Is This muzzle loading??

[Jimmy Mac]

Exactly. No one would own them if there was no muzzleloading season.

[RBK]

Every thing Guyon states reflects my opinion.
Thanks for keeping the thread "on-track", Guyon.

[Jimmy Mac]

The muzzleloading season was started for muzzleloading enthusiasts and buckskinners.

How many inline enthusiasts do you know?

How many get togather to shoot these for fun.

How many forms of shooting competitions are open to inlines. Do the inline shooters ever have formal shooting matches?

All over the US large groups of buckskinners and muzzleloader shoters get togather for camps and shooting competition. In Friendship Inn. alone thousands of people from all over the world gather twice a year for the spring and fall shoot.

So many people make buckskinning a way of life. Every weekend smaller groups of people shoot muzzleloaders for fun and in formal competition.

99% of the people that own inlines only use them for one reason. To hunt deer in our season.

They do not even like their rifles. They dont even want to shoot them because they are such a bitch to clean.

I see them every year just before deer season in gun shops and on public ranges.

They bought all the BS that they were told that is nessary to hunt with. They have their Pryodex pellets and their JHP bullets wrapped in plastic and their shotgun primers.

After three shots they cant force a sabot down the barrel without beating their ramrod against a tree.

After a few shots the plastic residue is built up so bad that what little accuracy they had is gone. They can't even keep them on the paper. They are happy after a while for a 4 inch group at 25 yards because "everyone KNOWS that is all a muzzleloader will do".

Sometimes they decide that their new rifle is junk and they go back to the gunshop and trade it for another inline that is supposed to shoot 1,000 yards using 15 pryodex pellets when they have already admitted that their shot at deer will be at less than 75 yards.

They come back the next day and the whole BS starts one again.

They then tell me that the inlines are so much better and eaiser to use than my rifle. But it will shoot in the rain they say but if it is raining they stay at home.

When they clean them they spend more time removing their breechplug than I do cleaning my rifle. They still cant get ALL of the plastic residue out of the bore.

The inline has only one advantage over a real rifle. It is more reliable when dirty. This is a real advantage for those too lazy to clean their rifles.

[Guyon]

To the muzzleloading traditionalist:

Yes, my inline's for hunting--just like my Remington 700 and my Marlin 336. I'm sure it'll be a little more work, but that's fine. It's a tool just like my other guns, and I'll put in the time necessary to become proficient with it.

I don't put my rifle up on some sort of pedestal. I don't use it to make myself feel like I'm part of some clique of shooters. My rifle is not my identity. I didn't buy it out of some obligation to tradition or to the past. I bought it for hunting.

I'm not an inline or muzzleloading enthusiast. Probably never will be if the elitist tendencies of certain posters on this board are any indication of the larger traditionalist muzzleloading community.

I'm a hunter, and I'll use what is legal for hunting. It's legal to use my inline and to scope my gun in Tennessee. I'll do both. If muzzleloading traditionalists in Tennessee don't like it, I suggest they lobby and vote for a law change.

Despite the "expert" opinion of folks like Jimmy Mac, the inline offers advantages that appeal to me. My money, my choice. Hell, I'll even use Pyrodex pellets and 209 primers. Again, my money, my choice. I'm going to try CVA's Powerbelt bullets too. Supposedly much less plastic residue and less cleaning. We'll see if that's true at the range.

I'll practice with my rifle. I'll be proficient and ethical with my rifle. I don't plan on taking any shots over 100 yards--the distance at which it will be zeroed.

Love me. Hate me. Don't give a crap about me. Honestly, I could care less. If you want to, you can even make the mistake of thinking you're somehow a better shooter or hunter than me just because you shoot a sidelock. Your opinion doesn't mean much to me, because you don't know me from Adam. That's because you take one look at my rifle and decide you already know me. Again, your mistake.

[BluRidgDav]

Let me try to explain why it is that most "traditionalists" are against the in-lines:

The title of this forum is "Black Powder and Cowboy Action Shooting". Now, Cowboy Action Shooting was started by a bunch of guys who wanted to shoot old cowboy-style guns. Much like the traditional muzzleloaders who got the various state game departments to set aside a special black powder deer season. CAS has become very popular. Some shooting ranges are starting to set aside special days/nights at their ranges for CAS only. Now, there are alot of guys who would like to get onto the range during these special sessions. They're not really interested in cowboy-style guns, they just like to shoot. Kinda like in-line shooters who just like to hunt deer.

