PDA

View Full Version : My rifle is not an "assault weapon!" It is a modern musket


ModernMusket
05-26-2012, 11:38 AM
Hello everyone, I wanted to take a minute to introduce myself and let you know about Modern Musket.

Modern Musket is a grassroots movement that advocates for Second Amendment rights and particularly the right to keep and bear modern rifles such as the AR-15 and others.

So-called “assault weapons” bans pose the greatest threat to Second Amendment freedoms. These bans place a prohibition on many common, semi-automatic firearms solely because of their appearance and their features.

The Second Amendment was written to protect the right of individuals to keep and bear modern firearms. When the Constitution was ratified these firearms were muskets; today they are modern rifles like the increasingly popular AR-15. Modern Musket's primary focus is to fight for the right of law abiding Americans to possess these modern rifles for both sporting and defensive purposes. Additionally, part of our goal is to eliminate misconstrued fears and negative perceptions of these types of firearms. It must be understood that they are not "assault weapons," they are simply modern semi-automatic rifles, and the ability to keep and bear these rifles is essential to liberty.

Feel free to check us out on facebook.

Thank you!
-MM

pointedstick
05-26-2012, 12:17 PM
I'm not so sure anti-gunners like muskets any more than AR-15s :)

tonelar
05-26-2012, 12:52 PM
Hey Modern Musket. Good to see you on here. I'm definitely a fan of your page.


I'm not so sure anti-gunners like muskets any more than AR-15s :)

Not so sure? You're point may be valid for the most rabid gun grabbers, however... I'm dead certain that your average anti definitely hates (or fears) EBRs more than grandpa's old single shot.

MakeYaBootyBurn
05-26-2012, 2:05 PM
:cheers2::cheers2::cheers2::cheers2::cheers2:
Welcome!

pointedstick
05-26-2012, 2:56 PM
Not so sure? You're point may be valid for the most rabid gun grabbers, however... I'm dead certain that your average anti definitely hates (or fears) EBRs more than grandpa's old single shot.

Grandpa had a single-shot? My grandpa was a decidedly unarmed communist pamphleteer. Sure am glad that's not a tradition that'll be continuing :)

Still, you're right. I guess I'm just not sure how effective it'll be. "Hey, this thing you're scared of is just a modern version of this other thing you're maybe a little bit less scared of!" I think if we want to convert anti-gunners, we should show them how cool guns are by taking them to the range, not trying to compare modern firearms with traditional firearms that they have no positive associations with. The odd anti-gun conservative maybe, but no anti-gun liberal has non-negative impressions of muskets. These were the guns we used to exterminate the Indians. etc.

oni.dori
05-26-2012, 3:24 PM
I'm not so sure anti-gunners like muskets any more than AR-15s :)

Since most of them think that muskets are the only thing the Second Amendment actually protects (since that is the "only thing available" at the time [which anyone with even the most minute research and knowledge on the period and/or its firearms would know that is the farthest from true]).

Already a fan of your page MM, thanks for your presence in the movement.


Unarmed communist pamphleteer? Way to make me shudder and be even MORE thankful on this Memorial Day weekend.

pointedstick
05-26-2012, 4:20 PM
Unarmed communist pamphleteer? Way to make me shudder and be even MORE thankful on this Memorial Day weekend.

Hey, better than an armed communist pamphleteer, right? He definitely woulda gotten thrown in the clink for that and then I might not exist. :)

The Wingnut
05-26-2012, 4:24 PM
At the time of the revolution, the typical sporting arm was of much higher quality and accuracy than any military arm. The same more or less holds true today.

Remember, military firearms are always a compromise between ease of use, durability and accuracy. Sporting arms do not have these concerns.

Citizens exercising their natural-born liberties SHOULD be better equipped than the state. Bear in mind that private citizens owned the equivalent of artillery pieces at the time, and the newly formed federal government had to ask for their help in prosecuting the revolution!

ccandgc
05-26-2012, 4:32 PM
Liked on FB!

gunsmith
05-26-2012, 8:59 PM
I like the idea of modern musket, makes much sense.

