Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.8
Site Design by Sekimori

« Record for criminal stupidity: robbing a gun store | Main | Justice Breyer and Active Liberty »

Amusing note on definitions

Posted by David Hardy · 21 November 2005 11:22 AM

I've seen this in some state laws, but only now realized it was the case in Arizona... the legislature has managed to define "firearm" out of existence!

Arizona Revised Statutes, title 13, chapter 31, contains all the firearm law restrictions, including prohibited possessors, concealed carry, etc.. Section 3101 is the definition section, which applies to the entire chapter. Here are the two key definitions:

"3. "Explosive" means any dynamite, nitroglycerine, black powder or other similar explosive material including plastic explosives. Explosive does not include ammunition or ammunition components such as primers, percussion caps, smokeless powder, black powder and black powder substitutes used for hand loading purposes."

"4. "Firearm" means any loaded or unloaded handgun, pistol, revolver, rifle, shotgun or other weapon that will expel, is designed to expel or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive."

So firearm is anything that expels a project by explosive, but explosive does not include ammunition or gunpowder.....

{update: note that key is that gunpowder and ammo are not explosives. So a gun that shoots those is not legally a "firearm." A spud gun probably wouldn't qualify, either, unless the hair spray or whatever used to power it is considered an "explosive." A good argument could be made that, even tho it will detonate, it isn't, since the statute lists nitro, blasting powder, plastic explosive and other "similar" explosives, and hair spray vapor has little similarity there.

I've seen another definition of "firearm" somewhere in statutes -- that which expels a projectile by action of an expanding gas. Now, that would encompass spud guns, not to mention BB guns and airsoft guns. Maybe cork guns. But it's not the definition used here.]

· contemporary issues

6 Comments | Leave a comment

Phanatic | November 21, 2005 12:49 PM | Reply

Nope.

Read section 4 again. A 'firearm' is any loaded or unloaded [handgun], [pistol], [revolver], [rifle], [shotgun], or [other weapon that will expel, is designed to expel, or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive].

Then, back to 3: Explosive does not include [ammunition] or [ammunition components such as primers, percussion caps, smokeless powder, black powder and black powder substitutes used for hand loading purposes].

First, there are all sorts of firearms by these definisions, notably handguns, pistols, revolvers, rifles, and shotguns. Their existence is not contingent upon any definition of explosive.

What's outlawed by these definitions are other weapons which expel a projectile by the action of an explosive, if that explosive isn't ammunition or ammunition components.

A potato gun, which propels a projectile by the action of an explosive, the explosive being a mixture of air and hairspray propellant, would be considered a firearm, ferinstance.

Kristopher | November 21, 2005 1:34 PM | Reply

Kewl!

Now AZ firarms laws only apply to spud guns.

This makes CCW much easier.

Phanatic | November 21, 2005 4:41 PM | Reply

No, AZ firearms laws apply to handguns, pistols, revolvers, rifles, shotguns, and spud guns.

Windy Wilson | November 23, 2005 10:30 AM | Reply

No. AZ firearms laws still apply to pistols, rifles, shotguns, etc., because they "may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive", as they may all be readily converted to some variant of a spud gun.

Dave | December 5, 2006 11:13 PM | Reply

i was wondering if you can carry a black powder revolver without a ccw in wa state if anybody knows, i cant find it on my local laws reguarding concealed carry. thanx

Spray coupon | March 25, 2014 4:38 AM | Reply

[url=http://www.softassembly.com/Spray.html]Spray voucher[/url].

Leave a comment