AmericanLongRifles Forums
General discussion => Gun Building => Topic started by: Taylorz1 on July 03, 2019, 12:20:50 AM
-
Hello all
I’m a newbie here and it certainly is not my place to say anything but I felt like the discussion around Rod England’s Alexander Henry Parts Kit was in the spirit of this website and there was good dialogue going on. Looking through the archives there are lots of posts pertaining to Longrange bullet rifles made by Whitworth, Edge, Rigby etc. Yes most of the longrange guns Alex Henry made were likely made post 1860 but he was making rifles prior and lots of longrange percussion rifles were made by other makers prior to 1860 as well. Locking the post because it pertains to too modern a rifle for ALR seems like discussion of contemporary longrifles should also be locked as well as posts pertaining to spaghetti Hawkens and most modern reproductions. The Alex Henry gun is as much in the style of pre 1860 guns as any of these other guns. Just my unsolicited 2c
-
(http://)
That's my opinion as well. I think Whitworth's experiments with long range muzzle loaders
started before 1860,maybe 1855 at the request of whoever the Queen was then,maybe Victoria.
Bob Roller
-
Bob,
Such experimentation started in the 1840's and the first really effective long range rifle appeared as the British P '51. No longer was the battlefield (or target) safe at 1,000 yards,
You are quite correct, Queen Victoria.
-
Well, that is my opinion as well, but I have no power, and I am a biased long range bullet head and lover of English Sporting Rifles.
Fleener
-
Hi Folks,
So what do we say to folks who want to post or discuss Civil War era guns? I am sympathetic about the muzzleloading match rifles but their heyday was after the Civil War and how do they relate to the history of American longrifles? How do English bullet shooting target rifles relate to round ball shooting American long rifles? Older English rifles from the flint era had influence on many half stocked American rifles including the Hawken brothers. German, French, and English guns from the 17th and 18th centuries had discernible influences on American long rifles (read Shumay). British, French, Dutch, Belgian, and American muskets and fowlers were the smooth bored brethren of American long rifles and smooth rifles. So how do Rigby, Henry, Gibbs, Lancaster rifled guns from the 1860s-1870s relate to our mission? This forum has a mission articulated by our rules. We can change those rules but how do we maintain focus on American long rifles and not become some general muzzleloading gun forum? There will always be a tension to balance our mission with the desires of some members. I view this not autocratically but as a forever ongoing discussion but a discussion guided by logic and reason and not emotional preferences. What say you?
dave
-
I have enjoyed the thread on the Alex Henry rifle as well. To be honest though, if the forum is truly focused on the American Longrifle, I have never understood why Hawken rifles are discussed here. They may be an American sidelock muzzleloading rifle which for the most part predates 1860, but to my mind they are about as far removed from a longrifle as the Rigby or Alex Henry. Even many trade guns were made after 1860 and they are freely discussed. If only certain muzzleloading firearm discussions are to be banned because the gun looks different or could have been made after 1860 , the mission focus sounds pretty vague and subject to misinterpretation. Just my 2c.
Mark
-
Hi,
Hawken rifles were made by the descendants and inheritors of long rifle making. They were the American long rifles of the plains and based on a direct lineage. How are Rigby rifles so related? You say they are as far apart from long rifles as late percussion English conical bullet shooting target rifles. Explain yourself.
dave
-
In the past Dennis has stated that he would allow English Sporting Rifles to be discussed here, has this changed?
I realize that they are not a ALR. But as I have stated in the past, this is the most knowledgeable, talented and simply best ML forum that I think you can find and there is a willingness to share knowledge.
Threads that "step out" a little or that are a little in the gray area like English Sporting Rifles do not dominate this forum. One can choose to not read or participate in those threads if one is offended.
Would a English Sporting rifle that shoots a round ball be off topic as well?
Fleener
-
Hi Art,
You ask a good question and I personally am very partial to English guns. As I wrote previously, I view this kind of discussion as a perpetual one that we hash over every time something like this comes up. I actually think that is as it should be so we don't become rigid and irrelevant in the long run. Anyway, I believe Dennis was very relaxed about this as well but then should we just open it up to all muzzle loaders regardless of time period, and does that include modern TCs, CVA,s, Traditions, etc? If we do that, we might get overwhelmed by those topics and the core experienced members who make this forum what it is may get put off and no longer participate. There is another well known forum, of which I know you are aware, that provides an example of that. Do we want to become more like them? If not, how do we maintain our identity as the forum you described? As moderators, we already had to deal with complaints about all of the kit builds posted on this site and also we had a member complain that we had become the "English" gun site rather than American long rifles. Again, as I wrote previously, I believe this to be a never ending discussion, which it should be, and we likely will go back and forth as we deal with it case by case.