I recall a few yrs ago a New Yorker got arrested for an "unregistered fifty caliber"
The media kept showing pictures of a Barret .50BMG, only it turns out that the rifle in question was a FLINTLOCK!!! & amazingly enough only the fact that no ammo/powder was in the apt kept this guy from facing prosecution.

k1dude
05-26-2012, 9:50 PM
I like the idea of modern musket, makes much sense.

I recall a few yrs ago a New Yorker got arrested for an "unregistered fifty caliber"
The media kept showing pictures of a Barret .50BMG, only it turns out that the rifle in question was a FLINTLOCK!!! & amazingly enough only the fact that no ammo/powder was in the apt kept this guy from facing prosecution.

I remember watching news on TV about 10 or 15 years back. The police broke down the door of a residence based on a meth head saying it was the home of dealers. The news report claimed several assault weapons and several thousand rounds of ammunition were found in the home. They showed the police displaying a lever action .22, a Marlin tube fed .22, and a 12 gauge hunting shotgun. Assault weapons? The several thousand rounds was 3 bricks of .22 and one box of 8 shot 12 ga.

It turns out the meth head lied and the police had arrested an innocent couple. The police refused to cover the $10,000 of damage they had done to the home.

I remember that NY flintlock story when it hit the news.

clutchy
05-27-2012, 11:06 AM
Read a little through your facebook stuff and dropped a like bomb on you.

good luck with the fight I think you should incorporate some of the recent big pro 2A decision language into your stuff.

good luck and we're with you!

ModernMusket
05-27-2012, 10:05 PM
Thanks every one for the comments and those who checked out the fb page. The concept behind Modern Musket is more figurative, and less literal. Yes modern rifles are much different than muskets, but the intent of the 2A absolutely applies to them in the same way it applied to muskets in the late 18th century. I agree that the best way to convert someone is to take them shooting. The second best way is to educate them and change their perception. -MM

ModernMusket
05-27-2012, 10:07 PM
Also, the people who are staunchly anti-gun are not the people I am interested in, nothing will change their stance. Im interested in the millions of gun owners who have been duped by the media and anti-gunners. We need to win them back and get them to realize that modern rifles are NOT "assault weapons," and that if rifles like AR-15s are safe from being banned, all rifles will be safe. -MM

pointedstick
05-27-2012, 10:17 PM
Also, the people who are staunchly anti-gun are not the people I am interested in, nothing will change their stance. Im interested in the millions of gun owners who have been duped by the media and anti-gunners. We need to win them back and get them to realize that modern rifles are NOT "assault weapons," and that if rifles like AR-15s are safe from being banned, all rifles will be safe. -MM

That's a very good point. It's probably more sensible too, since there really aren't very many staunchly anti-gun people out there, and most of them are either crazy or grossly emotional about the issue (I say as a former staunchly anti-gun person myself).

tonelar
05-28-2012, 3:19 PM
Have a great Memorial Day, MM.
I agree; here in CA it's even more important that we (as gun owners) stay together.

SilverTauron
05-28-2012, 3:40 PM
I find it hilarious that a .223 rifle is demonized as a dangerous threat to society, when 30-30's and 30-06s can be bought and shot in California and other Infringement Zone with little note. I consider a guy with a Remington 700 drawing a bead on my home at 300 yards much more deadly than some ignorant punk spraying the block with full auto fire.

ModernMusket
05-28-2012, 9:23 PM
Thanks Tony, you too. -MM

Silver, I agree. Any weapon in the hands of an irresponsible criminal can be used to assault someone. So-called "assault weapons" bans have been proven to be completely symbolic and we need to fight against them tooth and nail. They are the least "sensible" form of gun control imaginable. Thanks, -MM

oni.dori
05-29-2012, 12:43 AM
Hey, better than an armed communist pamphleteer, right? He definitely woulda gotten thrown in the clink for that and then I might not exist. :)

Touché...in a very strange and unusual way.

oni.dori
05-29-2012, 12:45 AM
Thanks every one for the comments and those who checked out the fb page. The concept behind Modern Musket is more figurative, and less literal. Yes modern rifles are much different than muskets, but the intent of the 2A absolutely applies to them in the same way it applied to muskets in the late 18th century. I agree that the best way to convert someone is to take them shooting. The second best way is to educate them and change their perception. -MM

My comment (if you were referring to that) was toward many anti's excuse why "assault weapons" aren't covered by the 2A, and should be banned. I fully understand, agree with, and support your figurative meaning behind MM.

sanjosebmx
05-29-2012, 8:09 AM
I hate the term 'assault weapon'. I know it's widely used, even in the gun community.. but Semi Automatic Rifle is more accurate, and less 'scary'...

