Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: What did the Founders mean... [View all]jimmy the one
(2,717 posts)johnston: not relevant, since modern firearms are equally useful for both. Also, you focused on a narrow part of history.
Johnston says I 'focused on a narrow part of history'. Duh, can I remind you of the title of the OP thread?:
What did the Founders mean in the Second Amendment? What was their plan for arms ownership? Who are the "militia"?
Yes, I responded to a narrow part of history, what the founding fathers intended, & your own first post on it.
Your first post was in reply to something about the militia act of 1792:
eko wrote: That {1792} act did not give all Americans the right to military arms as it only applied to all those enrolled.
johnston replied: The Militia Act of 1792 doesn't have that much to do with the national guard since it isn't a state militia..
Most civilian arms were superior to military weapons. For example, civilians had rifles, while the military only had muskets. The same is true of repeating weapons from that time until well into the 19th century.
Duh, which time period was johnston referring to? why the time period about when the militia act of 1792 was enacted (hint, 1792), and thru the early 1800s, which is what I was referring to. Stop spinning like a top johnston.
johnston: But yes, my description of superior stands. Besides, rifles could be made with bayonet lugs.
Then you acknowledge that the military/militias had by far more muskets than rifles, by about a 5 to one margin.
Your remark that "civilians had rifles, while the military only had muskets." is pathetic as well as untrue. The militias had 20% rifles, ~80% muskets or pistol, and few citizens could afford a rifle, most couldn't afford a musket.
To risk circa 1800 warping a rifle barrel by attaching a socket bayonet & using it as a spear would not have been wise.
wiki: The relative inaccuracy and short range of the musket was not considered to be significant on the battlefield, because smoke from the black powder used at the time quickly obscured the battlefield and rendered the longer range of the rifle useless, especially as a battle progressed.
.. Rifles were more expensive to make than muskets, and were typically used by small units of specialized riflemen trained not to fight in closed ranks, but in open order, spread out as skirmishers or sharpshooters.
Their greater accuracy and range made rifles ideal for hunting, but the slower rate of fire was a significant impediment for widespread military use, along with the fouling caused by normal firing which made them steadily more difficult to load.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rifled_musket