Comments: The French Could Teach California Something About Freedom

Dear Sir,

I was under the impression that Federal law (1938?) banned (cartridge) rifles greater than .50 caliber. Did I get that wrong?

Paul

Posted by Paul Price at April 27, 2005 07:13 AM

Don't make this too well-known or California will go back in session to close this "evil gun-size loophole".

Posted by FishOrMan at April 28, 2005 04:06 AM

Paul,
I believe it involves bore diameter not projectile diameter. I haven't looked at the wording in a while but if I recall correctly it treats firearms with a land diameter of over .5 as falling under the NFA. The .50 BMG has a land diameter of .5 but the grooves run a little deeper, hence the projectiles being .510 instead of .5 even.

So I believe that the .50 escapes the NFA because it deals with the smallest part of the bore & not the largest part or the projectile. Though I could be mistaken & it could be exempt from the NFA for some other reason.

FishOrMan,
I would love for any of the statist bastards in the Cali government to read this blog, if nothing else for the sheer satisfaction of them knowing they are openly referred to as imbecilic, assinine, asshatted idiots who aren't worth the price of the tar & feathers they deserve. But I doubt that's the case.

But don't worry - with or without reading any blogs they'd think of some reason to close the loophole that lets cartridges similar to the .50 bmg escape their foul clutches - cartridges like the .30-06 or the .22LR.

Posted by Publicola at April 28, 2005 04:49 AM

If someone were to make a rifle in 12.7mm Russian (12.7x108mm, IIRC), I wonder how hard it would be to import the ammo?

Posted by Heartless Libertarian at April 28, 2005 06:45 AM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?