Now let's say, just for the sake of argument, that the rules governing CAS were not written with foresight to expect that some shooters would try to take advantage of the cowboy spirit. Next thing ya know, new shooters are entering the cowboy matches with AR-15's and Glocks. When the traditional cowboy guys, who are still using lever-guns and single-actions, start to complain. The modern shooters snap back with, "Stop whining. The object of the sport is higher scores, and I can get higher scores with my modern guns, and hey, it's legal!"

Just because it's legal, doesn't make it right!!!

And just because modern gadgets "improve your score", doesn't make them appropriate!!!

The object of CAS is to get high scores with COWBOY guns, which have certain limitations, not just get high scores with any weapon. And the object of black powder deer season is to hunt deer with TRADITIONAL muzzleloaders, which also have certain limitations, not hunt deer with modern rifles that only lack a brass cartridge case.

Anyone who argues otherwise is just not being honest with himself or his fellow hunters.

[Guyon]

Dave, I see your point, but I again repeat that this mentality is all about the trees and has little to do with the forest.

Simply put, many traditionalists can't see past their own noses and their own greed. They want the woods all to themselves during muzzleloader season. Perhaps "primitive weapons only" WAS the original intent of the muzzleloading season, but intents change. Our legal system is based on interpretation, and many states have chosen to interpret muzzleloader as flintlock or inline.

The forest to which I refer above has to do with two major concerns that are more important (in my mind anyway) than protecting a hunting season exclusive to primitive shooters.

First, states recognize that some measures need to be taken in order to insure greater game management. Allowing more hunters into the woods during BP season (which in several states resulted in a shorter gun season in the first place) cuts down on burgeoning herds. Now certainly, this premise is contingent on whether you think herds need greater management, but in so many locales these days, wildlife officials seem to think so.

Second, hunters are a dying breed. If you check statistics, the number of issued licenses has long been on an overall downward slide. That means less money for game management, and it means that less hunters are entering the woods or picking up the sport. If modern inlines increase the enjoyment of the sport for even a few hunters (especially younger hunters), then they are more than worthwhile in my opinion.

Traditionalists' arguments are territorial in nature. ("Stay out of MY part of the season.") My point of view is more concerned with the wildlife we hunt and the sport itself. In my mind, life is too short to argue over how one hunter enjoys himself in the woods. There are too few of us in the first place, and infighting among hunters only gives antis more fodder.

All this said, I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree.

That's my honest take.

[BluRidgDav]

Agree to disagree, I agree, but here's why I disagree.

Many of your last post's points are based upon false assumptions.

1) Traditionalist arguments are based on greed. "They want the woods all to themselves."

This assumption is way off. The reason I used the Cowboy Action Shooting mataphor, was because both groups (CAS and Traditional Muzzleloaders) are amoung the most gregarious people you will ever find. They welcome newcomers. Truely, the more the merrier! The competition for both scores and game animals is a distant 2nd or maybe 7th on their list of the favorite shooting/hunting experiences.

(Within the world of guns, Type "A" personalities abound, but most of the "driven" individuals are pushing the outside of the envelope, with ultra modern guns, lazers, rapid-fire, large caliber, etc.)

Think about it, what type of mindset would voluntarily handicap himself and his sport by messing around with antiques? Hey, I'll rendezvous with any of you guys, anytime. But if it's CAS of ML season, I think that we'll have alot more fun, if you bring "traditional" weapons.

2) " 'primitive weapons only' WAS the original intent of the muzzleloading season, but intents change."

WOW!!!
Coming from someone, who's sign-off includes; "Protect your RKBA."
That one really floors me. Original intent DOES NOT CHANGE. Only modern interpretations change, and as we've seen with the 2nd Amendment, usually for the worst.

3) "Our legal system is based on interpretation, and many states have chosen to interpret muzzleloader as flintlock or in-line."

I've never needed a "legal system" to figure out right from wrong, and those that do, are usually up to something. I've been hunting with ML's since the very first "special ML seasons", and back then there were NO in-lines. So, it would be pretty hard for those states to have "chosen" to approve in-lines. What really happened, was that the game departments underestimated the ability of some folks to stretch the "original intent".

Noboby anticipated a stainless steel, synthetic stocked, 3x9 magnified scoped, shotgun-primered, pyrodex pellet powered, sabot-JHP firing MUZZLELOADER!!!