dave
-
Hi,
Hawken rifles were made by the descendants and inheritors of long rifle making. They were the American long rifles of the plains and based on a direct lineage. How are Rigby rifles so related? You say they are as far apart from long rifles as late percussion English conical bullet shooting target rifles. Explain yourself.
dave
Hawken rifles have more in common with English sporting rifles (which they are essentially copies of) than any longrifle built in the US up to that point. All the major feature of a Hawken rifle were first built by English gunmakers, in England long beforehand. The Hawken brothers, and other American plains rifle makers did simplify the design to make it more affordable (simpler lock, no drip bar, simplified patchbox if present, etc.) but it is plainly obvious they copied features of the highest quality guns that were being built in England.
I understand the reluctance of wanting the discussion to drift towards conical bullet shooting in these rifle's later days, but there should be no reason to limit the discussion about the development and architecture of these guns.
-
Hi,
Hawken rifles were made by the descendants and inheritors of long rifle making. They were the American long rifles of the plains and based on a direct lineage. How are Rigby rifles so related? You say they are as far apart from long rifles as late percussion English conical bullet shooting target rifles. Explain yourself.
dave
Hawken rifles have more in common with English sporting rifles (which they are essentially copies of) than any longrifle built in the US up to that point. All the major feature of a Hawken rifle were first built by English gunmakers, in England long beforehand. The Hawken brothers, and other American plains rifle makers did simplify the design to make it more affordable (simpler lock, no drip bar, simplified patchbox if present, etc.) but it is plainly obvious they copied features of the highest quality guns that were being built in England.
I understand the reluctance of wanting the discussion to drift towards conical bullet shooting in these rifle's later days, but there should be no reason to limit the discussion about the development and architecture of these guns.
On the contrary, I view Hawken rifles as different from English sporting rifles as Bedford rifles are from Lancaster rifles. They share some parts but their architecture is violently different from English sporting rifles. Fullstock Hawken rifles very much resemble earlier and contemporaneous Southern mountain rifles. They are uniquely American in architecture. Nothing similar on the European continent or the British Isles.
-
Yes, the Hawken brothers were descendents of longrifle builders. And, Hawken rifles are long by todays standards, but no longer than many other rifles of the time or later that are not discussed here. Length and descendency from the American longrifle does not make them a longrifle. The English sporting rifles and target rifles discussed here would be a natural progression from the flint sporting rifles of the 18th century just as the Hawken would be the natural progression of the longrifle. But, to my mind, the only things a Hawken has in common with the longrifle that it descended from, is that it has a sidelock, an octagon barrel and uses a patched round ball. My personal opinion is that if Hawkens are allowed here then the English rifles should be allowed also. As Fleener said they don't dominate the forum and if they are not of your interest, you don't have to read them. I very seldom ever read a Hawken post, but I know they are popular and I am not advocating that they be banned. You did ask, "What say you?"
Mark
-
My apologies for opening up the proverbial can of worms with my posting on the Alexander Henry rifle. Let us know if there is some relaxing of the rules in the future, I would enjoy sharing photos of the finished product on the forum as well as discussing any difficulties or peculiarities that may arise during the build.
Does anyone know what year A. Henry started building his long range rifles?
Curtis
-
Does anyone know what year A. Henry started building his long range rifles?
Curtis
According to Donald Douglas in Alexander Henry Rifle Maker, "In 1860 there was an amazing change in Henry's production of rifles due to the combination of his November 1860 rifling patent, the rapidly expanding Volunteer Movement and the formation of the NRA. Sales of rifles mostly in the calibre .451 with the Henry rifling went through the roof, with a quantum leap of 30-40 rifles/guns (shotguns) per year pre-1860 to around 200 rifles per year post-1860." The design of the lock, trigger guard, tang and the breech area goes back to at least 1854 as shown on an 18 bore ball gun gun no. 6145 by Mortimer & Son on pg. 13. (Henry was apprenticed here in 1830 at age 12). In Chapter 3 Douglas states " In the early 1850s, while at Mortimers, Henry invented the a three-groove segmental cut rifling, similar to the two-groove but with three cuts and a three-winged bullet with a very slow twist. His rifling was extremely accurate at long range and was soon in great demand from many sportsman and marksmen." Apparently, Henry started experimenting with rifling with the 2 groove rifle in the 1840's while he was a manager at Mortimers. He also made target rifles in the 1850's with his own firm, but the Henry rifling patent was in 1860 - so he was experimenting and perfecting the rifling system in the 1850's.
