PDA

View Full Version : Is the Cylinder of a revolver considerd to be a magazine?


AJAX22
03-31-2009, 2:01 PM
I've got a bit of a puzzler thats been kicking around in my head.

Is the cylinder of a revolver considered to be a magazine (amunition feeding device) under CA law?

Since the cylinder holds the bullet in the actual firing chamber of the gun, my instinct is to say that it is not a magazine... much in the same way that a peperbox pistol or double barrel shotgun does not have a magazine since the chambers do not allow for the removal and insertion of a new cartridge.

So... your thoughts?

There are a number of revolvers with capacities greater than 10 rounds

http://www.gunsamerica.com/935535379/Guns/Pistols/Colt-Replica/USFA_5_5_12_22_U_S_Firearms_NEW_REVOLVER_22LR.htm

AJAX22
03-31-2009, 2:13 PM
Another thing to consider...

If the chambers of a revolver constitutes a magazine, then why wouldn't the bullet in the chamber of a firearm (in battery) should probably be counted when evaluating the 'capacity' of a loaded gun...

Dr Rockso
03-31-2009, 2:23 PM
Revolver cylinder should not be considered an 'ammunition feeding device'. I think this has come up before in regards to 12 shot .22LR revolvers.

AJAX22
03-31-2009, 3:40 PM
Do you happen to have a link to those threads? I can't seem to find anything

DDT
03-31-2009, 3:46 PM
Since the chamber of a semi-auto isn't part of the "feeding device" a round in the action is not in the "feeding device." The only statutes I am aware of regulate the capacity of a "feeding device" and not the total rounds in a "loaded gun."

Perhaps a Side by Side .223 with 10 rd. magazines for each barrel?

Dr Rockso
03-31-2009, 4:06 PM
I know I've seen other threads where the consensus was that it was not an ammunition feeding device, but now all I can find are threads where the consensus is the opposite. I guess it's debatable :confused:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=144193
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=1594250

B Strong
03-31-2009, 4:37 PM
I would say that a cylinder is not a magazine.

A magazine would be detachable from the firearm, the cylinder only changes position to allow reloading, and is not (easily) detachable from the firearm

In addition, the cylinder must be loaded and in position with the barrel in order for the firearm to fire, but a magazine fed firearm could be fed one round at a time into the chamber and still fire.

RP1911
03-31-2009, 5:20 PM
so if you had a hammer down on an empty chamber in a revolver, a la carrying Colt SAA, would that make it a non-loaded psitol?

Mr. Magoo
03-31-2009, 5:28 PM
so if you had a hammer down on an empty chamber in a revolver, a la carrying Colt SAA, would that make it a non-loaded psitol?

Vewwwy vewwwwy interesting.....

abalone hunter
03-31-2009, 5:38 PM
Good question and I ask Fish and Game. I ask them if I was hunting with a handgun and had my gun open so there was no bullet in the chamber is it o.k. and the ansure I got was call the local Sheriffs office and ask them there policy. So it seems to me f@g won't ansure one more question in a long line of questions I have ask them .

Mr. Magoo
03-31-2009, 5:41 PM
Good question and I ask Fish and Game. I ask them if I was hunting with a handgun and had my gun open so there was no bullet in the chamber is it o.k. and the ansure I got was call the local Sheriffs office and ask them there policy. So it seems to me f@g won't ansure one more question in a long line of questions I have ask them .

Answer.

Also your abbreviation of Fish and Game looks to be "f-a-g" lol....

AJAX22
03-31-2009, 5:42 PM
I don't think the issue here is loaded vs unload.... as having a cartridge in the chamber of a firearm most definitly constitutes it being loaded according to CA law.

IIRC there was a court decision where (clark?) where the court made a refference to the chamber/magazine/cylinder defining loaded vs unloaded... If anyone happenes to have a link to that it might have a usefull bit of terminology.

gunsmith
03-31-2009, 5:44 PM
Good question and I ask Fish and Game. I ask them if I was hunting with a handgun and had my gun open so there was no bullet in the chamber is it o.k. and the ansure I got was call the local Sheriffs office and ask them there policy. So it seems to me f@g won't ansure one more question in a long line of questions I have ask them .

Your post is completely unintelligible, could you translate that into English?

AJAX22
04-01-2009, 9:04 AM
Any new thoughts on this?

CHS
04-01-2009, 9:13 AM
Any new thoughts on this?

I don't see how it could be called a feeding device. The feeding device for a revolver is your hands.

Now here's some REAL mental masturbation:

If a 11rd revolver is legal because it doesn't have a large-capacity magazine, would a 11rd speedloader be regulated as a "large capacity feeding device" ?