I mean really..just an anti-gun dream word..

1. A violent physical or verbal attack.
2.
a. A military attack, such as one launched against a fortified area or place.
b. The concluding stage of an attack in which close combat occurs with the enemy.
3. Law
a. An unlawful threat or attempt to do bodily injury to another.
b. The act or an instance of unlawfully threatening or attempting to injure another.
4.
a. Law Sexual assault.
b. The crime of rape.

IVC
05-29-2012, 9:29 AM
.. but Semi Automatic Rifle is more accurate, and less 'scary'...

The term we should use is "Auto Loading Rifle" because it is the mechanical essence of the operation. Also, it makes it painfully obvious that it's no different than a DA revolver (SA must be cocked manually, so slightly different).

The "Semi-Automatic Rifle" still has the "automatic" in it, which scares many people. They think it's used for semi-spray-shooting-from-the-hip.

oni.dori
05-29-2012, 12:25 PM
I hate the term 'assault weapon'. I know it's widely used, even in the gun community.. but Semi Automatic Rifle is more accurate, and less 'scary'...

I mean really..just an anti-gun dream word..

1. A violent physical or verbal attack.
2.
a. A military attack, such as one launched against a fortified area or place.
b. The concluding stage of an attack in which close combat occurs with the enemy.
3. Law
a. An unlawful threat or attempt to do bodily injury to another.
b. The act or an instance of unlawfully threatening or attempting to injure another.
4.
a. Law Sexual assault.
b. The crime of rape.

You are absolutely right, there really is no such thing as an "assault weapon/rifle", the only reason that term exists is because the anti's made it up. They only did that to fear no get support, because they knew no one else would buy in to their BS otherwise. If yet REALLY cared about PUBLIC SAFETY and REDUCING VIOLENCE, then they would be railing against "assault cars" and "assault hammers" as well, but no one sees that happening...

wildhawker
05-29-2012, 12:44 PM
The proper term is "semiautomatic firearms in common use".

With respect to the arms protected under the Second Amendment, see:

Before addressing the verbs "keep" and "bear," we interpret their object: "Arms." The 18th-century meaning is no different from the meaning today. The 1773 edition of Samuel Johnson's dictionary defined "arms" as "weapons of offence, or armour of defence." 1 Dictionary of the English Language 107 (4th ed.) (hereinafter Johnson). Timothy Cunningham's important 1771 legal dictionary defined "arms" as "any thing that a man wears for his defence, or takes into his hands, or useth in wrath to cast at or strike another." 1 A New and Complete Law Dictionary (1771); see also N. Webster, American Dictionary of the English Language (1828) (reprinted 1989) (hereinafter Webster) (similar).

The term was applied, then as now, to weapons that were not specifically designed for military use and were not employed in a military capacity. For instance, Cunningham's legal dictionary gave as an example of usage: "Servants and labourers shall use bows and arrows on Sundays, & c. and not bear other arms." See also, e.g., An Act for the trial of Negroes, 1797 Del. Laws ch. XLIII, § 6, p. 104, in 1 First Laws of the State of Delaware 102, 104 (J. Cushing ed.1981 (pt. 1)); see generally State v. Duke, 42 Tex. 455, 458 (1874) (citing decisions of state courts construing "arms"). Although one founding-era thesaurus limited "arms" (as opposed to "weapons") to "instruments of offence generally made use of in war," even that source stated that all firearms constituted "arms." 1 J. Trusler, The Distinction Between Words Esteemed Synonymous in the English Language 37 (1794) (emphasis added).

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment. We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U.S. 844, 849, 117 S.Ct. 2329, 138 L.Ed.2d 874 (1997), and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27, 35-36, 121 S.Ct. 2038, 150 L.Ed.2d 94 (2001), the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.

