Posted on 04/07/2018 4:57:14 PM PDT by Kaslin
Naw...M1A
When it was written the both the government and the people had the same weapon — the musket -
Sort of.
The Red Coats had muskets which were great shooters at 50-75 yards.
The Colonists, however, were armed with the superior weapons AKA the Kentucky or Pennsylvania “Rifle”.
Those were valuable because they were cordless long distance drills designed to reach out and touch someone at 400-600 yards.
These rifles were effective not just because they were superior at range but, because the unusual tactic of the Day colonists employed , which was to find anyone in leadership of the opposition and pit .45-.50 caliber round through their head, to scare the bejesus out of them and disrupt their lines and ranks.
So, a citizen may indeed have a superior weapon and even today just might.
Damned straight.
My favorite rifle ....ever...
bump
George would have cleaned out most of Congress by now.
do you think our forefathers were aware of the Puckle Gun?
some gun control advocates say they couldn’t envision our modern ‘weapons of destruction’ but history shows otherwise.
And he would have declared the Democrat-Communist party as traitors and shot them himself.
B a r, Maverick, Bazooka, tens of thousands of rounds, M1A1 Abrams... The USS Iowa Battle ship..
Barrett, M82A1, most definitely.
Doesn’t clash with the wig, and looks great with Continental Blue...
General Washington and his men would have hung most of this government.
Later that year, he was selected as one of 500 handpicked riflemen to go with General Daniel Morgan to Upstate New York to help stop General John Burgoyne and the British Army. As the battles around Saratoga raged, the British, having been pushed back, were being rallied by Brigadier General Simon Fraser. Benedict Arnold rode up to General Morgan, pointed at Fraser and told Morgan the man was worth a regiment. Morgan called on Murphy and said: "That gallant officer is General Fraser. I admire him, but it is necessary that he should die, do your duty." Murphy scaled a nearby tree, took careful aim at the extreme distance of 300 yards, and fired four times. The first shot was a close miss, the second grazed the General's horse, and with the third, Fraser tumbled from his horse, shot through the stomach. General Fraser died that night. British Senior officer Sir Francis Clerke, General Burgoyne's chief aide-de-camp, galloped onto the field with a message. Murphy's fourth shot killed him instantly. Murphy also fought at the battle of the Middle Fort in 1780.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Murphy_(sniper)
To call the judge an idiot is an insult to the mentally impaired.
The AR15 is the type of firearm that the 2A applied to. Of course the citizenry should have arms that are at least the equal to the government's. (As happened to Gen. Custer -- he was not only outnumbered, he was outgunned.)
M1A is old technology. AR platforms come in many calibers including .308.
He was 1st cav...lotta cool tanks and helos and stuff these days. Maybe even a gunship for his dash across the Delaware?
The elitist left wingers are skating on very thin ice. When the leftists decide that we no longer have the God-given right to bear arms, then they have broken the sacred contract between the government and the governed.
That means we are no longer subject to their illegal and arbitrary laws, and the matter will be settled on a battlefield that will include every town, every city, every field and every street.
In essence, the revolutionary army did own sophisticated weapons of the era. The Brits had the smooth bore 75 cal musket, which basically threw a large chuck of lead in the general direction the rifle was aimed. Whereas the yanks had rifled Kentucky style rifles with a considerably smaller bore that was very accurate at 100 yards plus.
I own a Kentucky 45 cal, it’s very accurate at 100 years and more. But the farther out it goes the less killing power it has.
I rather imagine him carrying a Kimber or Glock, elegantly appointed, immaculately clean, and being able to put 17 out of 17 into the 10 ring at 25 yards without breaking a sweat. While riding a Harley ( Washington was perhaps the most superb horseman ever on this continent).
No, they were not.
The rebels had rather few rifles and riflemen.
Most people had muskets of various types of their own.
Worse, rebels were generally less equipped in general.
The other advantage of most muskets over any of the PA rifles was they carried bayonets. Not a single rifle was made to carry a bayonet. And that is what scared rebels the most - when the ammo was spent and it was down to hand-hand combat - with vicious bayonets (not the wimpy knives of the last 100 years).
And again, rebels had relatively few of these for themselves. Equipping the troops was a major and constant problem.
There are many myths about the AmRevWar and the guerilla/rifle thing is a major one.
AR-15s are not used by the military but let's be very clear about one thing ... the 2nd Amendment was specifically created to protect civilian ownership of military grade weapons. "Weapons of war."
Amendment IIA well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Here are quotes from two Democrats, before the Dem Party became the Hate America Party, that speak specifically to the premise of civilians using arms for war...
"By calling attention to 'a well regulated militia,' the 'security' of the nation, and the right of each citizen 'to keep and bear arms,' our founding fathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy. Although it is extremely unlikely that the fears of governmental tyranny which gave rise to the Second Amendment will ever be a major danger to our nation, the Amendment still remains an important declaration of our basic civilian-military relationships, in which every citizen must be ready to participate in the defense of his country. For that reason I believe the Second Amendment will always be important."President John F. Kennedy
---------------------------------------------------
"Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms. This is not to say that firearms should not be very carefully used and that definite safety rules of precaution should not be taught and enforced. But the right of citizens to bear arms is just one more guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against a tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible."
Vice President and Senator Hubert H. Humphrey
The primary reason for the 2nd Amendment was to protect the citizen's right to own and use weapons of war to fight, as civilians, any threat to our sovereignty foreign or domestic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.