was made aware that Thus, I had literally Replaced Judith Wright.... (Australia's first Recognised (White) Poet, To address Aboriginal Land Rights, Dispossession, & Environmental Destruction.... You, Whinging about Me Expressing myself via Poetry....; Has all the "Impact", of King Canute trying to Command the Tide to cease to Rise.... Stand down, ye Pathetic Pusillanimous Pissant.... And ponder what other people have to say, Rather than Whining because your considering the PRESENTATION of my Ponderings, is a burdensome Strain, Upon your Brain... Is that Right ? There there, Nivertheemoind... Perhaps, One day, Ye MIGHT Grow out of such Ignorant arrogant hubristic Delusions...(?). Thyme will tell, And the Thymes, they be A' Changeling...(!). Such is life, Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !
The engineers accidentally 're-invented' two part ammunition. Didn't know about firesticks, but I was aware of this sort of concept from the self-contained propellant blocks separate from the projectile used in alot of modern British tanks.
Many tanks and 155 mm guns uses it today. modern 5" naval guns are one piece because of auto-loaders wile the WW 2 5" was two parts. Tanks with auto-loaders tend to go the other way. because they are cramped.
Ohio has “gun hunting” and “archery hunting”, where “gun” means straight walled cartridges above .357 or shotgun and “archery” means bow or crossbow. But there are different dates for gun, archery, and muzzleloading hunts.
Speaking of rule breakers, the original Sharps breechloaders using linen or paper cartridges and separate caps are "muzzle loaders" in some US states, but not all.
@@RomanvonUngernSternbergnrmfvus I'm from Louisiana hunting and fishing all my life and I had a gf from Philly one time wanted to hunt and skin a Muskrat and it dawned on me that I had never done that whole process before I just killed shit and gave it to someone else. I felt a deep sense of shame come over me like I wasn't primitive and manly enough to be with this chick.
@@off6848 sounds like that girl could bare you some fine off spring, even if she’s a yankee. I’ve got family that’s been hunting down where you are at for generations, they still speak a little French even. They showed me how to gut, clean and butcher just about anything on this planet, I was always more of a cook than a hunter compared to them. I was always big into charcuterie like my great uncle and grand father were, it’s funny since Iam the first in a generation to take it up and be interested in the subject, funnier still since I’ve been told I take after my grandfather in a lot of ways apparently. The guy LOVED fine cheese like I do while most of my kin can’t stand most of it. That being said, my time down there and my time doing all that has taught me that the two things folk tend to shy away from if they hunt is processing and finer cooking for some reason. Iam glad you are getting into it. If I have my say in anything I’ll have a smoking shed and a dry shed built by this time next year. Learned a lot of tricks for hunting up in Wisconsin and Illinois back in the early 2000s, it nearly cost my a couple finger tips mid winter but I’d say it was worth it, they got families that have been pretty much subsistence hunting and gathering for generations up there, same as Louisiana and Mississippi.
I bought one of these for my son. It's much, much easier for him to unload then digging a 209 primer out...and it's super easy for me to see that it is indeed clear/safe at a glance. Haven't taken a deer with it yet (muzzleloader season here in Nebraska doesn't open for a few more weeks. No worries about leaving it loaded and the corrosion/misfires that can come about from this practice during our 1 month long ML season either. I'm going to use my .58 flinter and he's going to use the Traditions. Called Nebraska Game & Parks...and they just seemed excited that someone under 40 was getting into muzzleloading and they told me not to worry even though it hadn't been 'approved yet. Seems like a worthwhile 'innovation' to get people affeild, even if the technology is really about 150 years old. It's not even what I would consider a loophole as you still have to seat the bullet in the traditional manner. Same people b****ing about the firestick are the same people who railed against in-lines 30 years ago. Those in-lines have probably driven more people into traditional muzzleloaders then anything else in the last 70 years.
