Yup, I hunt every season in PA with my flintlock except for when I have a bow in my hand. Now that I have taken every game animal in PA except Elk and waterfowl with a flintlock, I have no use for modern hunting tools.
Last edited:
PA regulation changes to be considered
- Thread starter zimmerstutzen
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Yup, I hunt every season in PA with my flintlock except for when I have a bow in my hand. Now that I have taken every game animal in PA except Elk and waterfowl with a flintlock, I have no use for modern hunting tools.
Sidney Smith
58 Cal.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2019
- Messages
- 2,211
- Reaction score
- 2,327
I was quoting the regulations digest. The law as written is contradictary. The digest is written in layman's terms so us blue collar types can understand things.
Sidney Smith
58 Cal.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2019
- Messages
- 2,211
- Reaction score
- 2,327
zimmerstutzen
70 Cal.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2009
- Messages
- 5,848
- Reaction score
- 1,216
The digest said you could use peep sights on a flintlock, even when the regs said otherwise. The for years the digest has said any muzzle loader over 44 caliber for firearms season, yet the regulations specifically outlawed double barrel guns, wheel locks, match locks, needle fire etc. The law for muzzle loaders was limited to percussion, flint and primer ignition, yet folks used the CVA electra. The Commission writes all kinds of things in the digest that are not accurate. Worst, is the fact that when pointed out to them, they just shrug and do nothing to correct it. As the regs currently stand, no one can figure out if a cap and ball revolver comes under a muzzleloader or other or is just plain illegal for hunting. In the SRA's a muzzleloading long rifle can be used but not a pistol. it makes no rational sense.
I agree that primitive should be primitive. That's one thing I like about rendezvous. The firearms have to at least look and operate the same as they did before smokeless powder came along. The ones I attend around here allow only round ball, not conical lead, at the shoots. Percussion or flintlock, optional, since percussion predates 1840.
Sidney Smith
58 Cal.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2019
- Messages
- 2,211
- Reaction score
- 2,327
Well my opinion on this is, the PGC offers up the digest as the guide to the rules and regs, and that's what I'm using. If I'm stopped for some reason and they then quote some other form of regulations, then I guess a trip to a court room to sort things out is in order, especially if its a case where they say I'm doing something wrong, and according to the regs digest I'm not. That line about "ignorance of the law being no excuse comes into question if one book says one thing and their version says something else. I would argue the entrapment angle then if I were a lawyer.......
zimmerstutzen
70 Cal.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2009
- Messages
- 5,848
- Reaction score
- 1,216
Yes of course. But wouldn't it be a lot simpler, if they just corrected their mistakes. They did correct a few of them, but stopped far short. Still can't figure out a cap and ball revolver under PA law. Not a muzzle loader, it does not load from the muzzle. , it does not load with loose powder from "the breech" My argument is that they are center fire. I have a few old tins of Remington and Winchester caps that specifically say "center fire" percussion caps right on the tins. The commission has made no effort to define center fire and Remington and Winchester certainly knew more than the commission does about firearms and what constitutes center fire.
Sidney Smith
58 Cal.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2019
- Messages
- 2,211
- Reaction score
- 2,327
True, and I think in a lot of cases with the game laws, thought is just something that doesn't come into their equation when the laws are written.
If I had a say I'd consider a cap and ball pistol as a primitive weapon, one that should at least be able to be used during the early muzzle loader season. It may be centerfire in location of primer, but that is where the similarity ends IMO. Center fire weapons should be classified as those firing modern cartridges only. Any situation where the shooter has to manually pour powder, manually insert a projectile, and maunally prime the weapon should remain as primitive.....But, we then go into what's constitutes primitive since then inlines would come into play and some would see them as primitive weapons. The process of laws is convoluted at best and ridiculous at worst.