Greg-Dawg
04-01-2009, 9:17 AM
Why do we complicate things? No, its not a semi-automatic therefore no mags.

Dirtbiker
04-01-2009, 9:34 AM
The bigger questions is are there any +10 revolvers on the"list"

RP1911
04-01-2009, 10:35 AM
They could be construed as such in unique cases where you can remove one cylinder and replace with another like the Ruger Single Six and the Colt New Frontier. If you carried loaded extra cylinders?

Army
04-01-2009, 11:10 AM
A magazine stores ammunition. The ammunition is not chambered, ready to be fired.

A cylinder is part of the firing mechanism, as all rounds of ammunition are already chambered and ready to fire in turn.

Clips fill magazines. Speed loaders fill chambers.

hvengel
04-01-2009, 11:32 AM
so if you had a hammer down on an empty chamber in a revolver, a la carrying Colt SAA, would that make it a non-loaded psitol?

I am assuming that the other 5 chambers are loaded? If so then as loaded is currently defined (IE. a round that is in a position to be fired) then the gun is loaded under Ca law since in the case of a single action revolver the act of firing involves cocking the hammer which would rotate the cylinder into a position where there is a round that will be fired if the trigger is pulled. Now if the next chamber is also empty you might be able to argue that the gun is not loaded but you should not expect to win that argument in court. Having any rounds in the cylinder of any revolver in Ca under circumstances where having a loaded firearm is not legal, like OC, is very likely to result in a conviction no matter how many times you have to pull the trigger for it to fire. At least right now everyone should avoid any OC situation where there is any possible way that the firearm might be considered loaded under current law.

RP1911
04-01-2009, 12:53 PM
The following is a technical comment, not a legal one: Don't do that on the Single Six. It is pretty hard to get the cylinder out when loaded (there is very little clearance), and if you jiggle or force it, you can make one of the rounds go off (they are called rimfire for a reason). Try it with 6 spent rounds sometime (it's particularly hard with the .22WMR cylinder). This could hurt.

I agree. I was just mentioning the capability of doing so. I think Ruger has a cap and ball (Old Army) revolver that can accept a .45LC cylinder. How that plays out legally, I am not sure. A cash and carry revolver that can be converted to shoot regular ammo.

AJAX22
04-01-2009, 1:25 PM
Agree that the rounds are already chambered. But only one of them is ready to fire; the others first have to be moved to the firing position, in the same fashion as the mechanism of a semi-auto pistol moves a new round from the magazine into the firing position. The only difference is that in a revolver, an extra chamber is brought along with the cartridge.

For some real fun, look at belt-fed guns. The belt is considered the magazine in California, even if it is a disintegrating belt (which can not be reloaded and reused after firing). For that reason, belt-fed guns can only be fed with little 10-round pieces of belt. How does that fit into your definition of "magazine"?

.

The difference between the rounds in a revolver and the rounds in an autoloader are that the rounds in a revolver are not removed from the chamber, nothing feeds ammunition into them, the chamber simply rotates into battery, are peperbox pistols such as the mossberg brownie considered to have magazines because they have 4 barrels and a rotating firing pin? the shells are all held in proper position for firing, nothing moves except the pin.... how does that differ from a revolver where the chamber aligns with the pin?

There is also the fact that a revolver cannot be made to function AT ALL without the cylinder, while semi automatics can be single shot manually loaded.

The convention is (at least with auto loaders) not to count the chamber of the firearm when calculating magazine capacity. otherwise all of our 10 round magazines would in fact have a capacity of 11.

If we are not counting the chamber of the firearm in an autoloader for the purpouse of determining what 'magazine' capacity is, why are we counting the chambers on a revolver?

Furthermore, what about the black powder percussion revolvers with a capacity of more than 10 rounds? what about the pinfire guns? If the chamber can be counted to determine capacity, what exempts black powder guns from this consideration, ammunition is not specifically defined as 'fixed cartridge ammunition' is it?.... can you have a 'high capacity ammunition feeding device which is an integral component of an object which is not even legally a firearm?