I retailed and later wholesaled muzzloaders from the mid 80's through the early 2000's. In watching the development of technology over the years to in-line slam fired rifles, break barrel guns, recessed muzzles for ease of loader, primer tech going from no. 11 cap...musket cap, 209 shotgun primers, real black powder to synthetics like Pyrodex to pelletized synthetic powder and finally lead round balls and minie balls to sabotted bullets, I used to joke that it was only a matter of time until someone re-invented the self contained primed cartridge that loaded from the breech! We're getting closer!!!
"Black Powder vs Smokeless", "Rifled vs Smooth Bore." These have a greater effect on the firing characteristics of a firearm than "Muzzleloader vs Breach Loader." I would imagine the "Primitive Hunting" season regulations generally care more about rate of fire and effective range of a firearm than it being a "Muzzleloader". (Edit) By "Rate of fire" I'm talking about what the regulators (somewhat ignorant) intent is, not what actually matters for hunting since hunters want to take down game in a single shot.
You assume the people making the regulations actually understand hunting or firearms, even a little bit. Given the way that most firearm regulations work... That's probably a rather generous assumption.
My state of New York has some of the most stringent regulations in the world when it comes to firearms. We actually just introduced background checks for ammunition so you have to pay $5 for a background check to buy a $3 box of 22s. That being said we have some of the most lax hunting regulations in regards to muzzleloaders. My muzzleloader started life as a Thompson Center encore in 45/70 and I had a guy named Jeff Hankins tap the chamber for a breechplug converting it into a smokeless muzzleloader. With that simple conversion that only costs about $500 I now have a muzzleloader that has more than 500 yards of range and because of the smokeless powder and bullets sized exactly to my bore I can reload within 15 seconds sitting at the bench. A lot of states don't allow modern muzzleloaders in their primitive seasons but New York allows scopes and just about anything else as long as it's a muzzleloader.
@@alphakevin687 The problem is, the only thing being muzzle loaded affects is fire rate., which is a fine distinction if that's all a special hunting season rules care about. But I'm positive that's not the case since hunters aim to take down game in 1 clean (ethical) shot. I'm positive the special hunting seasons actually care about the accuracy of the firearm, as less accurate firearms will naturally limit the amount of game hunted. Like he states in the video, black powder is susceptible to moisture and inconsistent powder load, thus lowering it's effective accuracy. A clear and simple definition that meets the goal of the special hunting season would be: "A firearm that uses non-cased black powder." There isn't really a good way around that definition in terms of preventing the drawbacks of black powder like there is with "muzzle loader" or "black powder muzzle loader".
Southern, family has a few guns and cannon that are all muzzle loading. Its easy to make a loading block. Makes reloading a gun easy and quick, and if you use some good grease its rain resistant.
The way we unloaded an unused charge was by looking for a target and firing at it. One gets practice shooting and loading that way, gets to test the gun and shot regularly, and it unloads the gun. 😊
Reminds me a bit of the Weihrauch EL-54 gas boosted air rifle. Rather than spraying an aerosol in to the firing chamber you inserted a glass ampule of ether in to a reservoir on the side, pulled back on the charging lever with filled the firing chamber with gas so when pulled the trigger a spring piston would ignite the gas and fire the rifle.
Hmm, reminds me of the concept of "dieseling" with a pellet gun. The disadvantage of dieseling is the unpredictable combustion and therefore pressure, sending your projectile on an unpredictable arc. I wonder if the ether ampoule suffered the same drawback
@@erict3728 No idea. Possible it used some kind of regulator to keep the amount of gas in the chamber equal for each shot. The optimal way to keep consistency would be to use a solid propellant rather than a gas, as in the Daisy VL. The home made gas guns used in Myanmar years ago didn't seem to have any kind of regulator. It kinda comes down to do you want power or do you want consistency?
The most important questions I have are "what are we doing" and "why are we doing it" in regards to laws governing this thing. It seems like the "what" is obvious: handicap the shooter to increase challenge. If this is the case then I would question those who feel the firestick is somehow wrong. Paper cartridge. The process of using other measuring devices is similarly rapid. The whole charge powder and slap primer on does not feel like the bit that's handicapping anyone. In every demonstration I've ever seen of someone remotely proficient with a powder measuring system beyond "dump about ye much in" the powder dump segment takes up a few seconds at most and the bullet ramming bit of that whole thing is the hard part. I'm not going to be persuaded that the firestick dramatically changes the equation the way a self contained cartridge would, but... to be fair... even that difference is fairly small in the scheme of things it just removes skill from the equation.
