All Hail the Second Amendment

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The riflemen were in the minority in the Continental Army. Took too long to reload a rifle compared to a smooth-bore musket.

[Minimalist]

You also could not attach a bayonet to a rifle.


The gun nuts will shriek as if their balls were on fire but who cares?

http://www.nytimes.com/books/00/09/10/re...illot.html

In the Colonial period, the gun meant the musket, an imported item that cost the equivalent of two months pay for a skilled artisan. Without constant attention its iron rusted, and blacksmiths were ill equipped to repair it (they shoed horses and made plows). The musket was not efficient for self-defense or hunting. It was not accurate beyond a few hundred feet (it had no sight, and soldiers were instructed not to aim, since volleys relied on mass impact). It frequently misfired and was cumbersome to reload, awkward qualities for individual self-defense; by the time you had put ball and powder back in, your foe would be upon you with knife, club or ax. Most murders were committed with knives, and -- contrary to the myth of primitive violence -- there were few murders outside Indian warfare (in North Carolina, on the average, there was only one murder every two years between 1663 and 1740).

I once saw an estimate that an actual rifle would have cost roughly $35 in 1775... which in today's terms would be nearly $1,100.  You didn't buy one unless a)
you were a rich motherfucker or b) you really needed it to hunt with.  Most Americans were farmers.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

You also could not attach a bayonet to a rifle.


The gun nuts will shriek as if their balls were on fire but who cares?

http://www.nytimes.com/books/00/09/10/re...illot.html

In the Colonial period, the gun meant the musket, an imported item that cost the equivalent of two months pay for a skilled artisan. Without constant attention its iron rusted, and blacksmiths were ill equipped to repair it (they shoed horses and made plows). The musket was not efficient for self-defense or hunting. It was not accurate beyond a few hundred feet (it had no sight, and soldiers were instructed not to aim, since volleys relied on mass impact). It frequently misfired and was cumbersome to reload, awkward qualities for individual self-defense; by the time you had put ball and powder back in, your foe would be upon you with knife, club or ax. Most murders were committed with knives, and -- contrary to the myth of primitive violence -- there were few murders outside Indian warfare (in North Carolina, on the average, there was only one murder every two years between 1663 and 1740).

I once saw an estimate that an actual rifle would have cost roughly $35 in 1775... which in today's terms would be nearly $1,100.  You didn't buy one unless a)
you were a rich motherfucker or b) you really needed it to hunt with.  Most Americans were farmers.

We tried the bayonet thing once. It was ... fun.

[Amarok]

Hahaha. You've watch a movie or two. Good for you. You go with that though buddy. It took more than a unit or two to win it. They lost because they were organized in straight lines in open fields; among other things. Farm boys that hunted for their dinner knew how to surprise them on trials. Among other things.

Mel Gibson is not a historian, fuckwit.

Clown boy thinks he's a historian too bad all his history is ideological rubbish

[The Grand Nudger]

I once saw an estimate that an actual rifle would have cost roughly $35 in 1775... which in today's terms would be nearly $1,100.  You didn't buy one unless a)
you were a rich motherfucker or b) you really needed it to hunt with.  Most Americans were farmers.

That's pretty much the baseline price for a credible rifle today as well.  It's always been an expensive hobby.  Don't even get me started on the cost-per-round.  A decent load for a 303, my go-to, is 40c.  If you want to get good and stay good you need to throw @300-500 rounds downrange at least 3 days a week.  That's $600 in ammo a week for a 303.  This is why serious shooters love .22.  The cost-per-round is 4c.   I'd love to get my hands on a No7 .22 Mk1.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Try throwing a box of .50s down range sometime. Only way I get to shoot these days is to get somebody to buy two boxes and give me one.

[Minimalist]

That's pretty much the baseline price for a credible rifle today as well.

Yeah, but, this is what they were talking about....

[The Grand Nudger]

I own one, it's one of my most credible rifles, lol.  Kentucky Long, .49 black powder muzzle loader with a rifled hex barrel, the flashpan switched out for a cap and hammer.  I cast sabot for it myself (I like to be able to shoot a deer through the tree it's hiding behind).  Got 5 pounds of granex in a firesafe out in the shed.  Family heirloom.    I also own a modern black powder rifle and they still cost @1k.  That's the -bottom- end of the price range for a good rifle.

I wasn't commenting on whether or not they were talking about some other rifle, just that the economy of it all is still roughly the same.  I'd even go so far as to say the economy of who owns said rifles is roughly similar.  I see a bunch of rednecks with cheap ass gear and I wonder why they even bother.  They can't shoot sub-moa past 25m and they've got a cabinet full of trash when they could have bought one decent rifle that would service all their needs without the presence of an unsecured arsenal within reach of their kids. It kind of puts the lie to their objections to gun control. They're not hunters or sport shooters, and they;re sure as shit not defending their homes. They're gun collectors. They don't want anything interfering with their ability to collect shitty guns for whatever godforsaken reason.

Personally, I'm always looking for ways to get rid of the guns I don't use. I've only bought two in my life and the rest are inherited. I couldn't even afford to shoot them all if I wanted to. There's no form of reasonable gun control that would infringe upon my 2nd amendment rights or even inconvenience my hobbies. Their stubborness and the recurring tragedies that occur because of it...otoh, does palpable endanger my right to ownership -and- my hobbies. You'd think they'd realize that too....but, again, gun collectors..not shooters.

---

Try throwing a box of .50s down range sometime. Only way I get to shoot these days is to get somebody to buy two boxes and give me one.

LOL, That's one of the beauties of service...somebody else foots the ammo.  I think that might be the only thing I legitimately miss about it.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Augusta Bay, Sicily. We're "disposing of over-age ammunition through the barrel". Eighteen .50s lined up on the bluff at the west end of the bay. I'm doing fam-fire for the guys who haven't had any paddle time. Somewhere in there we failed to notice the safety flagmen on the north and south sides of the entrance to the bay wagging their butts off. It took a cruiser rounding the point and showing her white missiles for us to get the idea. We were told later that she was two miles off the coast and taking strays.

Best fam-fire ever!

[Minimalist]

At least the dog survived.

http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/n...58a23.html

Plaquemine teen accidentally shoots family dog, kills grandmother, police chief says

A 19-year-old man shot and killed his grandmother in Plaquemine while removing the magazine from a handgun in what appears to be an accidental shooting, said Police Chief Kenny Payne.

The old "round in the chamber" strikes again!