• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades
  • Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Idaho's Definition

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't believe it! I really don't! First off we had the war with the inline crowd. Said they weren't traditional. NOW we seem to be starting another one saying the traditional crowd is not right either..we need a Primative one.



I assumed, and this may be my mistake, that the Traditional weapons in question were everything up to and including the side-lock percussion. That is, everything prior to the modern in-line.

(Thanks Mule Brain for the pic)
Perc.gif


When I opened the "Muzzleloading Season" forum, I assumed we'd be discussing the original intent of the season and how we can help get it back on track. Comparing regulations, who to write to, etc. I had no idea we'd be splitting hairs over flintlock vs. percussion or discussing the larger concept of game management.

I suppose if we eliminated percussion we'd be arguing over smoothbore vs. rifled barrels? Then, wheel lock vs. flintlock or sticks vs. rocks. :)

I am Chairman of the Board of a couple corporations. When I chair the board meetings, I keep the discussion on topic and on track. It's very difficult here due to the nature of the Forum. Perhaps the only way to make this work is to pre-approve the posts before they go public. This is more work for the Moderators, but it may be the only solution. It's the equivalent of not recognizing someone to speak at an in-person meeting. (Robert's Rules)

I thought we'd at least agree that side-lock percussion is "traditional enough"?

This topic is new, so let's give it some time and see how it goes.
 
I agree, lets keep this on track!

One point I would like to make, is that when the first muzzleloader seasons were created no regulations really had to be considered! The modern muzzleloaders didn't exist. So many folks decided to take advantage of that, and bucked that law for everything they could!

Any muzzleloader up to that time could be used. Which of course included the caplock. Which to me should not even be a point of topic on this thread!

I think that it about time the states rewrite the regs to reflect onslaught of modern weapons being used in traditional season. So lets say, that whatever style blackpowder weapons that were available in the early 60's could be used, and sidelock configuration only!

We need to put challenge back into the season. The states partake in the blame as well, for not nipping this in the butt 20 years ago!

Allow Handgonnes too!

Mule

I would be more than happy to write the proper laws pertaining to the muzzleloader seasons. :thumbsup:

This is one mighty debate, that I personally would like to see debated on a national level.
 
(please don't pick apart my use of the term primitive ok?)

Jest'a quick "off-topic" question here, but,.....

Don't you consider "terms" to be important?

I do, because the "misuse of a term" has often led to a huge arguement.

I cain't believe you complain about my humble attempt to prevent a potential arguement thet was start'n to escalate, while the rest of yore post dwelt largely on "poor me-isms".

Respectfully
Trollingb (a name graciously bestowed on me by "you")

(Claude, and the other members of this forum,.... If I'm out'a line here, my sincerest apologies!!)
 
Claude,.... I didn't see yore post, until I had already posted.

I will delete my post if you find it disagreeable (along with this one)!!

YMHS
rollingb (not,.... "Trollingb"!!)
 
Claude and folks, I never said a caplock was not traditional. I think it's traditional just fine. I know there are folks here that are traditioanlists and that's fine too.

However not all of us are traditionalsists. Perhaps that's what this forum needs to be is all traditionalsists. In which case then why is this discussion here and not happening at the TMA forum? Or is this the TMA forum?

Just because I would rather not have the caplock for a special ML season for my particular state. Not offense meant folks. Other folks would rather have the caplock, ok fine. Some do some don't. Eco se eco la. If you want ok fine. I'm not arguing the issue.

I don't see the caplock as being functionally the same as more primitive ignitions. We don't have to argue that though. Unless we are saying they are the same ignition, in which then I would not agree.

The traditionalistic topic associated between caplock and flintlock was introduced where I was only talking about the functional characteristics as relates to ML hunting.

So what, Tahquamenon only want's flintlock and earlier ignition for a hunting season. What's the big deal? I'm not attacking what anyone else wants.

Do we agree that functionally a caplock is less primitive in function than a flintlock or earlier ignition? Or are they the same type of ignition in which case why are they called differently.

For states that have flintlock seasons, what's the plan to have the caplocks added to those seasons so that caplocks don't experience traditional discrimination? Come on.

And Rollingb, thanks much for that "poor me-isms" comment. I'd say that's really out of line, but expected.

I'm going to try harder to be eloquent to you ok and I'm very sorry about the Trollingb thing. I really am.

But I'll ask that we both please start over and you drop the hatchet along with the contempt, because I have. Otherwise it really looks like you just wish to twist and pick things apart for the purpose of argument. It's obvious that you don't want me here, ok fine. That's not poor me-ism. What is poor me-ism if I allowed myself to be driven away from that which I care about.

Which is not going to happen. The attacks have driven some really nice folks off and that is a shame. I've been trying to get them to come back to the forum.

I think I've offered some really constructive things to this thread.

Sorry you disagree Rollingb, please share your suggestions and agenda on how to approach the traditional/primitive ML seasons?
 