Pre-measured powder pellets have been around for awhile, now. Measuring already doesn't have to exist if you don't want it to. Drop the number of pellets needed to hit your charge number, ram the projectile home, and prime. It's plenty quick. Dare I say, as fast as loading this rifle.
@@TheCharleseyemy thoughts exactly. My father used to carry pre-measured charges in film canisters, as a slightly more resilient form of paper charges. Said the tiny amount of prep went a long way and at the end of the day, he felt that if he had missed his shot more than 4 times in a day he wasn't getting that buck anyway. The handicap is still very much there and there's not much mechanical skill lost in not guessing your powder charge in the field. He stopped deer hunting in favor of hunting birds with the rest of the family, and never fails to mention how much less hassle it is to unload shells instead of pulling a ball when you lose your shot and call it a day lol
"Breaking the Law" with firearms, is using a firearm in the commission of a crime. There is no rational relationship between 'possession' and 'criminal intent'.
This is a classic case of everybody wanting to call something a loophole. This is in no way shape or form a loophole. Not even close. This is simply legal 100% legal. The inventors found a way to get other people involved in the sport of muzzleloading. The round to this rifle is still loaded through the muzzle. This is not a loophole at all not one bit
@ 4:55: Potassium nitrate is NOT hygroscopic. However, cheap or poorly refined potassium nitrate may be contaminated with sodium nitrate and/or calcium nitrate, both of which ARE hygroscopic. It is unlikely that any modern commercial black powder is hygroscopic.
I don't know if I would call it a loophole. It is similar to a flintlock, but instead of loading gun power at both ends, the fire stick is only loaded at the rear.
Something you may or may not know about muzzle loaders. A muzzleloader is not considered a firearm because it does not use an ignition system to fire projectiles. Instead, it relies on manual loading of gunpowder and projectiles into the muzzle of the barrel before each shot, thereby distinguishing it from modern firearms. This is why they are not regulated like firearms also.
This system is very similar to the Smith calvary carbine used in the 1860s. It used a rubber tube that held powder and bullet. It used a traditional percussion cap on a side hammer nipple. A small hole in the tube allowed it to fire. Since this dates to the civil war I'd call it a traditional weapon not a loophole.
That's not a muzzle loader, it's a breech loader. This is sort of a loophole because while powder and primer are breach loaded, you still have to ram the bullet down the muzzle, thus a muzzle loader.
Technically correct, but the ATF allows reproductions of this gun to be sold as a muzzleloader. Im not going to tell them any different.@@wingracer1614
Breechloading firearms are actually almost as old as muzzleloaders. The reason they never took off in mass usage until the 19th century is because manufacturing techniques were quite primitive. You had to ensure that the breech wouldn't explode in the face of the user and in most cases having a fixed breech, and thus a muzzleloader, was more useful than marginally faster reloading.
I do like that you can load a projectile down a bore that has absolutely no powder or even primer. It's very dangerous working around the front of the muzzle, I know you can theoretically make it safe with the presumption that the powder charge could never ignite but it's not absolutely safe.
that seems like a mighty fine hair your trying to split. powder does not spontaneously detonate, so, yeah, it is safe, as long as you don't prime the gun first, which user error and the same level of stupid could be applied to the firestick or anything else.
@@sinisterthoughts2896 I'm not talking about anything as spurious as "spontaneous" ignition, only unintended ignition. I don't think you know much about this, you refer to the burning of black powder as a detonation. I am well aware that it can often be hard to intentionally ignite black powder, I also know from fatal fireworks explosions they absolutely can ignite despite no apparent source of ignition. I have worked with industry experts and while they do everything to prevent an ignition the plan you need to plan for a fire and the plan cannot be "well if there is a fire death is certain" Look, I am not criticising you for using a traditional muzzle loader, but when you are loading the bullet down the bore above a full load of black powder you don't have the muzzle pointed at your head the entire time do you? You try at least to keep as most of your body parts away from the line of fire were there to be an inadvertent ignition... RIGHT?!?
