Carry Law clarification

[B96brig4CC]

Law states that it is unlawful to carry any caliber larger than .45. Title 21 1290.6. Now, does that refer to actual measure of the round or the load? It may seem like a stupid question, but I consider a 44 magnum a larger round than a .45 ACP.

Given the velocity of the rounds and the impact ft lbs. The typical full metal jacket 230 gr 45 acp travels 830 feet per second with 350 foot pounds of energy at 25 yards; The 44 magnum with a 240 gr bullet travels at 1,542 feet per sec with 1,267 ft lbs of energy at 25 yards.

I would say that a .44 would ballistically rate higher than a .45 making it a caliber illegal to carry. But if they are basing it on the size of the projectile, then a .44 would be legal to carry?

I have always had it in my head that a 44 magnum is larger than a 45 ACP.

What is everyones opinion?

Would you say according to the wording of the law that a 44 is a "legal" caliber?

 

[Kid Glock]

Imo, it's bore diameter, not ballistics.
.44 is ok to carry

 

[Glocktogo]

It is bore diameter, not power. You cannot carry a .480 Ruger, .50 A.E. of .50 G.I., but .44 mag is ok.

 

[NikatKimber]

And it's all the name of the round too. Technically .45 ACP is .452, which one would think is illegal, but it's legal, while .460 S&W is illegal, even though it's just a super magnum .45 LC. So is .454 Cassull, which is in between the .460 and .45 LC.

Just arbitrary political rules.

 

[B96brig4CC]

hmmm, wonder what would happen in court when they see the size of the hole you left in the BG.

 

[LightningCrash]

And it's all the name of the round too. Technically .45 ACP is .452, which one would think is illegal, but it's legal, while .460 S&W is illegal, even though it's just a super magnum .45 LC. So is .454 Cassull, which is in between the .460 and .45 LC.

Just arbitrary political rules.

The name of the round isn't caliber, though, so 460 S&W and 454 Casull are fine.

Any bullet that's over .445" diameter and under .455" diameter is .45 caliber, really doesn't matter what the manufacturer calls the cartridge. See the .327 Federal Magnum, it's actually .31 caliber.

Maybe I'll write the OKAG and see what he has to say

 

[NikatKimber]

You do that. I hope what you're saying is right. But I don't want to be the test case.

 

[LightningCrash]

Well, take the 200gr .452 on www.JKBullets.com
It's purposely a 45LC bullet, but it would be just as at home in a 454 or 460 case. You could crimp it into any of the three. You could mix and match them in a 460 revolver (and wouldn't that be a surprising range session!)

I think carrying 460 S&W would be a stupid idea, but not because I think it's illegal. I just think it would be stupid to carry a round you couldn't put on target repeatedly in a ridiculously heavy gun like that.

(I'm not volunteering to be a precedent case either)

This is not even getting into the circumstances under which you could Open Carry a .500 S&W Magnum...

Stranger still, the military considers the 30-06 (.308 bullet) and .308 Winchester to be .30 Caliber, no idea how they round down like that. You would think it would be .31 Caliber!

 

[NikatKimber]

And the .38 is actually a .36 caliber, and the .44 is actually a .429 caliber, I know, I'm just saying that I had heard that the .454 and .460 were illegal. If you read my post, I said that both of those were extended .45 LC rounds. I could be wrong, that could have been hearsay, but I still would consider it valid legal advice in the current political climate.

Since there is no more logic to the law than there is brains in a gnat, for all I know the politicians DON'T know (or don't care) that the name ISN'T necessarily the caliber.

The intelligence level of a lot of current laws don't inspire me to confidence in my government.

 

[B96brig4CC]

And the .38 is actually a .36 caliber, and the .44 is actually a .429 caliber, I know, I'm just saying that I had heard that the .454 and .460 were illegal. If you read my post, I said that both of those were extended .45 LC rounds. I could be wrong, that could have been hearsay, but I still would consider it valid legal advice in the current political climate.

Since there is no more logic to the law than there is brains in a gnat, for all I know the politicians DON'T know (or don't care) that the name ISN'T necessarily the caliber.

The intelligence level of a lot of current laws don't inspire me to confidence in my government.

Agreed. That was the reason for my question. If you shot a guy with a 44 mag, what is going to be the legal ramifications? I would never carry something like that, but I can't imagine that a jury would see it as self defense once proof of the weapons power is presented.