-
Hi Curtis,
You did not open a can of worms. You prompted a good discussion that I believe we should have from time to time. We will never resolve this kind of thing with some magic rule that fits every situation.
dave
-
In the past Dennis has stated that he would allow English Sporting Rifles to be discussed here, has this changed?
I realize that they are not a ALR. But as I have stated in the past, this is the most knowledgeable, talented and simply best ML forum that I think you can find and there is a willingness to share knowledge.
Threads that "step out" a little or that are a little in the gray area like English Sporting Rifles do not dominate this forum. One can choose to not read or participate in those threads if one is offended.
Would a English Sporting rifle that shoots a round ball be off topic as well?
Fleener
Fleener,
I vaguely remember saying that discussions of the rifles were ok, not sure if this was before or after we revised our date range for discussions. Nor did I know much of anything about these type of rifles, as far as I knew they were just long rifles designed for long range shooting.
We are having a discussion to see what is the best thing for our forum.
Dennis
-
There is no doubt that some of these rifles were built in 1860 and before which falls within the rules of this forum with Whitworth being one of the first.
I think that the forum is very well run, with some great people and I do appreciate that.
I also think diversity of topics helps keep the forum fresh, with some of the best topics in "over the back fence"
English Sporting rifles in flint are the predecessors to the same rifles in percussion.
Thanks
Fleener
-
I reread the ALR Mission Statement, Rules and Policies.
Repeated references are made to "custom sidelock sporting arms".
It would seem that enforcement of the rules has been flexible. When enforcement has been flexible, it is difficult to justify the occasional strict application of the rules.
-
My apologies for opening up the proverbial can of worms with my posting on the Alexander Henry rifle. Let us know if there is some relaxing of the rules in the future, I would enjoy sharing photos of the finished product on the forum as well as discussing any difficulties or peculiarities that may arise during the build.
Does anyone know what year A. Henry started building his long range rifles?
Curtis
You did NOT open a can of worms.You made us aware that someone went to no small expense to
make us aware of something that is a different discipline in the black powder shooting sports
which in itself is a narrow interest among narrow interests.The NRA has several million members
and the NMLRA can't attract 30,000.THAT is narrow defined.
Rod England asked me to make some locks for this project but at this point in time I will not take
in any new lock work from anyone for any reason.The lock he uses is the one Don Brown used
and it's from Davis,a well known purveyor of muzzle loading bits and pieces.These was once a
forum for these superb rifles called LRML (Long range muzzle loader) from England but I think
it faded away from lack of interest.
Bob Roller
-
My opinion only, but I think that the thread should have been moved over to "Over the back fence" area where it could be viewed and discussed. Seems to be a general interest in this.
-
Rich, Rod offers round ball barrels in .40, .45, .50, .54, .58 and .62 calibers. The round ball barrels can be had with the sporting rifle and the stalking rifle. The round ball barrels are considerably less than the target rifle barrels.
This is one of the last posts in the other thread. Now that the word is out, I think these rifles fall within the purview of the site and more of them will start to appear......as opposed to the long range target model which has a somewhat limited following. Just let things follow a natural progression.
-
Closing a topic which really deals with the development of Percussion rifles seems a bit strange . Not Mr. England's rifle specifically but more generally the genre of rifles represented from roughly 1855 to 1870.. Many of these rifles of English, Continental and East Coast US makers exhibit superb workmanship and merit study solely on that basis.
Not limited to:
Platinum lined nipples
Sealed nipple seats
Double lead threads on sights
Safety bolted locks
Hammer, nipple, fence evolution
Swamped barrels on ½ stock rifles
Lock making at the pinnacle of development.
To cut this short arbitrarily at 1860 suggests a misunderstanding of the history.
Would the "Grant" rifle in the Smithsonian (C1865) be off limits as well?
