NationStates Jolt Archive

http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee218/Balderdash71964/balckpowderrevolvers.jpg

I’ve been thinking about which of the two black-powder revolvers (in the picture) I should get for my son. My great Grandfather taught my Grandpa how to shoot, and then my Grandpa taught my Dad how to shoot and then my Dad taught me how to shoot, now it’s time for me to start teaching my Son how to shoot. (My daughter too mind you, I’m not playing to sexist gender roles here)

A black-powder weapon is ten times more work then a modern weapon. You have to load it by hand with measured powder, lead ball and firing cap, and then after discharging the weapon you have to take it apart and clean it with solution and brushes and patches and the black powder residue is so dirty that it’s easy to tell if someone only half assed cleaned it and so they have to be told to go ‘do it again’ like any good father son activity involves.

A child learns self control, responsibility and meticulous attention to detail with a black-powder weapon. The child gets to have the ‘fun’ of shooting the weapon at a target range etc., but they also get the responsibility of learning how to maintain and clean the weapon, which black-powder guns are notoriously good at rusting and showing a Dad if the child isn’t cleaning it correctly ;)

They learn the chemistry of how the weapon works, how the materials used to construct the weapon limit the amount of charge and projectile weight that can be used and achieved, how different loads effect projectile performance and why…

In the end, I’m stuck deciding between the larger weapon that will be harder for the children to hold until their hands get bigger but it’s only a .36 caliber weapon so it will be less kicking when it does fire (top), or the smaller and easier to hold revolver that will be easier to aim and fire for small hands but it is a .44 caliber weapon and will kick harder even if we does use small load charges in it (bottom). I’m leaning towards the 1861 model because it has an engraved sea battle scene on the cylinder (cool huh). Which one to you guys think I should get?

I'd go for the 1851. Although I'm not exactly an expert on these kinds of firearms, so take my opinion with a spoonful of salt.

For one thing the Brass frame looks very nice. For a practice gun, I think it's essential that people learn with a weapon they can hold easily and properly, so the smaller frame also adds weight to it's superiority. The recoil might be a problem at first, but once they get used to it I think they'll do quite well.

P.S. Let's not make this into a Gun control thread. Please...

All the best child soldiers are weaned on AK-47s.

hopefully your son will be secure enough with his masculinity not to need a war machine? heres hoping

http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee218/Balderdash71964/balckpowderrevolvers.jpg

I’ve been thinking about which of the two black-powder revolvers (in the picture) I should get for my son. My great Grandfather taught my Grandpa how to shoot, and then my Grandpa taught my Dad how to shoot and then my Dad taught me how to shoot, now it’s time for me to start teaching my Son how to shoot. (My daughter too mind you, I’m not playing to sexist gender roles here)

A black-powder weapon is ten times more work then a modern weapon. You have to load it by hand with measured powder, lead ball and firing cap, and then after discharging the weapon you have to take it apart and clean it with solution and brushes and patches and the black powder residue is so dirty that it’s easy to tell if someone only half assed cleaned it and so they have to be told to go ‘do it again’ like any good father son activity involves.

A child learns self control, responsibility and meticulous attention to detail with a black-powder weapon. The child gets to have the ‘fun’ of shooting the weapon at a target range etc., but they also get the responsibility of learning how to maintain and clean the weapon, which black-powder guns are notoriously good at rusting and showing a Dad if the child isn’t cleaning it correctly ;)

They learn the chemistry of how the weapon works, how the materials used to construct the weapon limit the amount of charge and projectile weight that can be used and achieved, how different loads effect projectile performance and why…

In the end, I’m stuck deciding between the larger weapon that will be harder for the children to hold until their hands get bigger but it’s only a .36 caliber weapon so it will be less kicking when it does fire (top), or the smaller and easier to hold revolver that will be easier to aim and fire for small hands but it is a .44 caliber weapon and will kick harder even if we does use small load charges in it (bottom). I’m leaning towards the 1861 model because it has an engraved sea battle scene on the cylinder (cool huh). Which one to you guys think I should get?

Personally, I've never been a fan of that style (nothing over the cylinder). If I was going to pick up a blackpowder pistol, I'd probably pick the 1858 New Army (I heard, although I can't confirm it, that the frame of the 1858 New Army is stronger than the types you showed, because of the metal above the cylinder).

