doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Cabelas Does Not Accept C&R

I have not had an FFL for about the last 20 years. When I did have one the REGS were very plainly written; If the receiver was made prior to 1899 it was "Antique" with no restrictions applied. A reproduction was antique only if it did not fire a readily obtainable cartridge or was a Muzzle Loader. Thus if a repro Henry rifle was made to fire an original .44 Henry rimfire it would have been classed as antique, but not if chambered for .44 Special or similar. The C&R class has been greatly expanded since those days, the 50 year rule had not yet been enacted. If a gun was not "Listed" in the C&R category, application could be made to "Attempt" to get one declared so. The 50 year ruling solved most of that. Sounds like a lot of dealers are applying totally out-dated rules in regards to the C&R guns. I don't believe much has changed on the Antique classification.
An 1893 Spanish Mauser firing the 7x57 cartridge is an Antique (assuming build date prior to 1899), but a 1916 Spanish Mauser firing the same 7x57 cartridge is a C&R gun now, thogh it was not always so.
Its really not all that complicated if one "WANTS" to understand it.

I can see an issue with some of the "antique" and C&R candidates.

For a gun to be classified as either, date of manufacture has to be definitivly established. Additionally, the responsibility to comply rests on both the seller and buyer. Penalties for violation, or at least the threat of penalties, are percieved as very high.

So, Cabelas would be responsible to ensure the data they are using to verify date of manufacture is accurate. In the case of "antique" classification, that means finding 113 year old data on a gun, verifying it to their own satisfaction (since they are sticking their neck out) and getting the potential buyer to agree the data is valid. Being wrong on a determination of DOM is just an unacceptable risk, given the severe penalty potential.

So, if Cabelas (or anyone else) believes they are ever charged with not complying with the laws governing the sale of antiques or C&Rs, they may not think commonly available DOM s/n lists from the internet are an adequate defense...and so they just do all their sales via modern gun laws. Kinda makes my C&R seem a little neutered if DOM lists that the ATF officially endorses don't exist. On the other hand, it's common for our regulators to put the burden of proof on the public, regardless of our rights.

Everyone involved with gun sales are snugged up hard enough to squirt diamonds out of their axe, given all the history, public outcry, etc., and media attention. I can see that. I don't like it anymore than anyone else here.