Respectfully, Jim
-
Hi Jim,
This site is not dedicated or obligated to encompass the general history of firearms. We don't discuss breechloaders, cartridge guns, revolvers, and many other topics related to firearms development nor are we dedicated to the complete history of percussion arms other than percussion locks were used on later American longrifles. Indeed, by the time percussion was adopted, the technical and artistic development of the longrifle was over. The original mission of this site was to focus on the history, collecting, and building of American longrifles. That mission was expanded to include guns and topics that are linked or relate to long rifles in some way. For example, 18th century English, French, and Germanic guns had direct influences on the designs and decoration of American longrifles. Although longrifles were made until late in the 19th century (until our modern revival), what firearms technology after 1860, domestic or foreign, has any relevance to our mission of studying the history, collecting, and building of American longrifles. The 1860 date I believe was meant to exclude discussions about American Civil War guns. We could rewrite our rule saying any muzzleloading guns but then how do we differ from sites like the "Muzzleloading Forum"? I for one, and I am not alone, would rather not invite a lot of discussions about how to rework your CVA mountain rifles triggers, or how can I make my Traditions Crockett rifle look more authentic. I believe that would drive away many of our most talented, experienced, and knowledgeable members.
dave
-
Hi Jim,
This site is not dedicated or obligated to encompass the general history of firearms. We don't discuss breechloaders, cartridge guns, revolvers, and many other topics related to firearms development nor are we dedicated to the complete history of percussion arms other than percussion locks were used on later American longrifles. Indeed, by the time percussion was adopted, the technical and artistic development of the longrifle was over. The original mission of this site was to focus on the history, collecting, and building of American longrifles. That mission was expanded to include guns and topics that are linked or relate to long rifles in some way. For example, 18th century English, French, and Germanic guns had direct influences on the designs and decoration of American longrifles. Although longrifles were made until late in the 19th century (until our modern revival), what firearms technology after 1860, domestic or foreign, has any relevance to our mission of studying the history, collecting, and building of American longrifles. The 1860 date I believe was meant to exclude discussions about American Civil War guns. We could rewrite our rule saying any muzzleloading guns but then how do we differ from sites like the "Muzzleloading Forum"? I for one, and I am not alone, would rather not invite a lot of discussions about how to rework your CVA mountain rifles triggers, or how can I make my Traditions Crockett rifle look more authentic. I believe that would drive away many of our most talented, experienced, and knowledgeable members.
dave
I echo your sentiments expressed here. Thanks Dave for your accurate wordsmithing of our opinion at present.
-
This is again coming from an outside looking in but looking at the posted rules and policies:
Allowable topics are:
1. The building or recreation of custom side lock muzzle loading sporting arms that would have been made or used in North America between 1607 and 1860.
2. The study and collecting of custom side lock muzzle loading sporting arms as defined in item 1.
3. The shooting of custom side lock muzzle loading sporting arms as defined in item 1.
4. The historical and cultural setting for the manufacture and use of custom side lock muzzle loading sporting arms as defined in item 1.
And a couple paragraphs out of the mission statement:
While the term American Longrifle may include a large and diverse group of firearms including those made for military and experimental reasons; the focus of the board is only those arms made primarily as sporting arms and utilizing a side lock ignition system.
While the focus of this site is the American long rifle in all its incarnations, it is also a home for all those crafts persons preserving a bit of the past by building traditional muzzle loading sporting firearms and their accoutrements. The mission of AmericanLongrifles.com is to promote and support the art and craft of building historically accurate long rifles, related firearms, and accoutrements of the highest quality and artistic merit.
Looking at the rules and mission statement posted on this site I would argue that English styled sporting rifles of the type in question here clearly fit these criteria. If moderators don’t want them discussed I think that is their prerogative but don’t think the decision is consistent with the above. Best
Zack
-
Looking at the rules and mission statement posted on this site I would argue that English styled sporting rifles of the type in question here clearly fit these criteria. If moderators don’t want them discussed I think that is their prerogative but don’t think the decision is consistent with the above. Best
Zack
Zack,
Please explain your thoughts regarding the rules and the Alexander Henry rifle.
Dennis
-
I suggest adding a forum to discuss other traditional ML firearms.
Sure there are other forums, unfortunately the depth of knowledge is pretty shallow. So much so I recently asked to be deleted from one such forum. I simply go tired of being shouted down by idiots.
I have ML interests that include other than FL long rifles. Shotguns, match rifles, Hawkins, match pistols, I enjoy them all. I try not to not discuss them here. Too bad because here we have the most knowledgeable folks anywhere. I could learn a lot from them. Being too narrowly focused may not be the best idea if being inclusive and encouraging younger people is part of the "mission". .