If I HAD to pick one of the two you showed though, I'd probably lean a little bit more towards the 1851 Navy.

ETA: It appears that there's an 1858 New Army Police in .36 cal, and it appears to be shorter than the .44 cal models.

P.S. Let's not make this into a Gun control thread. Please...

hopefully your son will be secure enough with his masculinity not to need a war machine? heres hoping

I don't think you'll be getting your wish UN Protectorates. Which is a shame, seeing as there's already a gun control thread on the first page. It would be nice to keep this thread on topic (for once).

Balderdash71964, hope you get the answer you need from this thread, before it gets ruined.

All the best child soldiers are weaned on AK-47s.

hopefully your son will be secure enough with his masculinity not to need a war machine? heres hoping



Guys. Quit it.
This guy just wants some opinions about a Father-Child hobby, which I applaud. I'm pro-gun control myself, but I know when to not be so self-righteous about it. C'mon.

If you want to argue about gun control, go to the other thread that's on the first page, okay?

Personally, I've never been a fan of that style (nothing over the cylinder). If I was going to pick up a blackpowder pistol, I'd probably pick the 1858 New Army (I heard, although I can't confirm it, that the frame of the 1858 New Army is stronger than the types you showed, because of the metal above the cylinder).

If I HAD to pick one of the two you showed though, I'd probably lean a little bit more towards the 1851 Navy.

If I was going to carry a gun all day I agree with you, the extra durability of having a full frame would be what I want. But the Colt half frames disassemble entirely for cleaning and I was looking for that. From what I understand they are stronger then they look.

ETA: It appears that there's an 1858 New Army Police in .36 cal, and it appears to be shorter than the .44 cal models.

I have been thinking about that one, it is nice. But I was thinking that in a few years, when the kids are all done learning, which one would I want to keep for myself? I might still go for the police model though, when I get ready to put money down I'll give it a good look.

Don't get one where the cleaning is too laborious or your kids might just get bored and not want to get involved.

I'd go for the 1861 Navy. Although I'm not exactly an expert on these kinds of firearms, so take my opinion with a spoonful of salt.

For one thing the Brass frame looks very nice. For a practice gun, I think it's essential that people learn with a weapon they can hold easily and properly, so the smaller frame also adds weight to it's superiority. The recoil might be a problem at first, but once they get used to it I think they'll do quite well.

P.S. Let's not make this into a Gun control thread. Please...

I think you mean you think the brass 1851 even though its a .44, yes? You said 1861 but then reading your post I think you mean the 51?

I think you mean you you think the brass 1851 even thought its a .44, yes? You said 1861 but then reading your post I think you mean the 51?

Drat. Yes I mean the '51.

ooooh if its for father son bonding then I reccomed this pistol!!


http://http://www.mookietoys.com/Products/inflatable/images/water_pistols/pistol.jpg

Don't get one where the cleaning is too laborious or your kids might just get bored and not want to get involved.

I'm thinking that if they think it's too laborous, then they aren't old enough.

That's the idea anyway, they don't have to like it if they try it and don't want to keep doing it, I'll still have the weapon for myself, I know I like it ;)

I first learned with a .22 rifle, and I think that was a good idea (not too much kick, significantly less danger, and much harder to accidentally shoot yourself with a rifle)

The problem with the heavier weapon with more kick (the .44) is that your kid can fall down the slippery slope of practicing bad shooting habits. I'd go with a lighter weapon - you can get all of the effects of learning how to properly care for a firearm - but he can also learn how to use it the right way. With a heavier weapon he might fall into certain habits to compensate for the kick/weight.

I first learned with a .22 rifle, and I think that was a good idea (not too much kick, significantly less danger, and much harder to accidentally shoot yourself with a rifle)

I like teaching how to 'shoot' with the 22. how to aim and hold a gun consistently. But there isn't as much cleaning or learning how a gun a works with the 22. You don't get to play with different powder loads and experiment for change in physics lessons.

The problem with the heavier weapon with more kick (the .44) is that your kid can fall down the slippery slope of practicing bad shooting habits. I'd go with a lighter weapon - you can get all of the effects of learning how to properly care for a firearm - but he can also learn how to use it the right way. With a heavier weapon he might fall into certain habits to compensate for the kick/weight.

