Is This muzzle loading??

Jimmy Mac...

I just sold my CVA plainsman cap - n - ball rifle, and bought a sweet inline...

WHY? easier to clean (removable breech plug) and easier to unload (removable breech plug)

and because it is a "muzzle-loader" hunt...

SOME states have a "primitive" weapons hunt... those are for cap-n-ball & flintlock guns and straightbows...

muzzleloading simply referrs to a gun loaded from the muzzle...

it matters not ONE BIT, to me what you or any other person thinks of my inline... afterall, it meets the requirement of the law, and I like it!

if you wanna rid the world of inline mzzleloader hunting, start lobbying for "primitive weapons hunting only"

but as long as there are "muzzleloader hunts" you are out of luck... and those of us posessing inlines say "oh well, YOUR opinion mattters not!"
 
For a while there you had to do the papers on any inline that used the shotgun primers. The ATF changed their minds after a while.
 
I wonder if there were "traditionalists" in Daniel Boone’s day? I can see them trying to stop the use of those fancy rifled bores because that was just a new way to cheat.
 
Back then your rifle kept you alive. There was no cheating.

Cheating comes in games with rules. Just like in the muzzleloading season. Using a modern gun is cheating.
 
jimmy mac...

it is only cheating if it is against the rules...

in My state, it is not against the rules, so it ain't cheating!
 
Back then your rifle kept you alive. There was no cheating.
Click to expand...

Seems to me that the Native Americans stayed alive pretty well until Europeans started bringing rifles into the Americas. Was it "cheating" when whites shot Indians armed with real "primitive" weapons?

If there were "traditionalists" during the days of Daniel Boone, Davey Crockett, Kit Carson, et. al., then I imagine they were using bows, spears, and atlatls.

It's all about perspective.
 
Original Intent, Nostalgia vs. Progress, and Legitimacy.

Original Intent.

No, I wasn't around 200+ years ago. But, I can read the written works of our Founding Fathers and, through their words, get a pretty good handle on their original intent, without being a psychic. If you prefer a "living, breathing" interpretation, from our modern leaders (Bill Clinton, perhaps), then I guess that's; Our freedom, your choice.

Reminds me of the example often used by Dr. Walter Williams, a noted scholar. Allow me to paraphase;

Let's you and me sit down and play some poker, and the rules be "living". After you bet all your money, I'll inform you that today's interpretation says that my 2 pair, beats your full house.

Hell of a way to play a game, conduct a hunting season, or base a legal system. In fact, our legal system is not based upon interpretation, but rather "Precedence". You know, when you look BACK at the way the law was intended to be enforced. Every now & then, a judge will come up with a NEW "interpretation". But, in the vast majority of cases, this new interpretation is reversed on appeal. (Just ask the US 9th Circuit.) Precisely because of the law's original intent.

But, I digress . . . . . .

Now, I (and alot of traditional muzzleloaders) WAS around 20+ years ago, and therefore can speak with some first-hand authority, when it comes the original intent of these special muzzleloading seasons.


Nostalgia vs. Progress.

These special seasons were set aside with the express purpose of EXEMTING THEM FROM PROGRESS. They were spawned by nostalgia. A time capsule, if you were. Not an mechanical engineering exercise to see how far modern science can push the closed-breach envelope.

Sometimes I get the feeling that in-line shooters are trying to educate me about the wonders of modern technology, as if I didn't know any better. I know that round lead balls are aerodynamically inferior to boat-tailed-polymer-ballistic-tips. I know that loose black powder is harder to load and clean than pyrodex and smokeless. I know that flintlocks are more prone to moisture contamination than encapsulated primers. I know that scopes can help me aim at longer ranges and in lower light. I know. Believe me, I know.

Yet, we traditional muzzleloaders chose to ask for a season, NOT INSPITE of these limitations, but rather BECAUSE of them! To challenge ourselves, to make it hard, to miss the trophy of a lifetime due to a "flash-in-the-pan", or to maybe, just maybe, collect the trophy of a lifetime, even if it's only a doe, by overcoming the obstacles that muzzleloaders throw up in front of us.

Now, I'll admit it. We (traditional muzzleloaders) BLEW IT!!! When we asked for a special season, we never imagined that some shooters/manufacturers would go so far to stretch, manipulate, and change the spirit of the muzzleloading season. Boy, were we wrong.


Legitimacy.