D.C. v. Heller, 128 S.Ct. 2783 (2008) at 2791-2792.

-Brandon

oni.dori
05-29-2012, 3:10 PM
And there is no more commonly used semi-automatic rilfe in the united states than an AR patterned rifle.

ModernMusket
05-29-2012, 6:55 PM
Brandon, good stuff, thanks! I actually use the same concept in the last paragraph in an article I wrote for the Modern Musket website (soon to be up). That is basically the whole essence behind Modern Musket. Constitutional rights adapt as technology evolves. Firearms have changed a great deal in the last two centuries, but the right to keep and bear arms must remain the same.

Thanks for the great input everyone. -MM

oni.dori
05-30-2012, 1:26 PM
Brandon, good stuff, thanks! I actually use the same concept in the last paragraph in an article I wrote for the Modern Musket website (soon to be up). That is basically the whole essence behind Modern Musket. Constitutional rights adapt as technology evolves. Firearms have changed a great deal in the last two centuries, but the right to keep and bear arms must remain the same.

Thanks for the great input everyone. -MM

You are absolutely right. No one contends that the office copier/printer or the printer hooked up to your computer isn't covered by the free speech guaranteed in the First Amendment; even though neither of those existed during the time it was drafted. All they had (barely) were movable type screw presses. How is there a difference in reasoning between the AR and the Kentucky Long Rifle (which was NOT a musket, and was actually MORE technologically advance and deadly than the standard military rifle of the day [the Brown Bess]; which is why by the end of the war, the British adopted their own version of it). In the end, there is no difference in purpose, necessity, or basic function between any of the examples; the only difference is the particulars in how they achieve that basic function.

bubbapug1
05-30-2012, 11:40 PM
I'll take getting shot with an AR over a musket any day....that big old slow moving lead ball is one hell of a flesh wrecker...although a small 224 bullet at 3000 fps hurts pretty badly too.

oni.dori
05-31-2012, 12:48 AM
Especially since that .223 is designed to break apart if it hits above the right velocity. Either one is a bad day, that's for sure.

Wherryj
05-31-2012, 6:08 PM
I like the idea of modern musket, makes much sense.

I recall a few yrs ago a New Yorker got arrested for an "unregistered fifty caliber"
The media kept showing pictures of a Barret .50BMG, only it turns out that the rifle in question was a FLINTLOCK!!! & amazingly enough only the fact that no ammo/powder was in the apt kept this guy from facing prosecution.

Wow, I hope that NY doesn't realize that a 12 gauge shotgun is .73 caliber.

ModernMusket
05-31-2012, 11:30 PM
Everything will be illegal in New York soon. They seem to be in a competition with CA to see how many ridiculous laws they can pass. -MM

IVC
06-01-2012, 12:59 AM
Everything will be illegal in New York soon.

Except the illegal immigrants... A paradox. Go figure.

TacticalPlinker
06-01-2012, 2:42 AM
I would like to make a statement...



I do not own an “assault rifle” or “assault weapon”.

I own a firearm. To be more specific, I own a shoulder fired, gas operated, magazine fed, semi-automatic rifle

My firearms do not possess the ability for “select fire” (selection between semi-automatic, fully-automatic and/or “burst fire” modes).

My firearms do not possess the ability for “burst fire” (example; fully-automatic fire for 3 or 5 projectiles per cycle).

My firearms do not possess the ability for fully-automatic fire (projectiles will continue to be fed and fired until the magazine or other ammunition feeding device is empty).

My firearms are semi-automatic (1 projectile will be fired per cycle)!

My firearms are not used as a “weapon” or for the purpose of “assault”.

My firearms are used for sporting and self defense purposes only.

My firearms are not military weapons.

I am not using my firearms in a military capacity.

I myself am not a member of any military.

Yes, my firearms are built on the designs of military firearms… However, ALL firearms (yes, even single shot smooth bore muzzle loading muskets) are built on designs of military firearms as the original design, intent and purpose of a firearm was for use in combat by the military.