From what it sounds like, the heavier (bigger) weapon is the .36 caliber, whereas the lighter (smaller) one is the larger .44 caliber.

The problem with the heavier weapon with more kick (the .44) is that your kid can fall down the slippery slope of practicing bad shooting habits. I'd go with a lighter weapon - you can get all of the effects of learning how to properly care for a firearm - but he can also learn how to use it the right way. With a heavier weapon he might fall into certain habits to compensate for the kick/weight.

Good point, that's one more vote for the gun with the naval battle scene etched in the cylinder then (yay - :p )

Do what my parents did. Buy the kid a .22 rifle, teach him safety and marksmanship, then turn him loose to shoot the varmints on the farm. Or in the back woods.

From what it sounds like, the heavier (bigger) weapon is the .36 caliber, whereas the lighter (smaller) one is the larger .44 caliber.

Both are true. The 'bigger' gun is the heavier 1861, but it won't kick as much when it's fired because it's heavier and has a smaller projectile (.36 vs. .44 for the brass 1851).

Even when I use 3/4 powder load I think the .44 is going to kick harder... but it is easier to hold (thus the dilema and why I posted for more ideas ;) )

I like teaching how to 'shoot' with the 22. how to aim and hold a gun consistently. But there isn't as much cleaning or learning how a gun a works with the 22. You don't get to play with different powder loads and experiment for change in physics lessons.
No reason to limit the lessons to one firearm. Marksmanship and safety can be learned with a light weapon, then introduce the heavy caliber stuff AFTER the child has learned GOOD habits.

If I was going to carry a gun all day I agree with you, the extra durability of having a full frame would be what I want. But the Colt half frames disassemble entirely for cleaning and I was looking for that. From what I understand they are stronger then they look.

I see your point. Most of my preference of the full frame over the half frame is the aesthetics, though (the strength issue is very much secondary, as I'm sure the half frames are more than strong enough).

I have been thinking about that one, it is nice. But I was thinking that in a few years, when the kids are all done learning, which one would I want to keep for myself? I might still go for the police model though, when I get ready to put money down I'll give it a good look.

What makes you think the kids won't still want to shoot it after they've learned how? They may tell you to get your own. :D

Why get the expensive shooters?

Computer simulation is cheaper and more fun!

http://www.rome.ro/images/doom/Doom.png

I'd go for the 1851, but take my advice with lots of salt because I know very little about firearms.

As for those of you whining about training his son to be some sort of child warrior or "boosting his masculinity" or what have you: nyet. I'd train my children with firearms too, because it's a sensible thing to do. Why?

Because if they ever somehow get their hands on one by accident they won't shoot themselves with it. They'll be able to handle it safely, which is extremely important to me because the last thing I want is for a child of mine or their friend(s) to be shot by accident.

All the best child soldiers are weaned on AK-47s.

I was, but I grew up in kind of an odd part of Michigan.

No reason to limit the lessons to one firearm. Marksmanship and safety can be learned with a light weapon, then introduce the heavy caliber stuff AFTER the child has learned GOOD habits.

QFT, even though I'm doing it backwards. ;)

...
What makes you think the kids won't still want to shoot it after they've learned how? They may tell you to get your own. :D

I've already got that speech worked out in my head.

Well of course the revolver is yours child, it has always been yours and will always be yours and you can come and see it whenever you want. I'll remember it's yours and everytime I bring it out and use it it will remind me of you and I'll be sure to tell everyone that it is yours too! :p

Why get the expensive shooters?

Computer simulation is cheaper and more fun!

*snipped BIG DOOM LOGO*

I won't even let them play DOOM,



Oh the irony. lol

I was, but I grew up in kind of an odd part of Michigan.

Which part?

In the country near Alma (about 1 hr north of Lansing).

I think it depends on how old your kids are. If they are younger than 10 I would think about maybe .22 rifle or pistol simply because it is going to be easier to handle than a larger caliber. If their older they can probably handle the .36 without to much trouble.

As for cleaning a .22 do like me and my dad did when he bought me a .22. Fire 1 shot clean the gun. Fire 2 shots clean the gun. Repeat until you are putting a full clip through it (my clip held 10 shots). Then clean the gun every couple of clips until you put a few hundred rounds through it.

