| The second reason, by contrast, strikes modern Americans as archaic, if not embarrassing: States' armed populations could resist and overthrow a tyrannical central government, acting as an insurrectionary militia--much as Americans had recently done in overthrowing British rule. That may have made sense in 1790, but today the insurrectionary rationale would seem to imply a right to keep and bear surface-to-air missiles and grenade launchers, among other things. |
What would be the smallest weapon that would be required?
We might need Jason Bourne to fire said weapon.
There's a lot of variation in the ballistics and accuracy of .30 caliber rifles. A .30-06, .30-40 Krag, 30-30, and .308 Win all have varying capabilities of range, accuracy, and foot poundage.
My personal favorite is the .303 British, but I was actually thinking of the .30-06.
I've had exactly one .303, and I hated it. It was probably more the gun than the caliber, but I loathed that thing after running a couple of rounds through it.
Well, plan on getting your shoulder reset after you dislocate it too ;) . I have a .45-70 lever action, and for sheer power, yeah, it's great, but it really doesn't have much in the way of range, and is far too large to hunt anything in the lower 48, though it'd probably be good for moose.
The minimum acceptable accuracy of the .45-70 from the 1873 Springfield was approximately 4 inches at 100 yards, however, the heavy, slow-moving bullet had a "rainbow" trajectory, the bullet drop measured in multiple yards (meters) at ranges greater than a few hundred yards (meters). A skilled shooter, firing at known range, could consistently hit targets that were 6 X 6 feet at 600 yards ? the Army standard target, and a skill mainly of value in mass or volley fire, since accurate aimed fire on a man-sized target was effective only to about 300 yards.
After the Sandy Hook tests of 1879, a new variation of the .45-70 cartridge was produced, the .45-70-500, which fired a heavier 500 grain (32.5 g) bullet. The heavier 500 grain bullet produced significantly superior ballistics, and could reach ranges of 3,500 yards (3200 m), which were beyond the maximum range of the .45-70-405. While the effective range of the .45-70 on individual targets was limited to about 1,000 yards (915 m) with either load, the heavier bullet would produce lethal injuries at 3,500 yards. At those ranges, the bullets struck point-first at roughly a 30 degree angle, penetrating 3 one inch (2.5 cm) thick oak boards, and then traveling to a depth of 8 inches (20 cm) into the sand of the Sandy Hook beach. It was hoped the longer range of the .45-70-500 would allow effective volleyed fire at ranges beyond those normally expected of infantry fire[5].
The main limitation of the .45-70 is the relatively low velocity which puts a practical limit on shots at game beyond 120 meters or so, despite its ability to kill at many times that distance. The trajectory of the bullets is very steep, which makes for a very short point blank range. This was not a significant problem at the time of introduction, as the .45-70 was a fairly flat-shooting cartridge for its time. Shooters of these early cartridges had to be keen judges of distance, wind and trajectory to make long shots; the Sharps Rifle in larger calibers such as .50-110 was used at ranges of 1000 yards[9].
Mine is a Lee-Enfield SMLE, or offically a Lee-Enfield Short Magazine Rifle MkIII . My major gripe with it is that it's just very uncomfortable to shoot, my personal opinion is that the barrel is too light and the balance is off, but I'm no gun smith and not even much of a gun buff, so it's hard to say for certain.
Mine is just a standard lever action, no trapdoor. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't those old split breaches worth a lot of money? Seems like I've heard or read that somewhere.
The bullet drop and trajectory arc is drastic, from my experience.