My firearms are all fully compliant with published federal and state laws. Any and all lack of clearly and specifically defined language contained within these laws is NOT the responsibility of any firearm owner. Instead it is the responsibility of the law makers to create and publish laws with clearly and specifically defined language so that it may be followed by those subject to it.


NOTES:
The above may or may not apply to the firearms noted below due to their design;
• Shotguns, including semi-automatic, pump-action, double shot or single shot.
• Handguns (pistol), including semi-automatic and non semi-automatic (single action revolver, double action revolver or otherwise). Not including pistol caliber rifles.
• Bolt action or other non semi-automatic rifle.
• Military artillery or other non small-arms firearm/weapon that is not a musket, rifle, shotgun or handgun (pistol).





From Dictionary.com

Rifle - noun
1. A shoulder firearm with spiral grooves cut in the inner surface of the gun barrel to give the bullet a rotatory motion and thus a more precise trajectory.

Weapon – noun
1. Any instrument or device for use in attack or defense in combat, fighting, or war, as a sword, rifle, or cannon.

Assault – noun
1. A sudden, violent attack; onslaught
2. Law. An unlawful physical attack upon another: an attempt or offer to do violence to another, with or without battery, as by holding a stone or club in a threatening manner.
3. Military. The stage of close combat in an attack.
4. Rape.

Assault Rifle – noun
1. A military rifle capable of both automatic and semi-automatic fire, utilizing an intermediate-power cartridge.
2. A non-military weapon modeled on the military assault rifle, usually modified to allow only semi-automatic fire.

Assault Weapon – noun
1. Any of various automatic and semi-automatic military firearms utilizing an intermediate-power cartridge, designed for individual use. Compare assault rifle.

Semi-Automatic - adjective
2. (of a firearm) Automatically ejecting the cartridge case of a fired shot and loading the next cartridge from the magazine but requiring a squeeze of the trigger to fire each individual shot.

Automatic – adjective
5. (of a firearm, pistol, etc.) Utilizing the recoil or part of the force of the explosive to eject the spent cartridge shell, introduce a new cartridge, cock the arm, and fire it repeatedly.

Firearm - noun
1. A small arms weapon, as a rifle or pistol, from which a projectile is fired by gunpowder.

TacticalPlinker
06-01-2012, 3:01 AM
Not to be an *****hole, but seeing as the title of this thread states "my rifle is a modern musket" and it's pointing our incorrect terms used even within the gun community...
To my previous post, I would like to add this...

I do not own a musket. I own a rifle.

Muskets have little relation to modern firearms or any other weapon. A musket is not a rifle. A musket is a smooth bore, single shot, muzzle loaded firearm. A rifle is anything but that, nor has the rifle been limited to a single shot or muzzle loaded firearm for well over 100 years. That's the opposite of modern. :)

SilverTauron
06-01-2012, 10:39 AM
I believe the intent behind the "musket" title is to establish a connection , which is that what was the standard weapon in the 1770s has evolved into the standard weapon in the 2010s. Look at the modern media for an example of this:we call TV news reporters and correspondents members of the "press", even though CNN's TV affiliate never owned a Whitney Printing Machine.

dantodd
06-01-2012, 11:55 AM
Not to be an *****hole, but seeing as the title of this thread states "my rifle is a modern musket" and it's pointing our incorrect terms used even within the gun community...
To my previous post, I would like to add this...

I do not own a musket. I own a rifle.

Muskets have little relation to modern firearms or any other weapon. A musket is not a rifle. A musket is a smooth bore, single shot, muzzle loaded firearm. A rifle is anything but that, nor has the rifle been limited to a single shot or muzzle loaded firearm for well over 100 years. That's the opposite of modern. :)

You seem to have missed the point. The AR and other semi-auto rifles are today's version of what the musket was in the 18th century. Yes, there were rifles back the but the musket was still the most popular military weapon.

TacticalPlinker
06-03-2012, 7:57 AM
You seem to have missed the point. The AR and other semi-auto rifles are today's version of what the musket was in the 18th century. Yes, there were rifles back the but the musket was still the most popular military weapon.

I did indeed missed the point but upon a re-read of the original post, I think I get it. I was not trying to argue history. Regardless, I support the 2nd Amendment and as such I support this project.