Being a very crafty species, it didn't take long for "improvements" to come along and the game bureaucracies were slow to keep up. Now, that the genie is out of the bottle, the few states that have tried to rein in the technology, have been, you guessed it, sued into submission by the in-line manufacturers.

4) States use muzzleloaders as a herd management tool.

Yup, now with easy-to-use modern ML's dominating, they HAVE to. It's not only pitting in-lines vs. traditionalists, but also ML against cartridge hunters. The early primitive seasons never had such an effect. Those season's were, for the most part, "add ons" where few animals factored into the total state tally.

[BluRidgDav]

5) "Hunters are a dying breed. - infighting only gives the antis more fodder."

Yes and no.

Our numbers have declined, and 1 of the 2 main keys to hunting's future is recruiting young hunters. But, I don't think that in-lines are bringing in any NEW hunters, young or old. Only lots of already established hunters, who want to hunt the ML season, without having to learn any of the traditional technigues. For the life of me, I really can't imagine some future hunter, lying in bed dreaming . . . . if only someone would invent a rifle that works & looks just like a modern rifle, except you put pellets down the muzzle. Then I'll take up hunting . . . . . (Baloney)
Take some kids to a flintlock demonstration, and watch their eyes bug-out. Let them shoot yours, and they'll be hooked for life.

The second key to hunting's future, it countering the arguments of the anti-hunters. Actually, most of the die-hard antis will never be convinced that hunting is OK, so we shouldn't waste our resouces trying. Our real efforts should be directed at the large majority of Americans who are either "undecided" or don't have strong opinions either way. That is where the votes are. And in our democracy, it's the votes that count.

Try this; Invite some of these "undecideds" over to the house for dinner. Pull out your very best venison recipe, with all the trimmings. Then, after dinner, adjourn to the den, and over fine wine or good whiskey, either:

- reach above the fireplace and take down "ole Betsy". Allow your guests to admire her slim lines and hand craftsmanship, the beautiful wood stock and old fashioned octagon barrel. Tell them how she's just like the one great-great-great grandpa used to carry, when he first came to this country, or fought in the great civil war. Show them how the powder and ball have to be kept dry, the the hammer cocked, and the sights lined-up just so. Tell them how you have to use real woodsmanship in order to get really close to a deer before you can attempt a shot. Tell them about the "the one that got away", because you held your fire, and the one that didn't, which provided such a fine meal this evening.

OR

- reach into the gunsafe and pull out your techno-wonder. Point out to your guests that the synthetics in the stock came from the technology of the NASA space program. Show them how the plastic speed-loader makes reloading a snap. How the sabot is just like the ones that M1 tanks use, how the pyrodex-pellets are amoung the most high-tech explosives around. Let them look through the 10X scope, and tell them that you can kill a deer with this rifle from here to all the way past their house. Tell them how you sniped tonight's meal from high in your aluminum climbing treestand.

Now imagine that this November, there's a referendum on the ballot, to either allow muzzleloading hunting in the county park just outside of town, or hire professional sharpshooters to take care of the park's "deer problem". Which way will the "undecideds" vote.

If we, as hunters, don't take it upon ourselves, to police our ranks and get control of the technology. Public opinion is not going to tolerate a bunch of UN-sportsman running around asassinating animals.

[Guyon]

1) Traditionalist arguments are based on greed. "They want the woods all to themselves."

I need but quote Jimmy Mac here as an example: "The inline allows folks to cheat by bending the rules just so they can infringe on OUR season."

You can't tell me that this statement (with its emphasis on "OUR") isn't indicative of an unwillingness to share. In your rebuttal here, you don't address the intolerance of traditionalists. Instead, you talk more about the "gregarious" nature of traditionalists. This assertion doesn't quite square with the staunchly anti-inline attitude I've encountered so far. In fact, it runs quite counter to the dismissiveness I've seen.

2) " 'primitive weapons only' WAS the original intent of the muzzleloading season, but intents change."

I support the right to keep and bear arms mainly because I believe in the principle--not simply because it appears in our Constitution. Strict constructionist arguments always tickle me to death, especially when folks claim to know the ORIGINAL INTENT of a writer. I'm not psychic; I can't channel the founding fathers. I can read and interpret though. That's been the basis of legal systems for centuries. If folks think the founding fathers were inscribing ideas devoid of interpretation into stone, then they're really dumbing down our founding fathers. These were smart men that knew the value of a living, breathing constitution--one that would be interpreted variously over the years.