Although there are advantages to a black powder such as varying the power and the fact it only has one shot. I would probably start with the smaller caliber and a small charge if they have never shot before simply because the kick can really be unexpected no matter how much someone warns you about it.

And I commend you on teaching your kids to shoot rather than hiding your guns from them. I wish more people would do the same.

What should children be trained to shoot? Telemarketers.

something Israeli like a Uzi or desert eagle for sure.

http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee218/Balderdash71964/balckpowderrevolvers.jpg

I’ve been thinking about which of the two black-powder revolvers (in the picture) I should get for my son. My great Grandfather taught my Grandpa how to shoot, and then my Grandpa taught my Dad how to shoot and then my Dad taught me how to shoot, now it’s time for me to start teaching my Son how to shoot. (My daughter too mind you, I’m not playing to sexist gender roles here)

A black-powder weapon is ten times more work then a modern weapon. You have to load it by hand with measured powder, lead ball and firing cap, and then after discharging the weapon you have to take it apart and clean it with solution and brushes and patches and the black powder residue is so dirty that it’s easy to tell if someone only half assed cleaned it and so they have to be told to go ‘do it again’ like any good father son activity involves.

A child learns self control, responsibility and meticulous attention to detail with a black-powder weapon. The child gets to have the ‘fun’ of shooting the weapon at a target range etc., but they also get the responsibility of learning how to maintain and clean the weapon, which black-powder guns are notoriously good at rusting and showing a Dad if the child isn’t cleaning it correctly ;)

They learn the chemistry of how the weapon works, how the materials used to construct the weapon limit the amount of charge and projectile weight that can be used and achieved, how different loads effect projectile performance and why…

In the end, I’m stuck deciding between the larger weapon that will be harder for the children to hold until their hands get bigger but it’s only a .36 caliber weapon so it will be less kicking when it does fire (top), or the smaller and easier to hold revolver that will be easier to aim and fire for small hands but it is a .44 caliber weapon and will kick harder even if we does use small load charges in it (bottom). I’m leaning towards the 1861 model because it has an engraved sea battle scene on the cylinder (cool huh). Which one to you guys think I should get?

I have a pretty strong opinion on this. I 100% stand by my belief that every boy should learn to shoot with a single shot bolt action .22 caliber rifle. Furthermore, they should use a child size rifle. I recommend a rifle made by the Cricket company. If you want to start with an antique, then get your hands on an old pig gun. Pig guns were designed for young farmboys to help their parents slaughter pigs. The boy would shoot the pig with the gun and then watch and or help with the butchering that would follow. Although I am a worrywort and do not like the idea of shooting antique rifles, I know that they are safe. Of course you should take any pig gun you plan to teach with to a gunsmith to examine and make any repairs if you do not possess those skills yourself.

No reason to limit the lessons to one firearm. Marksmanship and safety can be learned with a light weapon, then introduce the heavy caliber stuff AFTER the child has learned GOOD habits.

I agree. Also, lighter caliber rounds are cheaper and the boy can buy them with his allowance.

Shouldn't you be waiting until they're responsible enough to use a gun?

On second thought... Waiting until they're thirty to give them a gun might be a bit difficult.

Shouldn't you be waiting until they're responsible enough to use a gun?

On second thought... Waiting until they're thirty to give them a gun might be a bit difficult.

No. Absolutely not. If a child is trained from an early age in gun safety they will devellop good habits early. If gun safety is not taught at an early age and the child somehow gets a hold of a gun he would be much more likely to treat it as a toy which is very dangerous. It is negligent to not teach firearm safety to children.

Also, marksmanship needs to be taught early so that the child can have the best chance of develloping his inner marksman. We would be doing our country a great disservice if we waited until a boy became 18 until we gave him a rifle. We cannot remain the number 1 superpower if drill seargents are the first ones to train our young men to shoot. Our failure to teach marksmanship and firearm safety to boys endangers the safety of our children, and the freedom and security of our nation and of those oppressed peoples out there that need our aid from time to time.