@@sinisterthoughts2896Not necessarily, as if you had fired before loading, the powder could ignite from ant remaining burning embers in the bore. It's why you need to clean out the bore before reloading.
Please show me anything that is absolutely 100% safe after getting out of your recliner. Walking across the room your recliner is in? NOPE! Might accidentally kick something and break a toe. Got kids around the house? Might step on or trip over one of their small toys. The ONLY thing that is absolutely 100% safe is staying where you are and never moving.
@@HiredGun5 We're not talking about a non-zero chance of you banging your toe (which won't break at walking speed) we're talking about blowing a body part off instantly with no chance to respond to escalating danger. Now if you get out of your recliner and find you're staring down the barrel of a gun, can the perpetrator excuse themselves "i put you at no greater risk, you were also at risk of kicking something hard" is that a valid excuse??!? NO! If you can't do it to other people how can it be okay to do it to yourself. PS: it is absolutely NOT safe to never move, I've had relatives who did that and they ended up severely disabled as their muscles waste away and bones atrophy. Movement is necessary for the basic level of health needed for healthy function.
An interesting system, but it is a classic example of an "invention" that was created due to legal constraints rather than to solve a real engineering problem. :D I also once invented a "small arms" to help bypass legal restrictions. Even the weapons manufacturer said my idea was good. But I'm not particularly proud of it, because it's just the "ingenuity" dictated to overcome the regulations ;)
I think it's purely a gimmick. it does not in any way get near let alone around any legal issue. it's just a way to sell an "easy" muzzleloader to people who are afraid of muzzleloading. they are just selling prepackaged measured powder, which is what scares a lot of novices, measuring the powder wrong, it also takes out capping, which makes neophytes flinch. it's basically babies first muzzleloader, or the easy bake muzzle loader. it isn't really any faster than most in-lines, and the only edge you will gain over a tradition sidelock is the time to cap the nipples, which is a couple of seconds. it isn't like people are going to get follow up shots with this rifle they couldn't have with any other muzzleloader. there is nothing wrong with introductory models, but these rifles would be a handicap to anybody who wanted to learn about muzzleloaders and provide no real advantages over other models. they just lock people into a very overpriced proprietary ecosystem.
“Weapon” is a term used by the military to describe a firearm that is used for killing human beings. When you talk about “firearms” that are used to hunt animals, the term “firearm” is preferred by those of us who hunt.
Small correction, i believe they had conical bullets available before the minie style, they were just much harder to load and had to be engraved to the rifling. They could only be used in rifled arms, while balls would work in either, but not as well in a rifled gun. The minie was only a thing in the mid 19th century. Before that it was morally just round ball.
The assault weapons ban was a case where the law was loopholeing more than the people in terms of using technicalities to skirt around any reasonable intent. It made guns that were functionally identical either an item with especial legal protections or an item with especial legal ramifications.
If you really want a technicality, Bullet Storm comes to mind. It's technically a muzzleloader, but you can load multiple rounds at once and fire them at whatever rate you want. I have a feeling they wouldn't allow that though.
So many of you miss the point. It has NOTHING to do with "classification by the ATF". The point is "does it qualify for primitive hunting seasons, and does it do so legitimately?". THAT depends on how a "primitive rifle" is defined in STATE hunting regs (as the feds only have a say in hunting migratory game birds, and endangered species). If they define as "projectile loaded only from the muzzle", firestick qualifies. If they define as "closed breech end of barrel, loaded from muzzle", it will not. I dont really see it as "attempting to skirt a loophole", it's "making the game easier to play to attract more players" as well as reducing the load of junk that one needs to carry afield to play. For the manufacturer, its also "they HAVE to buy our expensive junk, so every sale is locked in market share". Dumping powder from a pre-measured caddy gives up about a second to a firestick (time afield), the other steps are the same. The convenience, and perception of "safer ramming" (you can stuff a sabot to an uncharged breech), and the ability to "safe" the arm by pulling the tube. Even if approved by states universally, i doubt it becomes popular, "proprietary systems" rarely do.
i hate it when people refer to it as a "loophole" it's not a loophole it's a legal firearm. the lawmakers are just incompetent. why should i be the one painted as the bad guy for following the exact letter of the law. if it ISN'T expressly "illegal" then that means it's legal.
