Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: robertpaulsen
The Militia used inexpensive, smooth-bore muskets, and the militia member had 6 months to acquire one. Muskets were quick to reload and more suitable for the rapid, volley fire used in battle.

Come on, this is ridiculous. The militia used whatever guns they had to hand, be it a squirrel rifle, a Brown Bess, or a blunderbuss.

Some colonies had regulations about required calibers of bullets and quantities of lead and powder, as well as laws promoting periodic militia drills, but (especially in times of peace) they were widely ignored even back in Colonial days.

And I have NEVER seen a militia law specifying a smoothbore musket rather than a rifle. I defy you to show me any such thing.

-ccm

625 posted on 11/10/2007 2:32:29 PM PST by ccmay (Too much Law; not enough Order.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies ]


To: ccmay
And I have NEVER seen a militia law specifying a smoothbore musket rather than a rifle. I defy you to show me any such thing.

From Militia Act of 1792,Passed May 8, 1792 section I (starts about halfway down the page)

That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of power and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and power-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a power of power; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack.

664 posted on 11/10/2007 7:32:07 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 625 | View Replies ]

To: ccmay
And I have NEVER seen a militia law specifying a smoothbore musket rather than a rifle.

Actually the 2nd Amendment itself used the word arms with specific reason. The founding fathers (most of 'em) were certified "gun nuts" and they knew that firearms technology didn't start, nor would it end with the current technology available at that point in time. Hence the reason that the word arms is given rather than a specific type of weapon. They knew that firearms technology was still evolving, even after over 300 years. That's why our firearms are covered, including semi and full auto and why our PHASERs will one day be covered (God willing this nation will still exist)! This little bit of genius is why I always laugh at the antis who try the juvenile assertion that the Amendment -- even if it DID cover citizens firearms -- only extends to the type available during the Revolution.

670 posted on 11/10/2007 8:11:51 PM PST by ExSoldier (Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting on dinner. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 625 | View Replies ]

To: ccmay
"And I have NEVER seen a militia law specifying a smoothbore musket rather than a rifle. I defy you to show me any such thing."

I see the issue was addressed.

Sure, there were sharpshooters using rifles. There were also cannoneers using cannon. Calvary riding horseback.

But the average Militia member had a musket.

780 posted on 11/14/2007 5:38:11 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 625 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson