• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Muzzleloaders classified as firearm wyoming

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I agree with you 100% thats why I posted the article. I know people don't think much of some gun laws, but we can't have felons owning any type of firearm. It'll be a shame if we can't purchase muzzleloaders through places like TOTW and others without filling out forms or doing a background check. If this happens don't blame anti-gunners blame the felons who are trying to skirt the law. They are the ones screwing it up for the rest of us by constantly breaking the law.
 
Again, I am no bleeding heart and have no sympathy with the felons.

My interest is in not layering more BS on the ML world. Redefining MLs as firearms is a risky method of doing keeping felons from soaking up permits. You are establishing a dangerous precedent. There are better ways to accomplish this. Simply ban them from being elibible to hunt.

Can they not get a big game permit for archery?
You could ban felons from possessing hunting devices which would include archery equipment.

CS

PS I worked in Upton and stayed in Laramie years ago. I love the place.
 
You do not have to be a Felon to lose you right to firearms. Bill Clinton put out a decree that anyone convicted of domestic violence can no longer have a gun. So if you get into a tif with your old lady and she calls the cops you will lose your rights.
A friend of mine that had a concealed carry permit for years went down to renew it and they told him no because of a fight with his ex-wife thirty years ago and said he best get rid of any guns because if caught with them he would be in big trouble.
Old Charlie
 
Yes we all know about the poor guy who has a mean wife and she disarms him. But get real most felons are bad people.
The crime in the back country has gone up stealing life stock, camp robbers, rape, pouching, car thefts. Etc. This has been traced in almost all cases to armed felons.
I don't see any plot here to diarm the folks of Wyoming. Can you go shopping in SC with your .44 Mag on your hip? We can any town in the state, if SC allows this freedom you are safe.
 
Terry,

You puzzle me here. You posted this to me and reference things that I did not say.

I will clarify my position. I am not interested in the felon getting away with threatening people. I do not want him armed and it sounds like he needs to spend more time in a cell contemplating the errors of his ways or contemplating his navel.

We just disagree as to how to accomplish that goal. I prefer using a means that does not burden the lawful shooters of MLs with a dangerous interpretation of the law. It is one of those slippery slope situations.

I am glad the Wyoming is enlightened with its firearms carry laws. Again, I am more familiar with that beautiful state than most people, having worked there.

As to being safe in SC, take a look at our gun laws and our castle doctrine recently being extended to one's vehicle and place of business.

(A) It is the intent of the General Assembly (GA) to codify the common law Castle Doctrine which recognizes that a person's home is his castle and to extend the doctrine to include an occupied vehicle and the person's place of business.

(B) The GA finds that it is proper for law-abiding citizens to protect themselves, their families, and others from intruders and attackers w/o fear of prosecution or civil action for acting in defense of themselves and others.

(C) The GA finds that Section 20, Article I of the SC Constitution guarantees the right of the people to bear arms, and this right shall not be infringed.

(D) The GA finds that persons residing in or visiting this State have a right to expect to remain unmolested and safe within their homes, businesses, and vehicles.

(E) The GA finds that no person or victim of crime should be required to surrender his personal safety to a criminal, nor should a person be required to needlessly retreat in the face of intrusion or attack.

Section 16-11-440

(C) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in another place where he has a right to be, including but not limited to, his place of business, has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, if he reasonably believes it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury to himself or another person or to prevent the commission of a violent crime as defined in Section 16-1-60.

(D) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person's dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or a violent crime as defined in Section 16-1-60.

Section 16-11-450

(B) A LEA may use standard procedures for investigating the use of deadly force as described in subsection (A), but the agency may not arrest the person for using deadly force unless probable cause exists that the deadly force was unlawful.

(C ) The court shall award reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of a civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (A).

From the section on firearms:

Section 23-31-520. The article does not affect the authority of any county, municipality, or political subdivision to regulate the careless or negligent discharge or public brandishment of firearms, nor does it prevent the regulation of public brandishment of firearms during the times of or a demonstrated potential for insurrection, invasions, riots, or natural disasters. This article denies any county, municipality, or political subdivision the powers to confiscate a firearm or ammunition unless incident to arrest.

(It was easily cut and pasted since I was reading it a few nights ago and had sent it to some friends.)

SC does have a few wrinkles in open carriage via a brandishing statute.

While I am not originally from here, I appreciate their strong support of the rights of the citizen to defend self and others. I am from Louisiana which also has strong firearm protections and permits open carriage of firearms and also has concealed carry permit laws.

I wonder why anyone would want to openly carry a sidearm though. It seems a lot safer to have it concealed for many reasons.

I think that we truly agree far more than we disagree. I have just seen abuses from inside the system and am less trusting of potential prosecutorial abuse of such interpretations of law which then intrude upon rights. The politician/lawyer that you see today is easily replaced tomorrow by a scary fellow. I would therefore prefer to see other laws used against this guy which do not establish principles that can intrude upon the ML realm.

CS
 
After reading some of the thought's of gun owner's here it is easy to see how the liberal wing get's gun law after gun law passed. As gun owners we are a dieing breed.
Old Charlie
 
"One of the issues here on this subject is Big Game Permits. It has been found thru a study in Utah that felons are buying valuable permits and hunting with M/Ls as they require no BG checks.
They should not be allowed to hunt as firearms are probibited to them"

Once again this would depend on the states definition of a ML being a firearm, most states follow the federal standard and felons can own ML guns, though most who plan to continue a life of crime would likely opt for something other than a ML would suspect, those who by ML's probably just want to go hunting not bumping off AM/PM's
 
After reading some of the thought's of gun owner's here it is easy to see how the liberal wing get's gun law after gun law passed. As gun owners we are a dieing breed.

Gee Charlie, was that a slap at me? What do you disagree with? I have carried a gun for 25 years and am aware that my views might be viewed by some as extreme. I have a thick hide, but to be ridiculed without even knowing particulars is a bit rough.

As to being a dying breed, I think not. The sad thing is that there are fewer places to shoot, but carry permits and guns sales appear to be flourishing quite well. Look at the backlog for custom MLs. Only the lower end production of sidelocks has been failing recently. I attribute this to a combination of in-lines eating the cheap market and custom guns eating to upscale.

It all looks good to me.

CS
 
No need for open carry?? Boy no wonder you eastern folk and we western folk can not parley. Here in the west open carry is a big deal.
I was in SC during the filming of "The Patriot" at Lake Moultrie {sp} park. The fellows I talked to in Charleston were not that happy about the eastern firearms laws there. So far as protecting ones home thats a right it need not be stated by some politico in 3 pages.
Anyway I am sure you are a nice fellow, and we could have a good time eaten catfish at that little palce on tha canal up near Monk's Corner.
Good luck, and carry on. :thumbsup:
 
Back
Top