Fezzy said, "When this country started the average american had the weapon they used in all militias."
I'm afraid that this is a myth. Back in the 1700's and early 1800s guns were not production weapons but carefully hand made, one at a time, and very expensive. It would have been most unusual for the average farmer in our mostly agricultural nation to be able to afford a gun. Once mass production became feasible, prices dropped significantly and more folks could hunt, depending less on trapping for red meat.
Was reading Wikipedia article on the ownership of firearms in Colonial households. They stated that only 10% owned firearms. I seem to recall this was a bogus figure by an antigun nut professor. Anybody have the real figures? Thanks, Leif
They were probably referencing a text called Arming America: Origins of a National Gun Culture by Michael Bellesiles. Take this with a grain of salt, as this professor's work was investigated and formally reviewed by an independent panel of scholars who questioned him about the validity of his research. He was hostile towards this
Much of his research he could not prove, since he claimed that his office was flooded. When his book references were checked, the claims he made could not be supported. In one section he described records in the San Francisco area--despite the fact that the San Francisco earthquake of 1908 destroyed all archives!
With the controversy surrounding his text, he was administratively dismissed from his position at, I believe, Emory University, and his course (which used that text) was cancelled. He also had been given a prestigious award by Columbia University, which was later retracted following his "misconduct."
Remind any one of the Global Warming behavior?
The primary infantry firearm of both sides was the "Brown Bess" smoothbore flintlock musket. This .75-caliber weapon was mass-produced for the British military. Folks should also be aware once manufactured these things were in service for generations.
Mass produced means large work shops with specialization.
Ironically, the spectacular triumph of American riflemen at King's Mountain in South Carolina in 1780 was at the expense of Major Patrick Ferguson, commander of the British forces in that battle and the inventor of the first breechloading rifle used in the British Army. This weapon, patented in 1776, was not only very accurate and had a high rate of fire but was dependable in rainy weather when flintlocks were not. In 1777 Ferguson was in a position to have altered the entire course of the American Revolution. Leading his own ranger detachment in an advance on Brandywine Creek in Pennsylvania, he had an opportunity to pick off George Washington but did not, explaining, "It was not pleasant to fire at the back of an unoffending individual who was acquitting himself very coolly of his duty, so I let him alone." Ferguson was wounded in the elbow at Brandywine, permanently crippling his arm. While he was convalescing, General Howe, allegedly unhappy because a junior officer had quite obviously invented a superior weapon, disbanded his corps. Ferguson's rifles were put into storage, and no one knows what has become of them. (Interestingly, almost a century later Federal officers would still be resisting the introduction of breechloading rifles into the Union Army.)
In short when the Americans signed our Declaration of Independence it was a come with what you have army. There was a shortage of guns. But what Ron misses is that guns were so valuable they were important bequests. Also, where did our Patriots get the guns to fight with? One guy in ten running around armed would have been a very different revolution. ;-).
Just more Progressive altered reality history they demand to share. Common sense should be enough to ward them off.