Maybe he saw a picture of a race gun?
Can't answer that one for you but author Harry Turtledove thinks he knows what would have happened if Robert E. Lee had been gifted with AK-47s:How would Lexington and Concord have turned out if one side was armed with contemporary weapons and the other with AK47's and 1911's for side arms supported by a Ma Duce or two? And the newest of those designs is 60 years old!
Thanks for posting that Lance, I'd never heard of the book, sounds interesting.Can't answer that one for you but author Harry Turtledove thinks he knows what would have happened if Robert E. Lee had been gifted with AK-47s:
The Guns of the South - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I encountered the book a long time ago.Thanks for posting that Lance, I'd never heard of the book, sounds interesting.
Lee could have given them to Hoods Texas Brigade, now that would have been a combination.![]()
Turtledove? Hmmm. . . . I think I got two of those for Christmas one year?Can't answer that one for you but author Harry Turtledove thinks he knows what would have happened if Robert E. Lee had been gifted with AK-47s:
The Guns of the South - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I actually disagree with you. Not that it matters, haha. Lets take technology back to the 80s, computers are getting smaller and more powerful. Hell look at the iPod over the last 10 years.I was just watching the news and some Guy says something like: firearms technology has evolved like electronic technology making it easier to kill. What!?! Am I missing something here? Do guns shoot lasers now, do they have infinite ammo, or are there hand held bazookas?
The technology has no where near evolved like electronics. Revolvers, bolt actions, lever action, clip fed guns are no different then the old days. Ya the looks have changed and some functions of firearms have been improved but they are all along the same simple functions as when they were first created. Firearms went from muzzle loading black powder and balls to cartridges that fire bullets. Not telegrams to text messages or projectors to 3d TVs or record players to ipods!
I swear these people talk out of their rear ends! How dumb is that?
You're still comparing a 200-year period of firearms development to less than twenty years of electronics development.I actually disagree with you. Not that it matters, haha. Lets take technology back to the 80s, computers are getting smaller and more powerful. Hell look at the iPod over the last 10 years.
Forget going back to the invention of the first firearm. Lets go back to the 1700s, wouldn't you agree that they have evolved, also making it easier to kill? A front loaded musket vs say a North American 22 magnum that fits in your back pocket? Take the military standard then, and then take today. A repeating fierce killing machine, vs 1 shot and reload. I think you are right the basic technology on which it was created is still there but with many many micro evolutions that makes the gun easier to fire, and kill. Just my two cents. Interesting topic for sure!
Things do advance at different rates. I think Sambuh understood the comment in the OP to be the same as I did. The Guy on tv was talking about firearms advances and used the electronics analogy. I assumed (yeah we all know what that doesYou're still comparing a 200-year period of firearms development to less than twenty years of electronics development.
Sure. The comparison was actually made earlier. It's the basis of the argument.. Naturally, we would all agree, technology has evolved faster. My point is simply, yes guns have actually evolved into easier to shoot, easier to kill machines.You're still comparing a 200-year period of firearms development to less than twenty years of electronics development.
I should of read this before I commented... So I could just say, "yeah what he said" hahaThings do advance at different rates. I think Sambuh understood the comment in the OP to be the same as I did. The Guy on tv was talking about firearms advances and used the electronics analogy. I assumed (yeah we all know what that does) that in the current climate the guy on tv making the comment was some anti gun liberal and the time frame was 1789 to present and that the 2nd amendment was outdated. That seems to be one of the favorite arguments. (one I whole heartedly disagree with by the way!) I could be be wrong but I don't think the intent of the original comment was that electronics and firearms advances are completely alike in pace of advancement, just that they have advanced. And if you look at the long view from 1789 to present they have.
Where they differ is in rate of advance. At least without seeing the actual comment in context thats how I understood it.
I think technology for firearms is going to be small innovations as opposed to the leaps and bounds in electronics. Somehow you still need to send a mass (Lead, copper... whatever) down range at a high rate of speed. What the innovations will be I have no clue. But the big leaps will be stuff like persoanlized rail guns (no need for powder and primers) or even directed energy weapons, or who knows what else, but those are a long way off. Also its worth noting electronics will not advance at the same pace unless we find something new (like quantum computing) since Moore's Law will start running into quantum mechanical limitations in the next 20-40 years or so.
Just my two cents.
Nonsense. I yam what I yam.Don't look now but i think kaw's going thru an identity crisis . . .