3) "Our legal system is based on interpretation, and many states have chosen to interpret muzzleloader as flintlock or in-line."

You argue here on some sense of moral ground, and again, your ideas are based on the assumption that inline shooters have no place in the muzzleloading community. It's elitism all the way.

I fully concede that the muzzleloader season was originally intended for sidelocks. But time's change, and technology changes, and traditionalists in any venue almost always have problems with this fact. To follow this logic to its end, all bow hunters would still be using long bows, tennis players would still use wooden racquets, and the Pony Express would still be operational. Technology has almost always changed the way the game is played--whether that game be warfare, travel, communication, etc. Even the muzzleloader season isn't exempt.

4) States use muzzleloaders as a herd management tool.

With fewer and fewer hunters entering the field each year, what's the alternative? Bigger bag limits during gun season, perhaps. Cheaper out-of-state licenses, maybe. I don't pretend to have all the answers here.

However, none of this rhetoric has done much to convince me that the majority of griping coming from traditionalists is the result of a clique-ish attitude. If they were as gregarious as you imply, then I'd imagine there'd be more tolerance for inline shooters. It boils down to a metaphorical territorial pissing match, and traditionalists don't want us "other folks" to set foot on their property.

[Guyon]

5) I really cannot respond logically to any of your ideas here. That's because they are based on pathos (emotional appeal) for the most part. They revel in nostalgia, and they reveal an awful low opinion of any hunter who doesn't use an antique weapon. Diction like "assassinating" and "sniped" provides a pretty clear picture of a hunter who sees himself as morally and ethically superior to the millions of folks who take animals in the field with modern hunting equipment.

You paint two nicely contrasting pictures, but each one is so biased towards a "good old days" mentality that I find them more comedic than useful. Both pictures, interestingly enough, contain a technological tool--like it or not. Perhaps you'd be better off telling your guest how you stalked your prey covered in mud and sticks and killed it with a spear you fashioned from hickory and flint. But wait. Isn't a spear a form of technology as well? Traditionalists can kid themselves as much as they'd like, but they're not all that different from any other hunter. Spark, powder, and bullet. The shapes are different, but the effects are the same. Do you really think that antique technology is somehow going to warm the heart of a undecided voter? I sure don't.

[Scott Evans]

I know some primitive archers who hunt the entire season with old style bows. They like the challenge and the intangible aura that surrounds that activity and way of thinking. They see no relative skill at all in the way I hunt… and that’s OK. I may try the bow at some point but I like the flint locks best for now and for my own reasons. I could care less however about playing dress-up or what the next guy is hunting with. I’m out doing my own thing and it’s very satisfying to me when I have the chance.

Don’t get worked up about who is and is not cheating the rules. The “law” is only real confining limit. “Rules” of the hunt, that each of us go by, are personal to enhance the experience.

[Jimmy Mac]

Since the origional intent of the muzzleloader season was to give muzzleloading rifle shooters and buckskinners a season TO THEMSELVES and away from hunters using modern
guns why should we not look down on those hunting in our season with a modern gun?

I am not a snob. I like to see other hunters in the field. I don't like to see rifle hunters intruding on the bow season. It is not fair to the bow hunters and not legal.

I don't like to see modern rifle hunters in the muzzleloading season. It is not fair to the muzzloading hunters and is not legal.

The inline muzzleloader is a modern rifle. It is not legal in some states for use in the muzzleloader season and should not be legal in others.

[Jimmy Mac]

I have helped several people get started in muzzleloading. I have coached a lot more than I can remember in my 30 years of muzzleloading.

Muzzleloading shooters and buckskinners are some of the nicest people in the world. In my 30 or so years of going to muzzleloading shoots and primitive camps I have never met anyone that was a "snob".

I have to yet meet the very first a-hole.

These people will help you anyway they can if you want to get started in this sport.

It is people like this that lobbied to get the muzzleloading season started. Why should they go out of their way to ne nice to those that invade their season with modern firearms?

They are not being nice to us.