If I had a say I'd consider a cap and ball pistol as a primitive weapon, one that should at least be able to be used during the early muzzle loader season. It may be centerfire in location of primer, but that is where the similarity ends IMO. Center fire weapons should be classified as those firing modern cartridges only. Any situation where the shooter has to manually pour powder, manually insert a projectile, and maunally prime the weapon should remain as primitive.....But, we then go into what's constitutes primitive since then inlines would come into play and some would see them as primitive weapons. The process of laws is convoluted at best and ridiculous at worst.
zimmerstutzen
70 Cal.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2009
- Messages
- 5,848
- Reaction score
- 1,216
And then we get to the hybrid guns, like Pope's muzzle loading center fire cartridge guns. A centerfire cartridge full of powder goes in the breech and the slug is loaded down the muzzle through a false muzzle. He made about 400 of them. Most accurate guns in America for many years. There are also those in lines that use a centerfire pistol case for ignition, but load the powder and bullet through the muzzle. Or the Maynard percussion cartridge guns that used a fixed cartridge case with powder and bullet, but had a hole in the base and were ignited by a percussion cap. And on top of all that, I believe it is the draper system cartridge, a brass cartridge case with a percussion nipple in the base that is loaded with powder and bullet, and fired in a centerfire gun, by the firing pin hitting the percussion cap on the nipple in the center of the cartridge base. Not so simple to define centerfire. Thing is, as a centerfire, I can use a 44 cap and ball revolver for deer in the regular firearms season. If it is defined as a muzzle loader, then the minimum caliber is 50.
Sidney Smith
58 Cal.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2019
- Messages
- 2,211
- Reaction score
- 2,327
You forgot those guns that use 209 shotgun primers for ignition.....
zimmerstutzen
70 Cal.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2009
- Messages
- 5,848
- Reaction score
- 1,216
Sorry, They outlawed Peep sights for 25 years. Made them legal about 2007 and then made them illegal again about 2011. They now did correct that and made them legal again. But the digest never changed after they were made illegal again.
People get confused about this all the time. Flintlock deer season is its own season, after Christmas. The other early "muzzleloader" season is open to all the other types as well as flintlocks. You can also use any kind of muzzleloader during regular firearms season. In special regs areas there is an extended shotgun antlerless season that overlaps with flintlock season.
I dont have any animosity toward any type of firearm for hunting. I hunt rifle, shotgun, bow/crossbow, and yes flintlock. I do enjoy the late flintlock season and pray they never abandon it's exclusivity. I would like to see it implemented the same season length statewide as the special regs areas . It wouldnt have any significant impact on the harvest, but it would sure be a gift to those who partake of the pleasure.
Why is it that it seems that those who know the least about something get to make the rules for it??????
A good bureaucrat will never attempt to change his errors in the writings of bad or vague laws. They are incapable of understanding that they don't know something. It's their nature.
Good morning all. I posted this question yesterday, I think on probably the wrong forum. I had just read someplace that Pennsylvania considering gun registration. Any of you hunters from their aware of this? Does it also include muzzle-loaders? I think the article said there would be a $10 a year fee or something to that nature, And I've always thought this is the way they could do their part to get rid of firearms, Once they find out where they are, you just have to to make the yearly "tax"so high That people can't afford it. I was just wondering if there was any danger of this going anywhere.
Squint
Squint
Sounds like something some Philadelphia congressman thought up. Likely would not get out of committee. Nor would it pass if it did come up for a vote. But, if the world turned upside down (that would make a catchy tune title
) and it did become law, it would be observed mostly in the breach. Registration is the first step to confiscation. And no, they wouldn't let us keep our muzzleloaders. Freedom is lost incrementally. Once you start down the road of compromise, the battle is lost.Richard/Grumpa
Didn't you read my answer to that question that you made in a topic titled "New gun regulations"?
Here's a link to it.
https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/threads/new-gun-regulations.114982/#post-1571282
For those who don't want to follow the link, it is against a Pennsylvania law for the state to make any laws that require guns to be registered.
I apologize Zonie, I looked for an answer to my question I just didn't know how to find it. I don't think I'm very knowledgeable about using this website. That is why I posted the question again.
Thanks, squint