Heck the walsh pistols had 6 chambers that held 2 seperate rounds per chamber (capacity of 12)
http://www.prices4antiques.com/item_images/medium/33/87/03-03.jpg

there were a few black powder firearms which used a 'stacked charge' concept like the modern day metal storm to fire multiple rounds with only one barrel


There is a pinfire pistol with a capacity WELL above 10 sitting on a shelf at martin B reddings in LA which is available for sale to anyone who wants it.

http://nra.nationalfirearms.museum/tour/graphics/NR-D25-Pinfire%20Handgun.jpg

There are revolver type guns with capacities well in excess of 10... here is one with 24 rounds of 38 special

http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h97/pokeystockman/24shotrevolver2.jpg

It just seems to me like counting the chamber on a revolver while discounting the chamber on an auto loader is a contradiction.

bohoki
04-01-2009, 4:53 PM
you asked the wrong question

you need to know if it is a "ammunition feed device"

and since the ammunition feed device feeds to a chamber the chamber can't be a feed device

of course what if someone made some kind of gatling type gun that had chambers all linked together that you slide cartridges into the big belt of chambers

DDT
04-01-2009, 5:33 PM
you asked the wrong question

you need to know if it is a "ammunition feed device"

and since the ammunition feed device feeds to a chamber the chamber can't be a feed device


I don't know if that is how the law would see it. It could easily be argued that an "ammunition feeding device" is used to move a round into position to be fired. There is no reason that is has to be moved into a chamber vs. a chamber being moved in front of a firing pin/barrel. Now, the pepper box with stationary barrels and ammunition with a pin the pecks around is an interesting proposition.

CHS
04-01-2009, 5:34 PM
you need to know if it is a "ammunition feed device"

and since the ammunition feed device feeds to a chamber the chamber can't be a feed device


We already discussed that. The question would be, if a 11rd revolver does not have a "large capacity ammunition feeding device" because they don't feed ammunition, then is a 11rd speed loader for that revolver an illegal "large capacity ammunition feeding device", since it DOES in fact feed ammo into the firearm?

Piper
04-01-2009, 7:12 PM
I've got a bit of a puzzler thats been kicking around in my head.

Is the cylinder of a revolver considered to be a magazine (amunition feeding device) under CA law?

Since the cylinder holds the bullet in the actual firing chamber of the gun, my instinct is to say that it is not a magazine... much in the same way that a peperbox pistol or double barrel shotgun does not have a magazine since the chambers do not allow for the removal and insertion of a new cartridge.

So... your thoughts?

There are a number of revolvers with capacities greater than 10 rounds

http://www.gunsamerica.com/935535379/Guns/Pistols/Colt-Replica/USFA_5_5_12_22_U_S_Firearms_NEW_REVOLVER_22LR.htm

While you're pondering various aspects of California gun laws, ponder this. An 1865 Navy Colt isn't a firearm according to California law. Furthermore, you could load a charge of powder into the cylinder w/ a bullet and conceal it in your waistband, so long as you don't cap it. How about that?

artherd
04-01-2009, 7:37 PM
It becomes a 'firearm' once you load it such that it is capable of discharging.

Piper
04-01-2009, 7:55 PM
It becomes a 'firearm' once you load it such that it is capable of discharging.

If you're referring to the Navy Colt, you're right. The other exception is a felon in possession, and I believe 626.9 makes it a firearm. So, if the cylinder is not capped, it can't fire. And if it can't fire and you're not a felon or within 1000' of a school grounds, it's not a gun therefore it's not a concealable firearm, and can legally be concealed on your person.

trashman
04-01-2009, 8:18 PM
Well, I was the guy who got excited about this nifty revolver in the first place...

Is this worth my drafting a letter to the BOFers? Is there any additional traction to be had from narrowing the definition of "feeding device" such that it only applies to removable spring-loaded magazines?

--Neill

El Gato
04-01-2009, 8:57 PM
Magazine (firearms)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
A staggered-column 9x19mm pistol magazine.

A magazine is an ammunition storage and feeding device within or attached to a repeating firearm. Magazines may be integral to the firearm (fixed) or removable (detachable). The magazine functions by moving the cartridges stored in the magazine into a position where they may be loaded into the chamber by the action of the firearm. The detachable magazine is often referred to as a clip; the correctness of this usage has been the subject of debate for most of a century.[1][2]

Magazines come in many shapes and sizes, from bolt action express rifles that hold only a few rounds to machine guns that hold hundreds of rounds. Since the magazine is an essential part of most repeating firearms, they are often subject to regulation by gun control laws seeking to limit the number of cartridges they hold.

So.. by this definition... a revolver cylinder is a magazine...:thumbsup:

trashman
04-01-2009, 8:59 PM
Magazine (firearms)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[...]

So.. by this definition... a revolver cylinder is a magazine...:thumbsup:

Which is why we wouldn't use it to determine what might be possible within CA law -- because it makes too much sense...

Chances are that there is a similarly straightforward definition of "detachable" in there somewhere too...and thank goodness the law doesn't follow it!

--Neill

AJAX22
04-01-2009, 9:00 PM
Magazine (firearms)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
A staggered-column 9x19mm pistol magazine.