[Alex Johnson]

The biggest complaint I have with some of the newer inlines is the fact that manufacturers are trying to build muzzleloaders that will act like centerfire rifles. I've seen one such rifle that will even work with smokeless powders making me really wonder where this is all headed. Personally I think that regardless of the muzzleloader you choose you will still in most cases be restricted to one shot and you have to learn how to make the most of that shot. Unfortunately I see the day coming rather quickly when the federal government takes notice of these "ultra" modern muzzleloading rifles and starts treating them like modern firearms with all federal restrictions that go along with them. This concerns me to a degree since I enjoy building muzzleloading firearms and I don't want to see the day when I have to obtain and FFL to order my components through my popular muzzleloading catalog. I realize that this is inevitable in the future, but it pains me to see it happening so fast.

As far as hunting with inlines goes I've hunted with a TC scout pistol before and found it to be an exciting way to deer hunt. I don't doubt that many other shooters are taking the time to learn to shoot these guns accurately and to hunt responsibly. However, I have noticed a surprisingly large number of people in our area buy inlines and go hunt with them without bothering to fire more than a couple shots from them. Even had one individual ask me to sight his inline in for him so it would be ready when he took it into the woods. I'm sure these people are the exception and not the rule, but I sometimes think the manufactures are partly to blame for these attitudes with there methods of advertising.

[Guyon]

Jimmy Mac: I'm not doubting that muzzleloaders are nice people as a rule. But I don't appreciate immediate disrespect the moment I mention that I shoot an inline muzzleloader. It seems that some traditionalists immediately assume that any inline shooter is a lazy slob and an unethical hunter. Alex is right. There are plenty of lazy folks who have no business in the woods during hunting season. But they shoot their centerfires about the same as they shoot muzzleloaders.

As you should have seen from my only other thread on this board, I'm new to muzzleloading. But I bought my muzzleloader at the beginning of August so that I'll have three full months to experiment with different loads, make sure I can shoot this thing accurately, and when the time comes, make ethical choices in the field. I still have to load the thing from the muzzle. I still only get one shot at the game. Maybe the gun will be a bit more accurate at 150 yards, but that's a moot point for me since I hunt in fairly dense wood where most shots are 50 yards and under.

The hunting season here in Tennessee is already short enough--particularly when compared to surrounding states. If I can get in three or four extra days with my muzzleloader, then I consider it money well spent. That doesn't mean, however, that I'm going to shirk my preparation. The prep will be also be time well-spent because I'll still be working on the basics of shooting.

So many folks are hung up on the equipment. And really, this is the only place where I think a kind of snobbery rears its ugly head. But like I said previously in this thread, both inlines and flintlocks use the same basic technology--spark, powder, bullet. I'm with Scott Evans here in that I'd prefer folks just let each other alone and not worry what the next guy is hunting with.

Alex: I hope you're wrong about the possibility of federal restrictions in the future. That would be a most unfortunate effect of the new designs. But if only inlines are affected by such restrictions, I suspect that a lot of traditionalists will be quite happy.

[Hemicuda]

I just sold my CVA plainsman cap - n - ball rifle, and bought a sweet inline...

WHY? easier to clean (removable breech plug) and easier to unload (removable breech plug)

and because it is a "muzzle-loader" hunt...

SOME states have a "primitive" weapons hunt... those are for cap-n-ball & flintlock guns and straightbows...

muzzleloading simply referrs to a gun loaded from the muzzle...

it matters not ONE BIT, to me what you or any other person thinks of my inline... afterall, it meets the requirement of the law, and I like it!

if you wanna rid the world of inline mzzleloader hunting, start lobbying for "primitive weapons hunting only"

but as long as there are "muzzleloader hunts" you are out of luck... and those of us posessing inlines say "oh well, YOUR opinion mattters not!"

[Jimmy Mac]

For a while there you had to do the papers on any inline that used the shotgun primers. The ATF changed their minds after a while.

[Guyon]

FWIW, I've been doing some more reading online about muzzleloading, and found this thread over at Hunter's Talk. http://talk.hunters.com/room_157/1351.cfm#10128

Sounds remarkably similar to the debate we've had here. Good arguments on both sides of the fence, but like here, people are sticking to their guns (pun intended).

[griz]

I wonder if there were "traditionalists" in Daniel Boone’s day? I can see them trying to stop the use of those fancy rifled bores because that was just a new way to cheat.

[Jimmy Mac]

Back then your rifle kept you alive. There was no cheating.

Cheating comes in games with rules. Just like in the muzzleloading season. Using a modern gun is cheating.

[Hemicuda]

it is only cheating if it is against the rules...

in My state, it is not against the rules, so it ain't cheating!

[Guyon]

Back then your rifle kept you alive. There was no cheating.