-
Alexander Henry and others were building rifles of this type well before 1860 both as sporting rifles and experimentally. These rifles were in use on this continent. I think this satisfies rules 1-4. I think that the stated mission also makes allowances for these rifles- again an excerpt-“it is also a home for all those crafts persons preserving a bit of the past by building traditional muzzle loading sporting firearms and their accoutrements. The mission of AmericanLongrifles.com is to promote and support the art and craft of building historically accurate long rifles, related firearms etc...” The language in both the mission statement and the rules makes allowances for “traditional muzzleloading sporting rifles” as well as “related firearms” specifically mentioned as not being longrifles.
-
Hi Scota and Zack,
You both hit on a very important point in my opinion. I've been a member of this and several other muzzleloading gun forums since the early 2000s. In that time, I've noticed that the most committed and talented makers and scholars gravitate to this site because they sense it offers the best experiences, resources, and knowledge. However, not all of those folks are coming here from a strictly long rifle background and they would like to share their expertise. So, we may be experiencing some growing pains and have to figure out some good options. I believe this thread is helping.
dave
-
That’s really my motivation here. You can spend five minutes on here and see that the best builders and thinkers hang out here. I guess my bias is regardless of the rules or the bylaws or the mission statement I selfishly stand to learn something and become a better gun maker and gun historian if these kind of guns are allowed. But those are very selfish motivations. I personally do feel that they fall within the spirit of the site and also conform to the rules and mission statement but I’m very new here and talking way above my pay grade. I do so with the utmost respect to the moderators and everyone else on the site.
-
This forum is SO easy to use and with the wide range of knowledge and interests
found here I can see no reason to leave it. No idiots are found here that I have
noticed and a wide range of talent is VERY noticeable.
Bob Roller
-
Well been coming here since before Mark Elliot handed the ALR over to Dennis. It is the americanlongrifles.com. I enjoy firearms of all kinds but am not particularly interested in studying firearms not having direct influence upon American Longrifles pre-Civil War. I have and like to shoot cartridge rifles, shotguns, would like to have and shoot a firearm typical of the Henry which is the topic of this conversation but could care less about building one. I am getting to be an old curmudgeon and really only enjoy flintlocks. I come to this site to learn about and enjoy earlier firearms. I would have no problem adding another category but do not want to have to wade through all the additional discussions in our main groups of topics. I would not want to add to the work the moderators already have by adding a new category but there it is, my opinion. I will visit regardless. just my two cents.
-
I understand that this is no democracy, but fully agree that there is no better collection of minds from which I and others could learn more about these guns.
Perhaps an additional section under General Discussion would keep things fairly sorted, allow our discussions of such, and we would not lose the character and reputation the ALR has earned.
That said, I'll further comment that I'd prefer a inclusive solution here in part because:
ANY
THING
BEATS
another lame "group page" on the Facebook! (no specific group in mind, just that FB pages are absolutely HORRIBLE for maintaining any sense of "Forum" organization and consistency. But unfortunately that's what everyone does now instead of setting up nice discussion forums.
but let us not get side-tracked into hacking on FB pages et al.
Thanks to the moderators and membership for this well-mannered and thoughtful discussion.
-
The simplest solution would seem to allow discussion of later era percussion arms in Over the Back Fence subforum. That would allow folks a place to bring up this sort of stuff around the truly talented people around here and keep the other areas free of the clutter of it.
-
Interesting discussion so far and from what I have been able to understand civil and respectful so far. I am a huge fan of the English style gun, mostly early Manton style flintlocks but also admire/almost covet the early long guns of almost all countries. I guess I,m riding the fence. :-\
-
The long range rifles as an Over the Back Fence discussion would be perfect IMHO.
My wife does Facebook and I want nothing to do with it.
Bob Roller
-
I don't see any reason why it can't be in the over the back fence section,when it's perfectly fine to have discussions about riding mowers,I don't think you have to worry about it trashing up the forum
-
No secrets; one of the issues is fairness and who knows what will be the next very interesting type of guns that requires a stretch to consider it an American longrifle or one of the sorts of earlier guns leading up to it?
Dilution of this site’s focus is not something desirable to all.
-
If the argument to be made is one of fairness I would say this- looking through the posts on here There are hundreds of posts about late percussion shotguns, english pistols, double rifles, late percussion halfstocks made likely just before and even after 1900, chunk guns from the 30s and 40s and “hog rifles” made after 1900 as well. The only thing these topics have in common with American longrifles is that some of the guns are long- many aren’t even rifles. I would also argue that these topics clearly fall outside the stated rules and mission statement yet they are tolerated/encouraged. If there is any unfairness it is directed against the bullet firing longrange guns being discussed in this topic.
-
The word 'bullet' seems to define this topic perfectly.
