Excellent Anti-Gun, Levergun Article from 1935

[JohndeFresno]

I'm pumped! I have been introduced to an excellent online resource of old magazines and manuals, which offers many totally free downloads (PDF files) from way 'afore I was around.

Quick Synopsis of this thread:
1) Interesting Anti-gunner expose - they were doing it back then, especially 1934 onward!
2) Outstanding article of old rifles with illustrations; many leverguns in calibers I have never personally handled or viewed.

The source: http://www.cornellpubs.com - You can subscribe for free to their newsletter.

Within this site
April 1935 issue of the American Rifleman - a free download. Copy-protected (so as not to destroy it). I used my Nuance Power PDF Advanced software (a powerful tool, by the way) to convert the issue to a searchable PDF document.

In other words, you can download it, hit Ctrl-F on Windows computers, enter "Roberts" in the box, and it jumps to a Levergun article by the author of that name. More about that below.

Your link to the download - it takes a while; 19MB file:
https://app.box.com/s/ugp1o06yry4w48zv15pr1mlrnlpj3054

Gun Grabbers, 1935
Powder Smoke Column, "The Sinister Influence"
The author opens up the column with this:
"THOSE who have done their best by insinuation to brand the National Rifle Association as a powerful. wicked, unscrupulous "gun lobby," attempted to "laugh out of court" our repeated statement that the criminal element in this country is favorable to the passage of extreme types of anti-gun laws. But— to use an oft-quoted phrase—"Let's look at the record":

Elsewhere in the article:
"Universal Service, under date of October 6th, carried a story in newspapers throughout the country concerning Communist activities in Russia and the United States, which said in part: "At a meeting at Trotsky Headquarters last week, one speaker boasted 'When we have weakened the country by suppressing its rifle bearers * * * we shall be in a position to go ahead with our plan for setting up a government based on the theories of Karl Marx, Lenin and Stalin."

So these crazies and anarchists were reaching for our guns even a bit before I had realized. The Sullivan Act, well known to most of us, may not have been just a law intended to protect us from gangsters with machine guns as we are sometimes led to believe. It appears that it was more of a tool of the Left, even back then.

Cool Old Rifles and Leverguns
"The Rifles of Yesterday" by N. H. Roberts shows large illustrations and discusses rifles and leverguns that really caught my attention, such as:
.45-70 Military Levergun
Colt Lightning .38-56
.30-40 Krag Bolt Action (of course)
.25-36 Levergun
Winchester 1876 .45-75 Lever Carbine used by Royal NW Mounted Police
Whitney-Kennedy Repeating Rifle (Levergun)
Bullard Repeating Rifle .45-90 (Levergun)
Hotchkiss .45-70 Rifle
All of the above are illustrated. I have not read all of the text, yet, but there are several other rifles, as well. The articles speaks of the old loads, accuracy, and performance of these old rifles.

Then there are other articles. Worth the time to download this one!

[Ysabel Kid]

I'll have to try this on my personal computer!

Thanks John!!!

[Sixgun]

John,
Yes, all extraordinary and exciting reading. I have many of the originals right here in Sixgun land as I've been mesmerized by these old guns and the guys who originally wrote about them since I was a kid. Everybody back in the day told me I was crazy for fooling with these outdated guns. I never listened and followed my head...and my heart.....glad I did. Got my first 1873 at 18....a decent second model that IIRC set me back two and a half or two weeks pay....and I have not stopped in 44 years....learning along the way.

What is really neat about reading all of the old stuff is learning what has been forgot by today's generation. Thanks for posting as I'm sure there is a lot in there I still don't know.-----6

[JohndeFresno]

Sixgun and Ysabel - you are very welcome. It seemed too good not to share!

[Bullard4075]

Downloading I go!

[sore shoulder]

Can you look up this article? American Rifleman, March 1968, P. 22

[JohndeFresno]

Can you look up this article? American Rifleman, March 1968, P. 22

If you mean me, all of my printed gun related mags were given away during the last few years, and my digital American Rifleman only goes back to 2009.

But you are apparently interested in an article in which the then-Director of the NRA stated that the association supported some type of gun control, as referenced here, for instance:
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/informat ... sp?ID=3247

For a few pennies less than 15 bucks you can buy the back issue from here:
http://backissues.com/publications/Amer ... leman-1968

[sore shoulder]

Can you look up this article? American Rifleman, March 1968, P. 22

If you mean me, all of my printed gun related mags were given away during the last few years, and my digital American Rifleman only goes back to 2009.

