[GOPcapitalist]

The Ruffin controversy is one that will likely never be resolved. Personally, I tend to think of it as the case of a braggard trying to stake an historical claim for himself. But it is beyond hair splitting to say that the slave holders didn't open the war.

Is it? Cause all i'm trying to do is establish accuracy. You asserted that slave holders fired the first shot, and that is an assertion you cannot specifically document as the answer is not known. A similar question on the other end of the war is known to have an answer though. As to whether or not the conquering general who negotiated the southern surrender was practitioner of slavery, the answer is indisputably yes.

In other words, there is some question as to whether or not the firer of the first shot was a practitioner of slavery. But as to the man who recieved Lee's surrender, the answer is indisputably yes.

[WhiskeyPapa]

The Ruffin controversy is one that will likely never be resolved.

So you thought it possible that a slave holder (Ruffin being an outspoken proponent of the peculiar institution) did in fact fire the first shot of the ACW, but you tried to obscure that possibility. Typical.

Walt