If you use a 40 cal CVA break barrel, ream out/chamber reamer, the rear of the barrel for 410 shotshell. load the 410 shell with blackpowder/wad/carboard. After chambered, ram a 40 cal down the bore. It's a muzzleloader
Your closing statements really demonstrate how limited your understanding of firearms is, in general. The primary limitation with a muzzleloader is rate of fire. The accuracy of even the more basic cap lock rifles is sufficient to demand scopes... in other words, the gun is accurate to a distance greater than a naked eye can see. That means that these "loopholes" you're talking about are addressing safety and reliability, not accuracy or rate of fire. As long as the bullet has to be rammed down the barrel, the ROF if effectively limiting you to a single shot at any particular target. The really telling part was when you brought up "assault rifles". The original assault rifle ban, I believe from Reagan, addressed the sale and resale of select-fire weapons. This means that they were capable of full auto fire, and were legitimately military weapons. They were also ALREADY heavily regulated. The only real effect of that ban was to almost entirely stop the issuance of new licenses for those weapons. Licenses already existing were still valid. This also only effected a tiny number of weapons, since they were already heavily restricted. What is frequently referred to as an assault rifle these days is nothing more than a semiautomatic rifle with modern externals. They're not functionally any different than other semiautomatic rifles that you'd call hunting rifles. Labeling them assault rifles is just advertising your ignorance and your political prejudices... ...which I am genuinely grateful for. Now I know that nothing you say can be trusted without independent verification. If your politics will make you repeat one lie, they'll make you repeat any number of other lies. Thank you for labeling yourself for us.
I guess that this is what happens when laws are prescriptive, rather than descriptive, so there is a "black and white" written list of features something can (or can't) have to fit into a category? Something similar happened with "firearms" (not defined as pistols, shotguns, nor rifles) which are (what I would describe as) pistol shotguns which are at least 26 inches in length, which have no way to attach any sort of shoulder stock and somehow meet the letter of USA firearms laws for non-NFA items, but are obviously "thumbing their nose" at them. The Mossberg Shockwave and Fostech Origin-12 are examples of these "Honestly Guv, it's not a pistol/short-barrelled shotgun and regulated under the NFA." type of firearms.
Not being an expert I would say for a muzzle-loader the bullet and powder must be inserted through the muzzle and maybe the primer needs to be completely separate from the powder? Like, not in line?
First we need to focus on why muzzleloader season exists and what it's trying to accomplish. My understanding is it's essentially removing the chance of taking follow-up shots on an animal if you miss. They also limit your effective range. Is this reducing your reload time enough that you would miss and be able to reload and take another shot before the animal runs away. I doubt it but I'm not very informed on the topic so I can't answer it for certain. It doesn't seem like it offers a whole lot over the old paper cartridges other than being more weather resistant.
That's a pretty cool idea, but I like my Remington 700ML. I had a job operating a mini end mill machine. The little milling tools came clear plastic tubes with vinyl push on caps. I saved about twenty of them. I weigh my Triple 7 powder on a scale and pour it in the tubes. I can put four .44 XTP bullets in .50 cal. sabots in a tube.They fit like that was the original purpose of the tube. When I get ready to hunt, I drop all my ammo in a shirt pocket and "do like a cabbage and head". By the way, my Remington 700ML has a 209 conversion kit from Badger Ridge, in Fostoria, Michigan. They also have a kit for the Ruger 77. You can order the kit and instructions or send your bolt to them and let them do the conversion. Tubes similar to the ones I mentioned can be ordered from U.S. Plastic Corp. Thanks for letting me use your platform for giving fellow hunters some info.