-
The only rules that matter are those that are enforced.
When a thread is locked, the "letter of the law" has been enforced.
When a thread it locked, and the contributors/readers re-convene to have a discussion over the "letter of the law", perhaps it is time to examine the "spirit of the laws".
Appears that some feel the long-range guns should have their own independent forum somewhere else, to never contaminate the pure definitions of site and purpose as stated here. It also appears that these rules are bent now and then for other non-"pure" gun discussions.
Are the rules better bent (selectively enforced) or modified such that enforcement is predictable? Selective enforcement puts all the decision making on the enforcer. Modification of rules might make it more clear to all those charged with enforcement, as well as allow the group better understanding of how to abide by the rules.
In this particular case, when I saw a moderator taking part in the discussion, I thought it (the discussion) was in the clear, and then another mod/admin shuts the thread down two days after it was started. This is why I speak of "selective enforcement" and clear rules.
I don't know. It's not my place to say. I would like having the option to learn more about traditional/historic guns of the non-cartridge type, from the caliber of folks who inhabit this forum. But if the Masters say we shall not do such, then we sha'nt.
But also, as stated many times in this thread, I cannot think of a better place to engage in such learning. I simply don't have the resources or time or experience to set up a new forum to handle such a limited scope of guns, and would never dream of putting up anything duplicitous of this one.
-
I really enjoy learning from this forum. It is a rare topic indeed that I don't learn from. For me to learn about "bullet rifles" is just an extension of topics to cover yet another type of firearm.
I wouldn't mind things of this sort that adhere to the spirit, if not the letter, of the rules, IF they are contained in a separate portion - the Over the Back Fence area would be good.
I do NOT want to dilute the "Long Rifle" portion of my learning. Yet is seems to me that the line has already been stepped over with the inclusion of the blunder busses, the pistols, etc. Let's try to contain the newer types of firearms to one area, though.
-
I agree with the above. I think the rules are applied selectively depending on the tastes of the moderator. It is more than ironic that the same moderator that closed the discussion on the Alex Henry is the same one Commenting on the “wicked” blunderbuss.
-
Timeframe matters under the current rules.
-
Which has been established that the guns fall within the timeframe published on the website.
-
I have never really studied the rules and mission statement until now.
The Mission Statement includes:
The mission of AmericanLongrifles.org is to promote, preserve and support the traditional art and craft of building, collecting and using the American Longrifle. This would include accouterments and related arms of the period.
In part, ALR Rules/ Policies, Allowable topics are:
1. The building or recreation of custom side lock muzzle loading sporting arms that would have been made or used in North America between 1607 and 1860.
In the strictest sense the forum could be restricted to long rifles made by purely traditional non-modern techniques. That is a wonderful topic but is academic in today's world. There is only a hand full of builders who choose to shun all modern tools. We have had that discussion before. From a practical sense we have to accept modern techniques.
It appears that the forum rules and mission statement are in conflict. Many ML guns used later in period specified do not fit the mission statement. I suggest a forum for building other than long rifles. And building with modern tools. Maybe an anything goes Traditional ML builders forum? This would make the rules and mission more congruent . It would be more inclusive of beginners. It would promote, preserve and support building MLs by a much wider audience and still maintain the traditional arts side of the mission.
-
No wording is perfect. We could spend a lot of time on wording and most would not agree that it conveys what this forum is about. In part because for each of us it’s not exactly the same “thing” we get or want from this site, and in part because words mean different things to each of us. In seeking justice where there was conflict, Solomon proposed to cut a baby in half when 2 women claimed to be the baby’s mother.
In the use of the word “traditional” there was no intent to shun modern tools.
There’s an ongoing discussion among moderators about not just the bullet guns but other topics. Putting things in OTBF versus gun building would undoubtedly require a lot of moderator action and be confusing to anyone not glued to this conversation. Then we could debate whether Gun A or Gun B A) belong on ALR or B) belong in Gun Building or in OTBF. Meanwhile much attention is diverted from the American longrifle.
-
We’ve had good input on the topic of “what to leave in; what to leave out”. The moderators will continue to deliberate some changes and will post them here when we’ve achieved consensus. Thanks for good discussion. Locking this thread now so we can focus on making decisions.
-
Guys please hold your thoughts on this, we are working on a solution but it takes time to get input from all our admins/moderators. This is a holiday weekend and several of us are out of town or have weeend guests. We have a general idea of what we can do but we need to look at in depth to avoid future problems.
Thanks
Dennis