Legal in Our Nation's Capitol?

[Statkowski]

Check out the jewelry offered here, made from expended cartridges (mostly).

http://www.south-life.com/

I'm not 100% certain, but wouldn't this stuff get you arrested, and prosecuted, in the District of Columbia?

[tl_3237]

Don't think they qualify under the definition of "ammunition" since they are no longer of the form usable in a firearm:

D.C. Code § 7-2501.01 (2014)

(2) "Ammunition" means cartridge cases, shells, projectiles (including shot), primers, bullets (including restricted pistol bullets), propellant powder, or other devices or materials designed, redesigned, or intended for use in a firearm or destructive device.

[Sgt.K]

Don't think they qualify under the definition of "ammunition" since they are no longer of the form usable in a firearm:

D.C. Code § 7-2501.01 (2014)

(2) "Ammunition" means cartridge cases, shells, projectiles (including shot), primers, bullets (including restricted pistol bullets), propellant powder, or other devices or materials designed, redesigned, or intended for use in a firearm or destructive device.

Yeah, they may have been modified since they were manufactured, but do you really believe a DC judge would not pull the red portion out and use it to hang you by the naughty bits? How long have you been here?

[tl_3237]

Yeah, they may have been modified since they were manufactured, but do you really believe a DC judge would not pull the red portion out and use it to hang you by the naughty bits? How long have you been here?

Assuming arguendo that the shown jewelry is a cutdown of real shot shells, I really DO believe that there is an infinitesimal probability the judge would attempt to misconstrue the definition of "ammunition" to rule that the head stamped cross-sections are viable "cartridge case" designed for use in a firearm.

In the event of a preposterously rogue interpretation as you suggest, the judicial system provide safeguards, a.k.a. juries and appellate courts, to remedy those injustices.

[PocketProtector]

2A not allowed in the nations capital. And bastardized so greatly that it includes jewelry and pop tarts. What more can be said?

It's over

[Statkowski]

The District has already convicted one man of not only having a dud shotgun cartridge, but also miscellaneous pieces of non-ammo (which they call ammo) for a black powder gun.

One of the products offered is a Large Bullet Necklace (http://www.south-life.com/sl/lizzy-j...charm-130.html) which contains an end cap and an expended cartridge with a bullet added to its nose.

The cartridge shown appears to me to be a .45-caliber Long Colt, expended of course, but with a new softnose bullet inserted into the casing.

You seriously think they wouldn't hang someone for that, no matter how pretty the neck it was found hanging on?

[tl_3237]

The District has already convicted one man of not only having a dud shotgun cartridge, but also miscellaneous pieces of non-ammo (which they call ammo) for a black powder gun.

One of the products offered is a Large Bullet Necklace (http://www.south-life.com/sl/lizzy-j...charm-130.html) which contains an end cap and an expended cartridge with a bullet added to its nose.

The cartridge shown appears to me to be a .45-caliber Long Colt, expended of course, but with a new softnose bullet inserted into the casing.

You seriously think they wouldn't hang someone for that, no matter how pretty the neck it was found hanging on?

I've seen the cartridge necklace but you presented the headstamps of "shotshell" as the object of your question. I find no reason to re-visit my original response that they would not be considered ammunition under the DC ordinance since they are not readily adoptable for use in a firearm. I suspect that they may not be true derivatives of real shotshells but that is not the linchpin for my comments.


I'm aware of the squib shotshell and projectiles in the Witaschek case. I believe the shotshell was not included in the conviction (though it would normally be actionable but the prosecution didn't submit necessary evidence) but possession of the hollow-pointed sabot muzzle loading bullets were. Taking in the application of the ordinance, as opposed to its propriety, those projectiles were definitely included in the definition.

As to the necklaces I doubt that the cases depicted would fall under the ordinance since they appear to be perforated by the chain attaching mechanism and thus are no longer viable for firearm use. As to the unfired 'bullet', assuming it is what we normally consider a projectile, then obviously it would fall under the definition.

I don't see a lot of ambiguity in the DC definition - overreaching and stringent as it is - but again your question(s) are with respect to its application and not its wisdom.

[Solaran_X]

I'm pretty sure you aren't even legally allowed to think about firearms or anything related to firearms in Washington D.C. without a permit and registering your intent to think with the police.