The 2nd Amendment Musket Myth (Or "I Want A Machine Gun")


The intent of the second Amendment was to insure that every able-bodied man in America would be armed in the event that the federal government or America’s own standing army turned on its people.

Our founders were keenly aware that armament would continue to improve and become more efficient and thus … the 2nd Amendment has Shall Not Be Infringed as it’s foundation.

It wasn’t just the government that possessed sophisticated arms … the Common Folk of the era owned what today’s gun grabbers would call militarized weapons.

By the time the 2nd amendment was adopted, (December 15, 1791) assault weapons already existed.

Contrary to what the liberals and gun grabbers want us to believe … there were repeater, multi-shot rifles even before the Revolutionary period.

The Girandoni air rifle is a repeating rifle capable of firing 22 shots in under a minute without a reload and was developed before the 19th century.(circa: 1790)

An example carried by explorers Lewis and Clark.
A butt reservoir air rifle, .31" caliber.

The Kalthoff repeater was a musket with two magazines and could hold 7, 12 and some say 30 rounds … developed in the 1600’s!

The Belton flintlock was a repeating flintlock design using superposed loads, which could fire 20 rounds in 5 seconds with one pull of the finger.

Superposed loads were powder and ball, stacked one on top of the other, and had twelve individual touch holes.

Developed in the 1700’s and worked somewhat like a Roman Candle
(Sorry no known examples but you can search under superposed loads and find examples of other makers)

The Puckle gun patented in 1718 and was one of the earliest weapons to be referred to as a machine gun.

True, it could only fire 9 rounds a minute but what I get a kick out of … There were two versions.

One version could fire round bullets whereas another version could fire shot or even square bullets!

Then there was the 24-barrel pepper-box revolver using percussion cap technology.
(Ugly Cuss)

The first pepper-box revolvers originated in the 1500s and used matchlock mechanisms.

This particular specimen was made in the 1850s by a Belgian gun maker and used percussion cap technology.

These are just a few examples of the known hundreds of Military Type Assault Weapons (lib speak) from eras before or soon after the 2nd amendment was adopted.

So anytime a leftist gun grabber tells you that the second amendment is meant for the type of weapons from that era, tell them fine … **I’ll have a Machine Gun please!

(There is Nothing in the 2nd Amendment giving the courts or congress Gun Control authority!)


I will happily restrict my guns to muskets only, IF (and only if) the left restricts ITS exercise of “freedom of speech and of the press” to non-electronic means and hand-operated printing presses, which were all that were available when the Bill of Rights was adopted.


There is Nothing in the 2nd Amendment giving the courts or congress Gun Control authority!

Inalienable rights are God Given and the Court is not My God!

The Only reason they (the courts, government) have gotten away with their gun control is because We The People allowed it!

The courts issue opinions and weren’t given the authority to write law!
(Well not until recently but that is another story)

These gun controls that the courts have written into the Second Amendment are Exactly that … Infringements!

A lot, if not the majority of the people have willingly accepted that the courts know best and in doing so … allow themselves to be controlled!


Don’t disagree at all, Silliessis. I can’t understand why we allowed the 1930’s gun restrictions to ever take hold, let alone later ones. The NY “Sullivan Act” was also as unconstitutional as it gets.


I believe that the term “assault weapons” is just a hook to get some form of gun control passed. After that happens they will bring up the fact that all semi automatic rifles are basically assault weapons or can be turned into them (under their definition). I would also point out that 99% of mass shooting do not involve assault weapons but revolvers (which are not their target at this time). Notice how much media coverage there is when there is a mass shooting & how little coverage there is when a gun owner saves himself with his gun.


Welcome Tex. We have ALL noticed the disparity. The reason is pretty simple. The media embraces every left-wing “cause” in the country.


Cr@p Post deleted by owner.
(Not the sites owner … just Lil Ole Me!):whistle:


Exclusive: Photo of the Saiga AK-74 Rifle Used at Dallas Shooting – Law Officer


So is NY’s much more recent “Safe” Act railroaded through by Andrew Cuomo (and the USSC refuses to hear cases regarding it)

It’s bonafide fact. The media corrupted the term “assualt rifle” into "assault weapon shortly after the Stockton, CA schoolyard shooting in '89, and have used it on any nasty-looking combat firearm they think they can make it stick to.


