- Joined
- Nov 13, 2011
- Messages
- 19,704
- Reaction score
- 5,943
- Location
- kekistan
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
When the amendment was written, they also had rifles not just muskets, as well as air guns with the same power as muskets but could fire numerous times before recharging the air chamber, there were also repeaters like the lorenzoni repeater with dual 7 round magazines, meaning they could fire 14 times without reloading just by moving a lever similar to modern lever actions.The 2A was written in the late 18th century by people whose view of guns was the muskets kept by militia members behind there doors for quick response if they were called up. Hence the 2A wording about militias. Now that we have local, state & Federal authorities, the 2A is obsolete except to gun fanatics.
There was also semi automatic guns back then that used multiple lockes and held between 3-8 shots actuated by a pulling the trigger over and over, and was accomplished by stacking multiple loads down a single barrel and having multiple locks to set off the last load first then keep it going in series.
There was also the fully automatic belton rifle, demonstrated before congress before the bill of rights was written, it could fire 8 shots in less than a second, and between beltons semi and fully auto rifles congress approved the musket conversion, but later dropped them deeming them too expensive, belton later petitioned the british govt and was rejected, likely for the same reason.
There were also revolvers before the 13 colonies existed, and before the constitution there was the puckle gun, which later became an inspiration for colt.
So there are plenty of examples of things besides muskets existing and being well known or in beltons case directly shown to congress, so the claim they only knew muskets is not only a complete lie but blatent ignorance of history and an epic failure for you to even research the most basic knowledge of what you are debating. This is why most anti gun debaters are ignored, they ignore all facts and assume emotion makes them correct over any logic or fact, ya'll can't even get definitions right, or words, or facts.
Arguing the way you are now is like a kindergartener arguing with a banker because the kindergartener feels like atms should give free money and his opinion should over rule fact, but with the case with most anti gunners it is adults making such pathetic debates assuming their opinion and emotion with somehow over ride all logic and fact which it does not.