A magazine is an ammunition storage and feeding device within or attached to a repeating firearm. Magazines may be integral to the firearm (fixed) or removable (detachable). The magazine functions by moving the cartridges stored in the magazine into a position where they may be loaded into the chamber by the action of the firearm. The detachable magazine is often referred to as a clip; the correctness of this usage has been the subject of debate for most of a century.[1][2]

Magazines come in many shapes and sizes, from bolt action express rifles that hold only a few rounds to machine guns that hold hundreds of rounds. Since the magazine is an essential part of most repeating firearms, they are often subject to regulation by gun control laws seeking to limit the number of cartridges they hold.

So.. by this definition... a revolver cylinder is a magazine...:thumbsup:

No.... quite the opposite actually

The cartridges are already in the chamber

If you count the cartridge that is already in the chamber then a 10 round semi auto pistol has the capacity to fire 11 rounds without reloading.

Army
04-01-2009, 9:03 PM
Except for the Garand, where the clip is an integral part of the internal magazine, required to make the magazine function.

And how about lever-action rifles with tubular magazines? Note that magazines don't have to be detachable at all.
The En-bloc clip of the Garand is still a clip filling a magazine. That it remains in the magazine means nothing. A lever action's magazine does nothing different than a removable magazine.




For some real fun, look at belt-fed guns. The belt is considered the magazine in California, even if it is a disintegrating belt (which can not be reloaded and reused after firing). For that reason, belt-fed guns can only be fed with little 10-round pieces of belt. How does that fit into your definition of "magazine"?It fits into the definition of a belt fed gun. California calls it an ammunition feeding device, not magazine. A pawl driven feed mechanism does not incorporate a magazine, hence the belt and/or links are neither a clip or magazine, but simply a way to align ammunition into the feed mechanism. Japanese machine guns were clip fed, the clip passing through the gun as it fired.

I don't actually mean to argue with you, Well, good...you would lose that argument :)

Your systematic taxonomy is nice, and very well-organized. But only in theory; as shown above, we can split hairs, and quibble about definitions.Thank you, but it is hardly theory. Clips, magazines, disintegrating and non-disintegrating link are well established in their roles............and I don't have a lot of hair.

In practice this means that convincing a judge and jury of your taxonomy will be hard, in the face of the DA splitting hairs and quibbling. I don't want to sit in the courtroom, with the DA showing my 12-shooter .22LR revolver to the jury, and making arguments such as the ones cited above. Way too dangerous.The definitions are well established in court and law. Even the DA agrees that the last 180 years have defined a revolver and a pistol :D

El Gato
04-01-2009, 9:04 PM
No.... quite the opposite actually

The cartridges are already in the chamber

If you count the cartridge that is already in the chamber then a 10 round semi auto pistol has the capacity to fire 11 rounds without reloading.

What ... you doubt Wiki....
I am stunned... apoplectic...without words...flabergasted....or just gasted... or something...

remember R. Lee Ermey... clips fit into magazines....
and magazines are storage areas/devices from a military standpoint...from an instructor standpoint... magazine/cylinder etc... not a problem... trying to get a CA. Legislator to understand the difference .... only the Govt. could afford that much money to overcome that level of stupidity...

AJAX22
04-01-2009, 9:05 PM
ok, here's a thought.... look at the dardik 1100 pistol.

The magazine capacity is measured separately from the revolving chambers, otherwise the capacity would be 12 rounds instead of 10....

If the DOJ is ok with a dardick (and we know they are) then counting the chambers of a revolver as being part of a 'magazine' or amunition feeding device is imparting a double standard.

tonelar
04-01-2009, 9:39 PM
I wish I could remember where this was, but I remember hearing the cylinder or a revolver referred to as it's magazine.

abalone hunter
04-02-2009, 8:38 AM
Mr. Magoo, Thanks fpr pointing out my F@g looks like f-a-g we got a good laugh. Gunsmith should like that being from Frisco.

gunsmith
04-04-2009, 2:26 PM
Mr. Magoo, Thanks fpr pointing out my F@g looks like f-a-g we got a good laugh. Gunsmith should like that being from Frisco.


We? as in the book Anthem?
http://www.noblesoul.com/orc/texts/anthem/complete.html
I am not "from" San Francisco, but I learned how to read and write
in the 1960's.
In the old days people were embarrassed by extremely poor spelling
because it made them look stupid.
BTW, your post is still unintelligible, I guess you're from some other country and English isn't your first language.
Or, it could be (as I suspect) you're one of those people
who presume they're intelligent, perhaps more so then average yet they can't spell average or even use a spell check.
So. .. Which is it? are you from some non English speaking country
or are you one of those arrogant buffoons?

AJAX22
04-09-2009, 5:51 PM
any other thoughts on this?