I believe any and all infringement is unconstitutional and illegal. The 2nd Amendment was not written to permit or deny use and ownership of firearms based on appearance, features or type. It was not written to permit or deny based on conditions, circumstances and exceptions.

The 2nd Amendment clearly states "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Period, end of discussion. There is no comma after infringed, there is no asterisks. If government does not understand basic grammar and meaning of simple words such as "keep", "bear" and "infringed", they don't deserve to be in office.

Any law that prohibits or limits the ownership and use of any firearm is infringement and is therefore illegal! :gunsmilie:

adrenaline
06-03-2012, 8:19 AM
I like the movement to connect with the general public on 2A. Just liked your page on FB.

Dreaded Claymore
06-03-2012, 9:26 AM
You seem to have missed the point. The AR and other semi-auto rifles are today's version of what the musket was in the 18th century. Yes, there were rifles back the but the musket was still the most popular military weapon.

This is summed up by the phrase, "arms in common use."

Dano2467
06-03-2012, 4:50 PM
How much of the stigma about "assualt" weapons do you think is atributed to the use of the acronym "AR" which I beleive most people today think A=Assualt and therefore it is oh so scary!

oni.dori
06-03-2012, 5:22 PM
This is summed up by the phrase, "arms in common use."

In all reality, and according to the Constitution, ALL arms should be in common use with the general public if they so choose to participate (and to what degree they do), and regardless of it's "orignially intended design". So even that phrase is all-encompasing at its core (and according the essence of the meaning of the 2A). There is a REASON why our founding fathers wanted us to be able to possess and use the "oh so scary and dangerous" tools (because they ARE scary and dangerous looking).

How much of the stigma about "assualt" weapons do you think is atributed to the use of the acronym "AR" which I beleive most people today think A=Assualt and therefore it is oh so scary!

An all-too-common misnomer; and yet another thing we need to re-educate the public at large on.

ModernMusket
06-09-2012, 3:21 PM
TacticalPlinker, great comments and Im glad you understand the figurative meaning behind "Modern Musket." Its a concept that will help people understand that modern rifles are not "assault weapons."

If we can get all +/- 90 million gun owners on the same page we will win this battle. Those are the people who we must educate and win back. Many of them have been duped by the media and anti-gunners into having a negative opinion of so-called "assault weapons."

Thanks for all the great input everyone! -MM

ModernMusket
08-13-2012, 10:03 AM
Just letting everyone know that the website is now up and running. Check it out if you have a minute and keep fighting the good fight!

www.modernmusket.com

Thanks -MM

Rock6.3
08-13-2012, 10:06 AM
Very cool.

How about a downloadable graphic suitable for engraving on a lower receiver?

CBruce
08-13-2012, 11:40 AM
Since most of them think that muskets are the only thing the Second Amendment actually protects (since that is the "only thing available" at the time [which anyone with even the most minute research and knowledge on the period and/or its firearms would know that is the farthest from true]).

Already a fan of your page MM, thanks for your presence in the movement.


Unarmed communist pamphleteer? Way to make me shudder and be even MORE thankful on this Memorial Day weekend.

By that logic, 'freedom of the press' only applies to the printing press. Not radio, television, the internet, or any future forms of media that the founding fathers couldn't have conceived at the time.

motorwerks
08-13-2012, 9:59 PM
its good to see ya here!!!

Cali-Shooter
08-13-2012, 10:31 PM
This thread needs to be stickied. MM, we LOVE what you're doing, keep at it times eternity!

THIS is the kind of terminology we need at the heart of our efforts to keep the fight strong, fresh, and to fight the way the anti's fight, with winning minds (except they do it by fear and deceit).

Charlie50
08-14-2012, 7:03 AM
I like the concept, I will look foward to checking out the site/ progress going foward. ... bump

1d0ntkn0w
08-15-2012, 2:48 PM
How much of the stigma about "assualt" weapons do you think is atributed to the use of the acronym "AR" which I beleive most people today think A=Assualt and therefore it is oh so scary!

I thought A stood for Armalite.

Rock6.3
08-15-2012, 2:50 PM
Musket, model of 2012 :)