I thought i heard someone state that as well. They both could line up in time. Considering the time its hard to prove since many things were passed by word of mouth instead of writing. Meaning written proof doesnt mean first or only use... both make sense.
@@davidgipson7140 The trouble with that theory is that we do have lots of early citations, and the earliest are describing something that happens with firearms. It's technical jargon first, and *then* it becomes a figure of speech. So we know pretty clearly where that figure of speech comes from. (Now, your more poetical sort of writer on mining absolutely does go and apply the already-existing figure of speech to a different kind of flash in a different kind of pan, once panning for gold becomes a matter of interest to the English-speaking public, yes! Your instincts are good there. But we can be quite certain that the term comes from flintlocks, not from mining.)
You can get muzzle loader shotgun conversions that are basically a thick milled steel shotgun shell brass section that takes primers to make a break action shotgun into a muzzle loader. They also have sleeves that convert the 12 guage shotgun to other calibers like 9mm or 22. U would have to get the expensive long ones with rifling to be accurate but its fine for survival situations but its a good idea
@rollotomasislawyer3405 I believe Dave Canterbury has a VERY similar strategy tjat he's done several videos on if you're interested. He converts a 12ga break-action into a muzzleloader and also shows how to load standard shells with black powder for them as well.
There's really nothing stopping you from buying two, drilling out that ring, and thin gluing the bullet to the end of the fire stick. You can always produce the unaltered rifle if someone suspects you have tampered with it.
@@rustygunner8282 I didn't say I was going to do it, just that it was possible and pretty cheap. The animals they're trying to handicap hunters for are overpopulating as it is, and if someone intends to eat the meat, I don't see anything wrong with it. There are also people who could benefit from a breach loading center fire rifle for other purposes.
But why would anyone do it? Why risk a long time in jail over it? You would be way better off hunting illegally with a legal rifle than hunting legally but with an illegal rifle.
@@wingracer1614 in both scenarios, it's hunting illegally. The likelihood that you would be stopped in the first place and to have someone question the weapon is slim to none. Telling them what it was when you bought it should be enough to deter them. Barring that, presenting them with the unaltered extra would probably satisfy a nosy game warden. The reason why it's illegal is the only difference. When it comes to the why for hunting only, it's simple convenience. It's highly unlikely that the amount of time it takes to reload would be the difference between catching or losing a wounded/missed animal. Depending on how expensive a given product is, the legal restrictions on buying a particular type of firearm versus another, or you plan on using the barrel for something else, it may actually be worth buying one of these and altering it. It's a workaround for a silly law in the first place, I'm just thinking of ways that it could be useful to someone else. Most states would require some kind of background check for a regular rifle, but not black powder. I'm not suggesting prohibited people should build their own firearms. However, it is legal to make your own firearms, and this alteration would bypass a background check and record of you owning a firearm. I'm not suggesting someone would do anything harmful with it, just that it's none of the government's business.
@@jacobstaten2366 This is classified by ATF as a rifle, not a black powder muzzle loader so the purchasing requirements are exactly the same as a bolt action or lever action rifle. The only question is how is it classified by state hunting regulations.
It may not be "traditional", I may agree with that statement, but as far as what it actually changes or if there is an unfair advantage...unless your game is mentally defective or you are in the middle of a pre Civil War sized herd, you're not going to get a second shot on your game. Solid charge pellets have been around long enough that they're kinda on their way to being traditional. Making prefab paper powder/patch/ball/patch is historically accurate and I would say just as fast and very traditional...except where I use Jumbo hand rolling papers, probably. Also, as a final note, I would say that it was the "assault weapons ban" that was an abuse of the second amendment of The Constitution.
I just want to say that I LOVE YOUR CHANNEL. The "Great Gate of Kiev" opening combined with your presentation and how you put the videos together, in addition to the subject matter is absolutely fantastic. BRAVO, good sir. The Cabinet of Curiosities most certainly has my attention. I wish I would have found it sooner, but I am glad to have found it regardless.