Also, I really think that children are capable of being awesome marksmen! I did a lot of shooting as a boy. It was mostly BBs and a little .22. I practiced so much with my BB gun that I was capable of marksmanship feats that make me truly amazed as I look back. Childhood is the best time for learning. Our brains are like sponges at that stage of our lives.

Shouldn't you be waiting until they're responsible enough to use a gun?

On second thought... Waiting until they're thirty to give them a gun might be a bit difficult.

Well that is relative. A kid could be responsible enough at 7 or 8 to use a gun and on the other hand they may not be responsible enough at 50.

I learned to shoot by the time I was 8 so it's not like there is some age limit on when a person is responsible enough to use a gun.

I'd skip the revolver and get him an official Red Ryder carbine-action two-hundred-shot range model air rifle.

No. Absolutely not. If a child is trained from an early age in gun safety they will devellop good habits early. If gun safety is not taught at an early age and the child somehow gets a hold of a gun he would be much more likely to treat it as a toy which is very dangerous. It is negligent to not teach firearm safety to children.

This made some amount of sense.

Also, marksmanship needs to be taught early so that the child can have the best chance of develloping his inner marksman. We would be doing our country a great disservice if we waited until a boy became 18 until we gave him a rifle. We cannot remain the number 1 superpower if drill seargents are the first ones to train our young men to shoot. Our failure to teach marksmanship and firearm safety to boys endangers the safety of our children, and the freedom and security of our nation and of those oppressed peoples out there that need our aid from time to time.

This completely voided your point. Raising your child to be a soldier is reprehensible. Let them make their own choice.

I'd skip the revolver and get him an official Red Ryder carbine-action two-hundred-shot range model air rifle.

You'll shoot your eye out, kid. HO-HO-HO!


http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/7504/333438377f8d0475ed3yv5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

If you've already progressed past the .22 stage, perhaps you might want to try one of those Winchester carbines that shoot .44 magnum. Your child will learn how to care for a firearm, and the recoil will be quite manageable.

Or, you could just go for the Mosin-Nagant. Just be sure to have a doctor handy to reset the shoulder! :p

No. Absolutely not. If a child is trained from an early age in gun safety they will devellop good habits early. If gun safety is not taught at an early age and the child somehow gets a hold of a gun he would be much more likely to treat it as a toy which is very dangerous. It is negligent to not teach firearm safety to children.

Also, marksmanship needs to be taught early so that the child can have the best chance of develloping his inner marksman. We would be doing our country a great disservice if we waited until a boy became 18 until we gave him a rifle. We cannot remain the number 1 superpower if drill seargents are the first ones to train our young men to shoot. Our failure to teach marksmanship and firearm safety to boys endangers the safety of our children, and the freedom and security of our nation and of those oppressed peoples out there that need our aid from time to time.

Also, I really think that children are capable of being awesome marksmen! I did a lot of shooting as a boy. It was mostly BBs and a little .22. I practiced so much with my BB gun that I was capable of marksmanship feats that make me truly amazed as I look back. Childhood is the best time for learning. Our brains are like sponges at that stage of our lives.

Hey, don't discredit our DI's, the Army does a great job of teaching our soldiers how to shoot. However, understanding firearms is always an advantage. I never got hazed during basic because I was comfortable with firearms, yet I knew their potential and respected them. Can't say the same for some of my classmates.

Safe gun handling education for children is as important as safe sex ed.

Ignorance gets people killed, if children learned about guns, instead of just being told how baaaaaaaaa-d they are, incidents of children shooting each other accidentally would go down.

I would start them off on a bolt-action .22 rifle first and then when they are proficient and safe with that move them up to a revolver.

Like its been said, go small cal to large cal. Rifles, then sidearms, then if you want shotguns. (how I was taught by my old man).

Safe gun handling education for children is as important as safe sex ed.

Ignorance gets people killed, if children learned about guns, instead of just being told how baaaaaaaaa-d they are, incidents of children shooting each other accidentally would go down.
Your logic is undeniable.

Safe gun handling education for children is as important as safe sex ed.

Ignorance gets people killed, if children learned about guns, instead of just being told how baaaaaaaaa-d they are, incidents of children shooting each other accidentally would go down.

Precisely but remember guns don't kill people, people kill people. You can kill a person just as well with a pen as you can a gun. That is why it is crucial for safe teaching on them so that they realize just how deadly they are and how they can be utilized properly.

