Eske Esquire wrote:
I'm amused to see gbaji starting to follow his "I'm right about long rifles" argument with a "It doesn't matter anyway" chaser, as if we'd be having this argument if he wasn't too stubborn to just admit to an error.
I never said that the phrase I used was some super official industry term. I simply stated that in the context of my post, the words I used were sufficient for any reasonable person to understand what I was talking about. Descriptively speaking, a "long rifle" is a weapon with a long rifled barrel. In fact, that's exactly why those antique weapons were/are called long rifles as well. My error (which I've admitted several times now) was in using a descriptive phrase which also matched a label used for a completely out of context set of weapons and assuming people would understand what I was talking about.
It's a pretty silly thing to get all worked up about, given that the actual point I was making was completely valid.
I just spent 6 days as a juror on a trial involving assault rifles being told what's what about guns by police, weapons experts, and state prosecutors. The notion that gbaji's better equipped for this debate because he knows a couple of rednecks is a laugh.
While I suppose some of them might have been rednecks at some point, most of my gun owning friends are former (or current) military.