"The truth is out there."

The earlier reference to the Tommy gun got me to thinking (I know dangerous) that perhaps the politicians, all of whom in that day were probably mental dullards (similar to today), needed a firearm reference upon which they could jointly aim their political action and potentially assuage their constituency. Given everyone at that time could immediately envision/draw what a Tommy gun looked like, perhaps they decided that a rifle whose barrel was 50% greater in length than that menacing device would not be so concealable. Meaning a rifle barrel greater than 1.5 x 10.5 inches; in other words a legal rifle barrel must be > 15.75 inches. Rounding it up to the nearest inch, that would imply a barrel length at least 16” in length.
That’s only a hypothesis but interested in learning whether it’s accurate or not.

Nice hypothesis, but keep in mind that the original NFA in 1934 mandated 18" barrels for both rifles and shotguns. It wasn't until decades later in 1960 that rifles were reduced to a minimum of 16".

Damn, well I can always use 1 & 2/3 as the multiplier and that will get us there!

quote:

Originally posted by craigcpa:
"The truth is out there."

But the magical words are still missing.

So what was the barrel length(s) of the Tommy gun back in the bad old days?

quote:

Originally posted by mrmn50:
I think that The Forum is being infiltrated by Liberals and progressives.

And people who have difficulties conversing in this medium.

Attention whores.

Wow, great question.

Wiki says "Minimum barrel length was soon amended to 16 inches for rimfire rifles and by 1960 had been amended to 16 inches for centerfire rifles as well.[7]".

I know there were numbers of Winchester and Marlin Trapper-type guns with just shy of {14 and 15"} 16" made before the 34 law was enacted. Were they involved? Why? What else was common enough to garner attention? I don't know.

I wonder if the previous and similar New York State law cited by Hatcher in his 1930's book on forensics had something to do with it? I think that law served as the model for GCA '34, but still doesn't explain the shift down to 16".

Man, that's a good mystery that needs solving.

The rimfire connection is what I was thinking as well. Someone once pointed out to me that the optimal barrel length for max velocity of 22LR is around 16" to 16 1/2". Anything longer and the additional friction is slowing down the projectile. Perhaps someone or some group made the case that the minimum barrel length needed to be shortened for 22LR, and the Feds acquiesced to 16". Then centerfire followed, mainly because having one standard for rifles makes it easier to manage.

quote:

Originally posted by soggy_spinout:
The rimfire connection is what I was thinking as well. Someone once pointed out to me that the optimal barrel length for max velocity of 22LR is around 16" to 16 1/2". Anything longer and the additional friction is slowing down the projectile. Perhaps someone or some group made the case that the minimum barrel length needed to be shortened for 22LR, and the Feds acquiesced to 16". Then centerfire followed, mainly because having one standard for rifles makes it easier to manage.

Ballistics By The Inch is always a fun website to peruse.

Mostly everything I am finding is either b.s. or conjecture. This whole thing may be proof of the intelligence void in the US government's workings .

This may be something along the lines of the magical number "10" when it comes to magazine capacity - two politicians, at least one of whom knew absolutely nothing about guns, were sitting around having drinks and...neither one of them will ever be able to tell us how they came up with 16".

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
Nice hypothesis, but keep in mind that the original NFA in 1934 mandated 18" barrels for both rifles and shotguns. It wasn't until decades later in 1960 that rifles were reduced to a minimum of 16".

Now that is something I did not know

quote:

Originally posted by mrmn50:

quote:

Originally posted by craigcpa:
"The truth is out there."

But the magical words are still missing.

Please

quote:

Originally posted by apprentice:

quote:

Originally posted by mrmn50:

quote:

Originally posted by craigcpa:
"The truth is out there."

But the magical words are still missing.

Please

quote:

Originally posted by mrmn50:

quote:

Originally posted by apprentice:

quote:

Originally posted by mrmn50:

quote:

Originally posted by craigcpa:
"The truth is out there."

But the magical words are still missing.

Please

^^^^^ What brought that on??
You have been poking at me all through this thread. What exactly is your problem.?

well, just guessing here...
You throw out an interesting question.

You state you found the answer, but you will only email it to those who ask for your permission.

You ignore repeated requests for open posting.

You cop out with the totally B.S. Kaepernick knee response.

You finally post a link to the "source" -- Quora -- a site with minimal credence, and a thread full of guesses.

You call gun people liberals and progressives. And cop some more attitude about your incorrect research.

Other than that, things went well.

quote:

Originally posted by fritz:
well, just guessing here...
You throw out an interesting question.

You state you found the answer, but you will only email it to those who ask for your permission.

You ignore repeated requests for open posting.

You cop out with the totally B.S. Kaepernick knee response.

You finally post a link to the "source" -- Quora -- a site with minimal credence, and a thread full of guesses.

You call gun people liberals and progressives. And cop some more attitude about your incorrect research.

Other than that, things went well.

Fritz, I see your point and, you do make sense. I think my biggest mistake was not using emoticons after some of my replies. In no way was I calling gun people liberals and progressives. An emoticon would have solved that perceived insult.

As far as my research site being of minimal credence, I did not know that but, as soon as Rogue corrected me, I edited my thread title and thanked him.

The knee response was a mediocre at best joke.

The 'requests' were demands, thus the 'magic words'

All in all, my thread has been a cluster fuck created by me. But, Indiana Boy was out of line, in my opinion, and, could have addressed things as you did.

I am not making excuses or defending myself here. Wrong is wrong and, I was wrong. Fritz, thank you. (another magic word )