I think you need at least a .45 to take down a Teletubby.

If you aim for the telestomach, you can get it with a .357. That was a close call.

hopefully your son will be secure enough with his masculinity not to need a war machine? heres hoping
A pistol is not a war machine.

You can kill a person just as well with a pen as you can a gun.
Not entirely, although it is possible to kill someone with a pen, it would be more difficult and take longer.

Base of skull or temple... those will kill pretty fast.

I think you need at least a .45 to take down a Teletubby.

I don't agree with that. At 7", a 45 isn't big enough, you need a 78 (10" diameter is good, 12" is better) to reliably take one down.



:D

I learned the basics with a bolt-action .22 rifle. They're good just for teaching care and handling, along with proper firing stance and such. They're also very cheap. Very very cheap.

I learned to shoot pistols with a 9mm, but between the two choices, I'd pick the 1861 one. 'Cause it's real purty.

Personally, I would say neither, as the mechanics, while fun for you, might be boring for the kids.

depending on their age, and how mechanically inclined you usally are, they might like nothing more then the smell of the powder, the loud boom, and the cloud of smoke.

My suggesstion is to try them on a .22 or .223 caliber (~5.56 mm) weapon, either pistol, carbine or rifle.

minimal kick, minimal "scary" noise, cheap ammo, a great starter for learning aim (using the irons, not a scope; glass breaks and you cant hit food/aggressor), and eliminating flinching early.

Good luck, hope you have fun, no matter what you decide.
Rafe
OOC


Which one to you guys think I should get?

Not entirely, although it is possible to kill someone with a pen, it would be more difficult and take longer.


:D too true. Conversely, though, the pen is mightier than the gun and much, much easier to write with.

I first shot a rifle about the same time I got my first Barbie doll, I think I was about six and we lived on a dairy farm in Texas [backn in the early 80's - I live in Australia now]. My dad had a Winchester rifle [no clue what type] and I first shot that, with him helping to brace me against the kick. Later I tried a pistol and loved target shooting.

At that time, it was just part of life on the farm. Dad hunted deer and rabbits to supplement our food during winter and shot rattle-snakes that were too close to the house or the livestock. Sometimes I got to go hunting with him and learned how to skin a rabbit. I never thought hunting was fun, it was just part of our survival. But I do love target shooting - it is fantastic fun and a great sport to get into. It's a very expensive hobby around where I live, though, costs a fortune to do.

Thank you all for your help and thoughts. Lots and lots of good advice and posts here. I knew I'd get some help, but I'm surprised how much good help we have here and things to consider. :)

Kids may learn shooting.

A bow.

Thank you all for your help and thoughts. Lots and lots of good advice and posts here. I knew I'd get some help, but I'm surprised how much good help we have here and things to consider. :)

Post pics when you get it. :)

:D too true. Conversely, though, the pen is mightier than the gun and much, much easier to write with.

I first shot a rifle about the same time I got my first Barbie doll, I think I was about six and we lived on a dairy farm in Texas [backn in the early 80's - I live in Australia now]. My dad had a Winchester rifle [no clue what type] and I first shot that, with him helping to brace me against the kick. Later I tried a pistol and loved target shooting.


Just to sidetrack this a little bit, how did you end up leaving Texas for Australia?

Did we really just accomplish something on NSG? Did we really give meaningful advice?

*passes out from shock*

Go for a crossbow, much better..

This made some amount of sense.



This completely voided your point. Raising your child to be a soldier is reprehensible. Let them make their own choice.

I think you missed the point. This is not a matter of individual choice as much as it is a matter of importance to the nation and the world. Like it or not, dictators are out there and sometimes the US and sometimes even the UN gets off its lazy ass and tries to bring some freedom to the armpits of the world. The civilized world greatly benefits from high quality US soldiers. This does not just magically happen.

What I learned on was a .22 bolt action for rifles, and a .45 M-1911 for pistols. Depending on what kind of game you will hunt(if any) I suggest the Ruger M-77 Mrk 2 in .243. Its a very good sporting rifle, good for deer(atleast in the US), varmits, and anything inbetween. Not much kick, quiet compared to other rifles, and fairly lightweight.