Seems to me that the Native Americans stayed alive pretty well until Europeans started bringing rifles into the Americas. Was it "cheating" when whites shot Indians armed with real "primitive" weapons?

If there were "traditionalists" during the days of Daniel Boone, Davey Crockett, Kit Carson, et. al., then I imagine they were using bows, spears, and atlatls.

It's all about perspective.

[BluRidgDav]

Original Intent, Nostalgia vs. Progress, and Legitimacy.

Original Intent.

No, I wasn't around 200+ years ago. But, I can read the written works of our Founding Fathers and, through their words, get a pretty good handle on their original intent, without being a psychic. If you prefer a "living, breathing" interpretation, from our modern leaders (Bill Clinton, perhaps), then I guess that's; Our freedom, your choice.

Reminds me of the example often used by Dr. Walter Williams, a noted scholar. Allow me to paraphase;

Let's you and me sit down and play some poker, and the rules be "living". After you bet all your money, I'll inform you that today's interpretation says that my 2 pair, beats your full house.

Hell of a way to play a game, conduct a hunting season, or base a legal system. In fact, our legal system is not based upon interpretation, but rather "Precedence". You know, when you look BACK at the way the law was intended to be enforced. Every now & then, a judge will come up with a NEW "interpretation". But, in the vast majority of cases, this new interpretation is reversed on appeal. (Just ask the US 9th Circuit.) Precisely because of the law's original intent.

But, I digress . . . . . .

Now, I (and alot of traditional muzzleloaders) WAS around 20+ years ago, and therefore can speak with some first-hand authority, when it comes the original intent of these special muzzleloading seasons.


Nostalgia vs. Progress.

These special seasons were set aside with the express purpose of EXEMTING THEM FROM PROGRESS. They were spawned by nostalgia. A time capsule, if you were. Not an mechanical engineering exercise to see how far modern science can push the closed-breach envelope.

Sometimes I get the feeling that in-line shooters are trying to educate me about the wonders of modern technology, as if I didn't know any better. I know that round lead balls are aerodynamically inferior to boat-tailed-polymer-ballistic-tips. I know that loose black powder is harder to load and clean than pyrodex and smokeless. I know that flintlocks are more prone to moisture contamination than encapsulated primers. I know that scopes can help me aim at longer ranges and in lower light. I know. Believe me, I know.

Yet, we traditional muzzleloaders chose to ask for a season, NOT INSPITE of these limitations, but rather BECAUSE of them! To challenge ourselves, to make it hard, to miss the trophy of a lifetime due to a "flash-in-the-pan", or to maybe, just maybe, collect the trophy of a lifetime, even if it's only a doe, by overcoming the obstacles that muzzleloaders throw up in front of us.

Now, I'll admit it. We (traditional muzzleloaders) BLEW IT!!! When we asked for a special season, we never imagined that some shooters/manufacturers would go so far to stretch, manipulate, and change the spirit of the muzzleloading season. Boy, were we wrong.


Legitimacy.

Imagine, right now, that there were no special muzzleloading seasons. If a bunch of in-line shooters tried to lobby the various state game commisions for a special "muzzleloader" season, they would be laughed at. Why? Because the modern in-line does not differ, significantly, enough from a modern centerfire, to warrant a special season. Even when I hunt with one of my centerfires, rarely is more than a single shot necessary. I'm not bragging, it's the same with all of the other modern rifle hunters that I know. The only things that really make a difference are: faulty ignition and limited range due to open sights and low velocity/blunt projectiles.

Have you noticed that, in some locations, in-line muzzleloaders are replacing modern repeating shotguns with slugs, when hunters are given the option? Something is way out of wack here!

Modern in-lines are not a legitimate line of firearms. They are simply mutants, resulting from improperly crafted regulations. An evolutionary dead-end. A hundred, or even a thousand, years from now, Winchester 70's, Remington 700, Leupold Scopes, etc. will be looked upon as great examples of 20th Century sporting arms. Traditional muzzleloaders will still be remembered and respected as the weapons that forged a fledgling nation. In-lines will be remembered not at all.

Rocks, spears, bows, flintlocks, caplocks, centerfires, they all may be merely rungs on man's ladder of hunting tools, but the discriminating hunter can tell the difference.

[Jimmy Mac]

Very good post.

Exactly right.

[Jimmy Mac]

I wonder how many inlines would be sold every year if they were not allowed in the muzzleloader season?

3 or 4 perhaps?