Imagine, right now, that there were no special muzzleloading seasons. If a bunch of in-line shooters tried to lobby the various state game commisions for a special "muzzleloader" season, they would be laughed at. Why? Because the modern in-line does not differ, significantly, enough from a modern centerfire, to warrant a special season. Even when I hunt with one of my centerfires, rarely is more than a single shot necessary. I'm not bragging, it's the same with all of the other modern rifle hunters that I know. The only things that really make a difference are: faulty ignition and limited range due to open sights and low velocity/blunt projectiles.

Have you noticed that, in some locations, in-line muzzleloaders are replacing modern repeating shotguns with slugs, when hunters are given the option? Something is way out of wack here!

Modern in-lines are not a legitimate line of firearms. They are simply mutants, resulting from improperly crafted regulations. An evolutionary dead-end. A hundred, or even a thousand, years from now, Winchester 70's, Remington 700, Leupold Scopes, etc. will be looked upon as great examples of 20th Century sporting arms. Traditional muzzleloaders will still be remembered and respected as the weapons that forged a fledgling nation. In-lines will be remembered not at all.

Rocks, spears, bows, flintlocks, caplocks, centerfires, they all may be merely rungs on man's ladder of hunting tools, but the discriminating hunter can tell the difference.
 
Good point..Man I didn't expect this thread to get so busy. I agree I think Inlines are a slide downa slippery slope in some ways..
 
Shooters all during history have looked for ways to improve their shooting and hunting skills without shooting and hunting.
 
Not so fast, BluRidgDav.

Original Intent. . .
isn't quite so easy, though many would like to think so. That's because a sense of original intent provides security. It frees one from having to think through the intricacies of an issue, and it erases doubt. Advocates of original intent, often political extremists (left or right) or religious fundamentalists, claim they know exactly what "intent" lies behind a law, a religious passage, or even a piece of literature, but they forget the complex historical situation which produces any document. They also deny the fact that language is unstable. That's its very nature.

Predictable that you'd use Bill Clinton to produce a knee-jerk reaction, but you know full well that Republicans are just as guilty as Democrats when it comes to nitpicking language and interpreting the Constitution. Your poker analogy is interesting but flawed. In that scenario, who makes you the dictator of rules?. My claim was that intent and language are debatable and interpretable--not that rules can be shanghaied from on high.

Yes, precedent is the primary foundation of our legal system, but every single day, laws and precedents are interpreted variously. By lawyers, by judges, by juries, by legislators, and by folks in the executive branch. Would you argue that those nine folks in SCOTUS have no place interpreting the Constitution?

You're never going to sell me fully on original intent. That's because language and motives are too complex to ever pin down to a single intent that everyone will agree upon. Even at the moment of conception, the waters are sometimes muddy. If "original intent" helps you sleep better at night, so be it. But the world and its history are far more complex--particularly when it comes to producing a text grounded in language.

That said, your strongest argument is that you do have greater insight into the original intent behind muzzleloading season. My response, however, is: so what? I'll repeat again. Intents change. Maybe not in your mind. Maybe not in the minds of your traditionalist friends. But from the perspective of inline shooters and a great number of state governments, the current intent of the muzzleloading season is to allow hunting for folks who shoot a firearm that loads from the muzzle. Pretty simple. I'm not all that worried about original intent, though you think I should be. I'm concerned with current intent, and I don't really care who it ticks off.

But then, what about a state like Georgia? They just got their muzzleloading season a few years ago. Gun hunters there, if I'm not mistaken, gave up a portion of their season for muzzleloading. Inlines were around and had been for quite some time. Inlines are legal under Georgia's rules.


Nostalgia vs. Progress. . .
No one is stopping you from reliving the past and challenging yourself with antique weapons. I'm certainly not trying to push modern technology on you. Please don't try and push your gun of choice on me. Is it so hard to live and let live?

Legitimacy. . .
Again, we're arguing at two ends of the spectrum because language is open to interpretation. In your mind, legitimacy is shaped by nostalgia, original intent, and your own subjective desire to have a portion of the season exclusively for traditionalists. In my mind, legitimacy is shaped by concerns for hunting, game management, my state legislature, and my wildlife division. I don't see that legitimacy changing anytime soon.
 
This is an interesting thread, as it usually is where ever it crops up. And the arguments are right along the same lines; original intent vs what is legal.

Problem is (mainly a problem, for people who shoot true muzzle loaders), both sides are right: The original intent WAS to provide a season for muzzle loaders, at the time synonymous with primitive hunters, to give hunters who chose primitive equipment a chance to hunt deer in less crowded conditions with equipment that was more of a challenge to use. However, now even that God-awful Savage ML that uses SMOKELESS powder is legal in some muzzle loading seasons.

