The Founding Fathers Couldn’t Imagine AR-15 Rifles

Church:

NeverEnuffAmmoYea the vid just makes sense.

I’m still waiting on flying cars and nuclear powered electronics.  I foresee the shit out of so much stuff it would blow your minds.

Thoughts?

9 COMMENTS

JUMP DOWN ↓ TO ADD ANOTHER

wang chung February 14, 2013 at 12:33 am

They could have never imagined the 600 round Glockazine. Just sayin.

Reply

ringo45 February 14, 2013 at 07:32 am

haha

Reply

William February 14, 2013 at 01:42 am

My whole thing, going to this is. Maybe they could not have forseen that technology would advance, and the like in the world of firearms when they wrote the second amendment (semi-auto/full-auto rifles and handguns) thats fine. But also, on that same foot, they would not see how technology could impact the first amendment (Television, Radio, Internet) as well. Why do the people allow restrictions, bans, and legislation on the second amendment because its not what the forefathers would have forseen, and in the same breath, go psychotic when the first amendment starts to get even mildly restricted? If you are going to allow one amendment to adapt to changes in technology, then you should allow ALL of them to adapt to changes in technology, not just the ones that make you “feel good”

Reply

Dave February 14, 2013 at 03:58 am

What some people on the left seem unaware of is that the idea of the machine gun dates back to at least Leonardo Davinci (even longer if you include the Chinese repeating crossbow): Davinci lacked the technology required to make the tools and material necessary to make his designs into reality.

Additionally multiple barrel or multiple chamber firearms are essentially co-temporal with the Revolutionary and ante-bellum periods.

The Ferguson rifle is one the first examples of a successful breech-loading design.

I forget the name of the rifle and it’s inventor: there was a rifle that existed pre-revolution that had over a dozen chambers on a conveyor belt arrangement, the shooter manually advanced the next chamber to the barrel, pulled back the flintlock, and fired.

Reply

Rafterman45 February 14, 2013 at 06:36 am

The bottom line on this topic is this. At the time of our Founding Fathers writing the 2nd Amendment, civilians had the same, if not better, weapons than the military. And that was exactly their intention.

Reply

AuricTech February 14, 2013 at 02:00 pm

1:54 – 2:01 refers to the Giarandoni air rifle, which saw service in the Austrian army beginning in 1780.

Reply

AuricTech February 14, 2013 at 02:02 pm

Typo alert: it’s the Girandoni air rifle…

Reply

Gene February 14, 2013 at 08:00 pm

They were aware of more advanced weaponry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puckle_gun

Manufacturing technology was immature.

Reply

John February 14, 2013 at 10:43 pm

Civilian control of the military The presence of a distinct civilian police force, militia, or other paramilitary group may mitigate to an extent the disproportionate strength that a country’s military possesses; civilian gun ownership has also been justified on the grounds that it prevents potential abuses of power by authorities (military or otherwise). Opponents of gun control have cited the need for a balance of power in order to enforce the civilian control of the military.

Reply

LEAVE A COMMENT:

Previous post:

Next post: