Posted by Justice/tx on 2/11/2008, 12:17 pm, in reply to "Another Liberal Media Attack on Firearms/Muzzleloaders"
216.141.24.7 | Message modified by user Justice/tx 2/11/2008, 12:29 pm
basically, I think Carl is right.
Modern muzzleloaders come in two varieties in my point of view:
1) modern inline using older technology (percussion cap, and BP (or BP sub), and full bore bullets) does not outperform a traditional gun using older technology either. They are merely cosmetically different in order to cater to a market which does not care anything about tradition and only wants to extend their hunting season with a gun they are more familiar and comfortable with. I personally do not like these guns, but I don't think there is sufficient reason to disallow them from hunting ML season given the same technology and only cosmetic difference.
2) moderrn inline using modern centerfire technology (209 enclosed ignition, BP/sub/smokeless, sabotted bullets, modern scope) are a serious technological improvement over the older technology. When I say "enclosed" above I am referring to much more than "enclosed from weather." What I mean is that a percussion cap and nipple can only stand so much breech pressure, but a modern primer supported by metal that "encloses" it can support much higher pressures, at least twice if the rest of the gun is properly designed. This is a dramatic improvement in muzzle velocity for a given weight of bullet. If that is sabotted it may have 3 times the ballistic coefficient (some new ones > .3, where a regular fullbore .50 bullet is around .16 and a .50 ball is .07). When you add a modern scope to allow distant aiming of this long distance ballistic capability, you can take deer at >250yds, as Toby Bridges has demonstrated at his site (a 284yd kill, IIRC). IMHO these should only be allowed in regular gun season since they borrow all the centerfire technology.
Of course, the problem you bring up is the fact that they are so much like centerfires they should be regulated like centerfires for all purposes of the law.....(whether I like regulations or not, the logic is difficult to avoid) and therefore they probably will be. And while they are at it, why wouldn't they include ALL MUZZLELOADERS?
What is more, from a non-shooter's POV the distinctions do not matter. You could snipe a person perfectly well with either one, and the APPEARANCE is all that really counts to most folks anyway.
And I think that is where Carl's point comes strongly in to play. I sincerely hope we can keep traditional arms out of that fray, but I doubt it.
YHS,
Justice
  |
|
Message Thread:
|