Historical precedence. We have modern rifles because people who owned guns took it upon themselves to alter, or modify said gun. It was never considered illegal to do so. This was part of America for well over 200 years.
I thought the point of muzzle loading was doing a nostalgia hunt? Once they started making inlines quite a few years ago I wondered where it was all going. I've never fired a muzzle loader but have always wanted to; something about a Kentucky Rifle or Hawkins using flintlock that I'd really groove to.
I'm not sure I like how he uses the phrase almost illegal. It either is legal or is not. Unless it is proven illegal it is legal. There is no almost and there is no stretching.
"Abusing loopholes" is more neutrally referred to as following the letter of the law. Imagine if going the speedlimit was called abusing a loophole to avoid a ticket
No. Abusing a loophole for a speed limit would be to go over the speed limit in reverse gear because it is written that the speed limit is in the "direction of travel" and that the "direction of travel" in somewhere defined as to be depending of the front of the car or the driver seat. That is what a loophole is and that would be abusing it. A loophole depends of the spirit of the law, if you don't respect the letter of the law but you respect its spirit then you are not exploiting a loophole. When it comes to firearm regulation both pro and anti just shut their brain down and go dumpster diving for arguments and reasoning.
If it takes a cartridge and the barrel is rifled, its a rifle. If it takes a cartridge and no rifling just a straight groove, its a firearm. If it takes a cartridge and smooth bore, its a shotgun. The prime being in the cartridge makes it a cartridge gun and not a muzzleloader.
In countries where rifles are forbidden or have strict license requirements, blackpowder guns and muzzle loaders skip the licensing requirements. In these countries, that makes owning a gun a reality.
If someone were to design a minigun that muzzleloads the projecticle automatically, then loads the charge stick. Then fires, then ejects. Would this be considered a legal minigun? Im sure it cant fire as fast as a regular one, but what does it matter if at the end of the day its still a minigun
The dates are not reserved for modern ammunition and arms, the dates reserved are for muzzle loaders. Muzzle loaders are still permitted during open season.
I Love that Intro musuc sounds like we should be seeing a paper boy streaking down a steep cobbled street somewhere in the Industrial Black Country, Wolverhampton or somewhere equally as quaint yet Ghastly.....
Idaho requirements for muzzle loading seasons is that the power must be loose and poured in through the muzzle. There is also a requirement for non-optical/telescopic sights. Several years ago, there was a push to go further to allow only traditional sidelock percussion cap or flint-lock mechanisms but that was rescinded after one season. I prefer to hunt with my sidelock percussion cap Kentucky rifle.
I do not like the term "loophole abuse". That has a negative connotation. Exploitation or another similar term would be more neutral. This is a great innovation, and I'm excited to see what future developments produce.
This is essentially a artilery style breech, it's a none fixed Ammunition design just like a bag gun. As for the word loophole... That simply means it's something legal that the person doesn't like..
Is it legal to"double break" the barrel? Where you can load the round in from the front but it's closer to the seal and rear fire stick? I suppose a latch or screw or a combo of both would work to make sure it's safer and stronger to use, along with the barrel being able to seal closer to the round as well. If it is legal then I'd like to make it and be credited for it :)
"...come close to breaking the law, but don't." That "but don't" makes all the difference in the world. It's like going nude vs. wearing a bikini: the bikini reveals quite a lot, but what it conceals makes all the difference between "dressed" and "public indecency." The law is there to draw a line. You can get as close as you like so long as you don't cross it.
As one of the hunting only stanced people that the gun community hates, I think this is a perfectly reasonable invention designed to fix a genuine safety issue.
That is a peculiar development in muzzle loading. I can't see myself spending money on that kind of weapon. I understand the frustration of wet powder, but that's part of muzzle loading, learning to keep your powder dry.
Agreed. They have gotten so far from the intent of fair chase, and the promotion of maintaining a tradition with primitive arms. There's nothing wrong with these modern black powder guns, but they are as accurate, at range, as a modern center fire. Sometimes, more accurate at typical hunting distances.