Claude and folks, I never said a caplock was not traditional. I think it's traditional just fine. I know there are folks here that are traditioanlists and that's fine too.

However not all of us are traditionalsists. Perhaps that's what this forum needs to be is all traditionalsists. In which case then why is this discussion here and not happening at the TMA forum? Or is this the TMA forum?

Just because I would rather not have the caplock for a special ML season for my particular state. Not offense meant folks. Other folks would rather have the caplock, ok fine. Some do some don't. Eco se eco la. If you want ok fine. I'm not arguing the issue.

I don't see the caplock as being functionally the same as more primitive ignitions. We don't have to argue that though. Unless we are saying they are the same ignition, in which then I would not agree.

The traditionalistic topic associated between caplock and flintlock was introduced where I was only talking about the functional characteristics as relates to ML hunting.

So what, Tahquamenon only want's flintlock and earlier ignition for a hunting season. What's the big deal? I'm not attacking what anyone else wants.

Do we agree that functionally a caplock is less primitive in function than a flintlock or earlier ignition? Or are they the same type of ignition in which case why are they called differently.

For states that have flintlock seasons, what's the plan to have the caplocks added to those seasons so that caplocks don't experience traditional discrimination? Come on.

And Rollingb, thanks much for that "poor me-isms" comment. I'd say that's really out of line, but expected.

I'm going to try harder to be eloquent to you ok and I'm very sorry about the Trollingb thing. I really am.

But I'll ask that we both please start over and you drop the hatchet along with the contempt, because I have. Otherwise it really looks like you just wish to twist and pick things apart for the purpose of argument. It's obvious that you don't want me here, ok fine. That's not poor me-ism. What is poor me-ism if I allowed myself to be driven away from that which I care about.

Which is not going to happen. The attacks have driven some really nice folks off and that is a shame. I've been trying to get them to come back to the forum.

I think I've offered some really constructive things to this thread.

Sorry you disagree Rollingb, please share your suggestions and agenda on how to approach the traditional/primitive ML seasons?

So what your saying is, that if the inline was removed from traditional muzzleloader season so should the caplock?

Well the way I see it, the caplock was around when the muzzleloader seasons started, so they should be included.

Interesting info here: On Pennsylvania

Established in 1974, the state's first muzzleloader season drew 2,064 hunters. By 1983, the season had attracted 113,695 hunters. Look at that increase, and all with traditional styled muzzleloaders. :thumbsup:

Remove the Caplock? Humbug!
 
I would suggest you read the entire thread Mule Brain.

I never suggested removing anything from my state's or any other's present season. I suggested to agument the existing General ML season in my state with another more focused on traditional primitive hunting methods and equipment.

What are you working on for Florida?
 
Sorry you disagree Rollingb, please share your suggestions and agenda on how to approach the traditional/primitive ML seasons?

Simple,.... use Idaho as an example to work from, as was initialy posted!!
 
I cannot believe this is still going on! Is it just a pi**ing contest between rollingb and Tahquamenon!?! I don't know what half of the last post by Tahq. even means? All of this discussion is probably meaningless anyway for most states--I cannot see them "going back" to a purer 'traditionalist' hunting season. The inline and associated industry (sabots, primers, pelleted powder, etc)has gotten too big and their lobby is probably more than a few of us could fight....inlines are ingrained now. Not everyone is going to agree with us 'traditionalists' [what ever that means]that the old fashioned guns are more fun. You have to have a sense of history that means something to you to really get into the old guns. The modern hunter is so brainwashed by modern gunwriters with ballistics and gadgets that he/she thinks they must have all the most modern, best stuff--this is the exact opposite feeling that the traditionalist has--the desire to recreate the old days, hunt like our ancestors, etc....ol' Dan'l or Davy cared not for ballistics, didn't use scopes or sabots, but they sure were HUNTERS. They used flintlocks (and Davy had at least one percussion rifle)and they were very successful with them. I have shot modern guns all my life (I'll be 61 this fall)and can quote you ballistics and such...but there is something special about the old time guns--for me, at least--and I wish more modern ML shooters would try the old time guns and try to get that 'feeling', the 'stepping back in time' when you step into the woods with a longrifle, the feeling of oneness with the forest, stalking and tracking game, rather than sitting in your factory made tree stand with the sabot-shooting inline or .30-06; the thrill of the hunt like your great-grandpappies had it....we may lose this thrill if the modern ML trend continues and that would be a great loss. :m2c:
 
Do we agree that functionally a caplock is less primitive in function than a flintlock or earlier ignition? Or are they the same type of ignition in which case why are they called differently.

I agree, but that has nothing to do with this discussion. Yes, a flintlock is more "primitive" than a cap lock. A matchlock is more "primitive" than a flintlock, and a sharp stick is more primitive that all of them. But, that's not the discussion here.

The topic is... Getting the "Traditional/Primitive" (WHATEVER) season back to what it was prior to the widespread use of the in-line.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top