In the Civil War, which would you take?

[TCB in TN]

Remind me again who fired on Fort Sumter? The Civil war was about State's rights. The state's wanted the right for their citizen's to own slaves. I have no respect for Confederates. Which side explicitly supported slave ownership? It wasn't the North.

God Bless Abe Lincoln.

Do a little research and you will find that some of the western states that stayed with the Union still had slaves during the war. All the way up until the End.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_documents/emancipation_proclamation/

Fact is that Lincoln did his thing with Slavery to cement some political alliances which helped allow him to have the power to win the war. I am no fan of slavery, and had family that fought on both sides during that period of time, so while I think the abolishon of slavery was both a noble and over due act, it was also not a selfless one on the part of ole Honest Abe. Also looking at the results of his brand of forced Federalism, I have to say, that in the long term, the US traded one repugnant opressive custom (slavery), for what is developing into another (continually increasing control of the Federal Governmentthat threatens to eventually take away many if not most of our freedoms).

 

[spooney]

What a trainwreck of a thread.

Anyways on the original question I would take the rifle and the any gold I "found/liberated" while I was in the 1860's and bring them back to the present, where I won't die of a horrible infection.

 

[JesseL]

Anyone that views Lincoln as an unblemished hero, or the Union as purely wholesome in it's motives for waging the civil war, should read this:
www.lneilsmith.org/abelenin.html

 

[MBane666]

Wasn't there a time travel/alt history book years back abot someone who went back in time to aid the Confederate cause with a Sten gun? I seem to recall the book was pretty well done, weapons-wise. It speculated that a Sten could easily be made with Civil War technology, but the problem was that consistent centerfire brass case technology was a little ahead of the curve.

I just finished reading a book called MACHINE GUN — The Story of the Men and the Weapon That Changed the Face of Warfare, by Anthony Smith. Not a great book, but fascinating on how long it takes changes in war technology to actually be adopted and effective.

Michael B

PS: Visit DOWN RANGE TELEVISION, downrange.tv!

 

[razorburn]

If you tried to shoot black powder through an AK, I believe it would foul pretty quick.

The original posting indicated that we'd have infinite ammo. So I'd have an infinite amount of modern 7.62 x 39, already filled with smokeless already.

 

[DRZinn]

A run-of-the-mill bolt action rifle with reasonably standard magazine capacity. Think along the lines of a Mauser K98 or a Springfield 1903. Only with iron sights. Say you got to take as many rounds as you could carry.

 

[Thin Black Line]

Wear body armor and pick up a Henry or Spencer rifle upon arrival in the
War zone. Exit war zone ASAFP and head West. Stake out claims in oil
rich terroritory.

 

[1911Tuner]

Carry

Okay...Back to the topic.

Since we're limited to what ammo we can carry...and assuming that I wanted to be a combatant, and willing to choose a side.

An AR15 or M16 with 9 20-round magazines and a half-dozen 6-pocket bandoliers. Of course, a 1911 pistol with 5 loaded magazines, and 50-100 extra rounds. All required cleaning and maintenance equipment for the weapons systems included, along with a small bottle of LSA. I'd want a kevlar helmet and a flak jacket...Rocky boots, and 5 pairs of socks. An Alice w/buttpack, and as many MREs that I could handle. A rain-proof poncho...a portable water filter and purification tablets along with a supply of quinine...a hundred caps of a wide-spectrum antibiotic...a Ka-Bar knife...soap...a messkit...and a map with directions back to the time machine so I could get the hell outta dodge when my ammo was gone and the other side was fixin' those wicked triangular bayonets.

 

[Sharps-shooter]

I once read that lincoln was shot with a .22 rimfire round. Is it true? can anyone refer me to any data on this matter? was .22 rimfire even around at that time?

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I once read that lincoln was shot with a .22 rimfire round. Is it true? can anyone refer me to any data on this matter? was .22 rimfire even around at that time?

Lincoln was shot with a muzzle-loading pistol, specifically a Deringer, made by Henry Deringer, a famous Philadelphia gunmaker.

The .22 Short was the first self-contained metallic cartridge and was developed by Smith and Wesson in the mid-1850s

 

[Turkey Creek]

Consider the fact that bunches of equipment was thrown away on the long hot dusty marches that were on nothing even resembling what we today would consider "roads"- I wonder how many of those who elect the body armor would still be lugging it around 5 years later

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Consider the fact that bunches of equipment was thrown away on the long hot dusty marches that were on nothing even resembling what we today would consider "roads"- I wonder how many of those who elect the body armor would still be lugging it around 5 years later

That question reminds me something Audie Murphy wrote about conditions on Anzio. He said a soldier would scrape out a little hole -- but after his first artillery barrage, he would deepen it to a regulation foxhole.

After his second barrage, he would add overhead cover and dig until he had an artesian well.

A recruit might throw his vest away, but I suspect a man who survived a battle or two -- especially if he was actually hit -- would treasure that vest for the rest of the war.