What is traditional? Did inlines exist prior to the percussion side locks? Yes they did. Were scopes ever used in the 1700 & 1800 hundereds? Yes again. Does an inline require you to load your gun from the muzzle? Yeap again.
Of course an argument can be made for the traditional hunters also.
The way I see it is like this... shoot what is legal and what you enjoy. My state, Va, has a muzzle loading season, not a traditional hunting season. Other wise we might have to outlaw all those nice fiber optic sights, cams, over draws, releases, aluminum arrows and mechanical broad heads. for a more " traditional" archery season. Hunters should stick together and not worry about others who are using legal weapons to harvest game.
__________________
" A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user."
I agree with TScott on this one. First of all, modern inlines are no more accurate than modern sidelocks (cap AND flintlocks). The barrels are made the same way for both, and are offered in the now common faster twists.
First of all, the argument that inlines are somehow more modern that sidelocks disregards the fact that the first inline muzzleloader was invented in the 1600' s, but never caught on, probably because it would have been more costly to manufacture at the time.
I guess my biggest problem with those who whine and cry about inlines being too modern is that the objection is obviously motivated by blatant self-interest. Before Tony Knight brought back the inline concept which HAS made muzzleloading more attractive to new or converted muzzleloader hunters, there were always relativly few ML hunters left. The inline and the marketing surrounding them has really just renewed interest in what was likely a dying method of hunting. But I think that the heart of the matter is that the " old-school" hunters feel that their, until recently, somewhat exclusive season, their " territory" so to speak, has been somehow taken over by these new ML hunters who are attracted the modern rifle-like design and handling. It' s not that any of the bitchers will outright admit this, so they use baseless arguments (i.e. " Inlines are too accurate, or too reliable, or too long ranged, or can have scopes, or shoot high performance bullets, etc...) to bolster support for their chosen type of weapon to exclude those who want to do it differently. It' s the same type of mentality that kept Civil War soldiers armed with ML' s when reliable cartridge rifles were available.
The point is that " modern" (meaning recently produced) inlines are really no different than " modern" sidelocks. The accuracy is the same, they can all have optics installed if you want, they load the same, use the same powders and similar primers, and are all still sensitive to the elements if proper precautions aren' t taken. What I often ask these people is just how primitive should the ML seasons be? If inlines are too " modern," then why aren' t flintlocks, too? I mean, muzzleloaders had been around for a long time before the flintlock was invented. Maybe we should ban them and then everyone could use matchlocks. And what of rifling? Isn' t that a " modern" invention? Maybe we should require roundballs and smoothbore muskets, or better yet, arquibui. And while we' re at it, we should just ban stocks too, because the " primitive" muzzleloaders (hand cannons) didn' t have them, so they must be a ' modern' amenity. And only rounded stones for projectiles, too. Lead is just too progressive if you ask me.
I think before people whine about the details of other' s hunting preferences they should consider that ANYTHING that encourages new hunters into the sport ensures that the sport will be around for years to come. The more exclusive any method of hunting is the more likely that it will disappear FOREVER!. I think that the objections to inlines will eventually disappear just like the objections bowhunters used to have for the compound bow.
I say we should be allowed to hunt with what we like. If long-rifles, brass, and round balls trip your trigger then more power to you, but don' t try to take away my right to hunt because I like composite stocks, stainless steel and sabots. Remember, if we ban each other then it won' t be long before we all get banned.
If In-lines are legal in your state then I can,t see a thing wrong with them. If it loads from the muzzle it is a muzzle loader. If the tradition nuts don,t like them then they sure as hell don,t need to use them. Our state bans scopes which is nothing more that discrimination against hunters who have vision trouble with open sights due to age or injuries. mIf there are populations of deer that need reduction then leave the hunters alone and let them do the job.
I don' t understand why this is even an argument. I' ve shot both and don' t see any real advantage in either you still have to load them from the front, one shot at a time. I do like the stocks available on more of the in-lines though. They fit more like my other rifles and carry better.
To me projectiles and powder should be a bigger item of discussion. Maxi-balls, sabots and Pyrodex have made a much bigger change and represent a bigger difference than where the fire comes from.
If you can' t shoot 4 or 5 shots in under a minute and eject brass after each shot, then it is definitely a primitive weapon!
I agree this issue is and continues to be beat to death. If legal than why not, if not no debate that i can see. If you choose to hunt with a " Traditional" (and I use that term loosely) and your area allows inlines in the same season you can buy an inline if you feel it offers that much of an advantage, it is a choice. IMHO there is no reason for debating it!
I would almost welcome that my state would put out a special season for flintlocks only and one for cap and ball only and one for in-lines only.....that way I' d have a reason to justify the purchase of a flintlock.
I started in black Powder using a cap and ball.. took a couple deer and bought an in-line... took a couple deer and bought an updated modern in-line using the 209 primer system. Haven' t taken a deer with it yet but I' m sure I' ll get my chance.
Taking a deer with a flintlock would be a hoot.
Getting back to the question posed......each state will set their own reg' s and that' s the way it should be.
awhile back some one was against (savage I think) it uses smokeless powderistead of black powder, but like you' ve all stated correctly it loads from the muzzel too. If Maines muzzel loadind season was longer than 1 week I probably would get into it I like the hawkens replicas but an inline wouldn' t hurt my feelings either.
__________________
The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few or the one
[Deleted]
for a more " traditional" archery season. Hunters should stick together and not worry about others who are using legal weapons to harvest game.