What the firearm companies have done is produced a rifle that for all intents and purposes is no different than my single shot bolt action - except it loads from the muzzle. Heck, remove the breech plug and some of them even CLEAN up like my centerfire rifle.

People who purchase and use scoped in lines during a blackpowder/muzzleloader season are taking advantage of the equipment race that has outstripped legislative intent/wording.

I don't hunt with a muzzle loader, but I fully understand and agree with the guys who hunt with true muzzleloaders when they express outrage that these scoped modern rifles are allowed in the woods during what is supposed to be a primitive season.

I say lets combine all the firearm seasons into one long any gun season. Within a week of passage of such laws gunbroker.com would be choked with in-lines for sale. Jeezus - Wally world sells an in-line rifle kit in a frigging blister pack hung on the wall along side the cleaning suplies.

In an any-gun season the true primitive hunters would be right there, along side everyone else, with their flinters and sidelocks, hunting as they always have. The erstwhile in-line owners would be in the woods with their scoped centerfire rifles just like me.

THEN, approach the game commissions and get the primitive season reinstated, with language specific enough to make sure blasphmeous creations like inlines never scar our landscape again. All you'd have to do is show them 9law makers) the in-line sales for the year(s) following the blending of the seasons; then the game commissions could infer the intent of the hunters who went afield with high-tech scopes mounted on stainless steel, synthetic stocked, bolt-action in-lines, with totally protected ignition systems, firing a saboted 50 cal projectile over # grains of smokeless powder.

I believe the end result would be much different than what we are dealing with now. It would be much more like CAS, who took the mistakes learned in IPSC, and PPC, where equipment races ruined the sport(s) for the average Joe, and clearly defined what would be, and would NOT be, allowed in THEIR sport; thus keeping it fun for all.
 
Origional Intent

I will say this again.

The muzzleloading season was put in place in most states long before the inline was even thought of.

The muzzleolading season was started so BUCKSKINNERS AND MUZZLELOADING RIFLE ENTHUSIASTS to have a season away from modern hunters using modern guns.

This like the Constitution is not up for debate. It was written in plain simple English so even a 6 year old could understand.
 
Magmundood

You are correct. Several people hunt with their muzzleloaders during the modern gun season. they do so because they enjoy their rifles and the sport of the hunt.

No one I know enjoys their inline enough to use it in the modern season.

Inline owners see their rifles as a nessary evil. They need it to hunt in the muzzleloading season and they don't even like to shoot it much less clean it.

They see it as a easy way to hunt without learning how to use a real rifle.
 
And I see it as using what I want to, in a wayI want to use it...

i still have toload it 1 shot at a time, down the bore from the front like you do...

I just cap it with a shotgun primer instead...

I still shoot round balls in it...

I use REAL FFg BLACK POWDER in it...

but I use shotty primers...

I HAVE been known to use it in standard season (I sometimes hunt a spot where 70 yards is all you can see...)

part of the fun is that you get to shoot your gun once a day, EVERY day... (I don't leave it loaded)

but so what if it takes a shotty primer...

does it load any faster than yours? (shooter/loaders SKILL determines this, NOT rifle design...)

does it hurt YOU in any way, Jimmy Mac? and if so, HOW? what harm is done to you, and in what way?
 
Exactly, Hemicuda.

This year, I plan to try my inline during centerfire season as well.

I've been lurking over at BlackpowderShooters Talk. The more I read, the more I think I'd like to try shooting a flintlock. Who knows? Next year, I might just pick up a Lyman Great Plains kit and try the gun during muzzleloading season.

But if I do, will I complain non-stop about the inline shooters with whom I share the woods? No, I won't. I'll worry about my business, and let the next hunter worry about his.
 
I almost forgot my manners.

Magnumdood, welcome to TFL. You'll find a lot of knowledgeable folks and some decent debates here. Take off your coat and stay a while.
 
Every time I open up an issue of Muzzleblasts I see the pictures of trophey animals taken with muzzleloaders. It seems these days that many of the guns being used are inlines. I guess I don't have too much problem with people using these guns for hunting, but I do feel they are missing out on some of the enjoyment that many of us get from hunting with a truly traditional muzzleloader, enjoying the history and challenge of it. And really there is more challenge when using a gun designed over 200 years ago, there are more chances for missfires, problems the environment can spring on you, there is no guarentee that you'll have 100% success even if everything else goes right. But that all combines to make the hunt all that more enjoyable when you do bring home meat because you know that it took a bit more skill than hunting these days normally requires. That's what I enjoy about the sport of traditional muzzleloading.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top