Posted on 03/27/2023 5:43:45 PM PDT by Drew68
Based on what?
Yeah, we certainly had smoothbore muskets. But we also had Kentucky long rifles, and THAT was the comment I made re: superior firepower in long guns.
It’s like saying that Joe and Jim down the street both have several .22LR rifles, but Jim also has a .30-06; in which case, Jim has superior firepower in long guns.
Your were right regarding that issue, RB, so props are due in that regard.
Agreed.
That’s a really ignorant statement.
Equal firepower? Not on your life. The rebels didn’t even have equal clothing or food levels possible for Brits.
Why do you think the new US was so lobbying the French? Mostly what they got was more equipment including firepower (still woefully dependent on capturing big guns…yeah I mean cannon), along with other needs. In fact that was the biggest reward from the French, not their own troops. And it still was uneven.
Based on, he didn’t build the wall. blah blah, didn’t do muh of anything really and 2020 was a depression-level nightmare.
What good was there?
“I don’t know why anyone needs an AR-15,” Trump told aides as he flew on Marine One to the White House in August 2019, according to a person who heard his comments.
__________________________
Must be true if his anonymous aides said so 🤷♂️
I mean NYC - Manhattan types. I have been all over New York.
Someone needs to inform Trump it’s not based on what he or anyone else determines to be a “need.” He sounds more like his fellow NYer Chuck Schumer on this matter.
Is that you, Desantis?
I like both of your takes on it. I stand down to some extent on all this. However, I do NOT stand down on this:
“The method Trump used to ban bumpstocks was extremely dangerous. To direct the ATF to ignore the clear words of the law, that a full auto fires repeatedly with ONE TRIGGER PULL, and order them to make up something (that many trigger pulls were actually one trigger pull) showed an ignorance (or contempt?) of the Constitution and how we make law.
Furthermore, when this transpired, I observed that this sort of precedent could pose horrible problems for gun owners. Luckily, leftist administrations have not yet taken advantage of this precedent. It is an EXTREMELY DANGEROUS PRECEDENT.”
Maybe? :)
LOL. what a joke of an article
Despite the myth, the bulk of the major combat in the RevWar was mass frontal assault. Pennsylvania (another myth…these were really created in PA and mostly from PA in the RevWar) rifles were even longer than muskets and had ZERO mounting for bayonets. They were even more unwieldy than the long muskets. The rifles also were tough to load, taking average 1 round per minute vs 3 rounds per minute for a musket. They were few, and when they were in use it was mostly as sharpshooters in the mythical “guerrilla” mode, hoping to pick off a few. For most of those reasons, the rifle wasn’t a big player. It was notable, but not major.
I’m talking specifically about 2nd Amendment issues. You gave Bush a B+ and Trump a D-. I’m not disagreeing with you. I’m just asking what you base that on. Have you done a comparison between the two on this issue?
That’s just a blatant lie, Jeb.
I stand corrected. I believe you. Thanks.
How is my opinion a lie? Explain that please..
I agree with you on this, Laz.
“Luckily, leftist administrations have not yet taken advantage of this precedent. It is an EXTREMELY DANGEROUS PRECEDENT.”
That’s because it doesn’t exist, it’s all in your own opinion nothing to do with the law…or they would have.
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.