I have a lot of thoughts about gun control. I’ll list the one’s on the top of my mind:

  1. Most people that are for GC don’t know anything about guns except what they see in the movies & on TV. They see someone shooting a 45 (for example) & “know” that after firing the gun “kicks” up 15 or 20 degrees. Yet they expect a military type weapon to be perfectly stable (like in the movies) when 10 rounds are shot in 3 seconds. I’ve shot on full auto before & I can say that it’s a (very) rare person that can keep on target firing on full auto. So what they are afraid of is total bull.
  2. Do I believe that we have a “right” to have a gun? Not really because I don’t believe that a person that has a gun is part of a militia. On the other hand I believe that you are pretty dumb if you believe that someone else can protect you. Police arrive in time to try to solve your murder…not in time to stop it.
  3. The left sells “causes” (not solutions). They can’t keep their people motivated by not constantly coming up with causes. Motivation results in votes & votes turn into power for them. I think of them like sharks. Sharks have to keep swimming in order to breath. Lefties have to keep coming up with causes for that quest for power. Gun control is just the next cause.


Do you remember the movie “heartbreak Ridge” with Clint Eastwood? I saw it and while I don’t think it was a great movie, it was ok. I recall the scene where he’s training all the losers he has and he opens up with an AK47 and they all hit the deck. Then he tells them how it is an AK47 ASSAULT RIFLE, and makes a very distinctive sound. We were living in Fort Worth back then and one of the local broadcast channels aired the movie one night. I was watching it again, and when the scene with the AK came up, some douche bag libtard scum had edited the sound and instead of saying assault rifle, they said assault weapon. Lowlife media scum is all they are.


Gotta disagree with you here. The 2nd Amendment speaks of the “well regulated militia” in the context of a reason for it. The operative phrase states “the right of the people (not militia) to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”


Who are the militia? The people.


Hi Fantasy Chaser. No problem with a disagreement on the issue. Basically even though we disagree, I still believe that each individual not only has the right to protect himself but also the duty to protect themselves (& their property). So in the end we really agree. Being from Texas I’m probably even a little more…let’s say aggressive on protecting property rights than most. I respect other people’s property rights & expect them to respect my property rights.


An “assault weapon” is what can be legally used against someone who wants to assault you. That’s my interpretation. As for home protection, I prefer a shotgun. :beerchug:


As for home protection, I prefer a shotgun.
Everybody says that a shotgun is better for home protection & I wouldn’t dispute it. My problem is that I know nothing about shotguns & have never fired one. On the other hand I shoot high expert with rifles. My wife is a horrible shot but can at least hit the broad side of a barn with a rifle. Both of us can tear them down, clean them & put them back together. Plus we are both comfortable with them. Oh and as a nutty side issue our house is full of my wife’s crystal collection. (wink)


As a cop, I used to answer calls from little old ladies who imagined burglars every time they heard a sound at night. I’d usually tell them to buy a pump shotgun and keep it under their beds. They don’t even have to load it. If they think they hear a noise at night, pick it up and jack the slide one time. If they don’t hear running feet and breaking glass, go back to sleep because no one is there!


Your probably right Pappadave. Seems to me that I saw a shotgun on sale at our local Academy. I kind of doubt that I would every have to fire it anyway because around here everyone “assumes” that people are armed (& mostly they are).


I love shotguns. I have many of them but the one that serves me best here around the ranch is my wife’s Remington 870 .410, which fires 3" rounds through a full choke barrel. Great for snakes, skunks, coons, and other unwanted critters. A couple of nights ago my wife was returning to the ranch house from the craft house when she heard that menacing rattling of a rattlesnake near the back patio. She awoke me and I grabbed the .410 and blew a 4 inch hole right through the belly of that bad boy.


Cool! I love my rifles, and enjoy long-range shooting, but if someone tries to come in my home in the “wee” hours, they will be met by a hand-full of projectiles.