But you are apparently interested in an article in which the then-Director of the NRA stated that the association supported some type of gun control, as referenced here, for instance:
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/informat ... sp?ID=3247

For a few pennies less than 15 bucks you can buy the back issue from here:
http://backissues.com/publications/Amer ... leman-1968

In all fairness I already knew what the article says, I was just looking for some confirmation on the veracity from the database you were referring to, and also indirectly referring to the same NRA doing considerably more than "supporting" "some type of gun control", considering they helped write and lobby congress for it including the NRA president testifying to congress in favor of it (this is permanent congressional record), and "some type of gun control" is in fact the 1934 GCA, which is literally the mother of all gun control that we are still fighting today and which the NRA has still never taken any steps to help repeal. I didn't want to step on your thread but thought I might lead a few of the faithful to the information without raising any ire from those who have a hard time digesting this information.

In case it's material to the issue, I'm an NRA member. Very grudgingly.

[JohndeFresno]

In all fairness I already knew what the article says, I was just looking for some confirmation on the veracity from the database you were referring to, and also indirectly referring to the same NRA doing considerably more than "supporting" "some type of gun control"...

Hmmm...
Well, for starters, I did not mean to represent the above source as a database, per se; it is just a great resource of many types of articles that you probably won't find elsewhere, as per my first statement:
"I have been introduced to an excellent online resource of old magazines and manuals, which offers many totally free downloads (PDF files) from way 'afore I was around."

So I thought your question referred to my fairly extensive database of digital mags saved from several online subscriptions. On occasion, I post links on this site to those articles that are in the public domain.

As for the NRA engaging in early gun control, that is a whole 'nother thread. Let's remember that Liberal factions have taken the original intent of that legislation, along with practically every other thing you can think of and stretched and twisted it way beyond its original intent - to suit their knee-jerk emotional and logic-flawed agendas.

I don't claim to be a scholar on this subject, but we need to remember what was happening with the advent of well organized, sophisticated bands of warring gangsters, submachineguns (the Thompson was invented in 1918), high speed and armored cars, and a rapid change of culture coming out of the Roaring Twenties.

But as to assessing all or most of the blame of the current insane gun control arguments that we fight now, I am a little hesitant to lay that mess at the feet of the NRA. Just like I can't paint with such a broad brush as to blame the authors of our Constitution and its Amendments because they failed to clarify even further that the freedom of religion does not mean that our schools must comply with demands for a special prayer room covered by prayer rugs because one or two students belong to a religion that embodies that practice.

Nor would I fault our nation's founders because they failed to clarify that freedom of religion does not mean that if somebody is offended by prayer to Our Maker, that members of our institutions should be stifled - or else face possible local or Federal sanctions.

Nor more to the point, do I blame Thomas Jefferson and others because they failed to add the words "defense of family, home and hearth" as an additional reason that we should have the right to bear arms.

As with our nation's forefathers, the actions and decisions of our early NRA representatives were no doubt fraught with imperfections just as they are today, but I think it is safe to say that on balance, they did not have a crystal ball.

I guess we could argue that more on another thread.

[Blaine]

In all fairness I already knew what the article says, I was just looking for some confirmation on the veracity from the database you were referring to, and also indirectly referring to the same NRA doing considerably more than "supporting" "some type of gun control"...

Hmmm...
Well, for starters, I did not mean to represent the above source as a database, per se; it is just a great resource of many types of articles that you probably won't find elsewhere, as per my first statement:
"I have been introduced to an excellent online resource of old magazines and manuals, which offers many totally free downloads (PDF files) from way 'afore I was around."

So I thought your question referred to my fairly extensive database of digital mags saved from several online subscriptions. On occasion, I post links on this site to those articles that are in the public domain.

As for the NRA engaging in early gun control, that is a whole 'nother thread. Let's remember that Liberal factions have taken the original intent of that legislation, along with practically every other thing you can think of and stretched and twisted it way beyond its original intent - to suit their knee-jerk emotional and logic-flawed agendas.

I don't claim to be a scholar on this subject, but we need to remember what was happening with the advent of well organized, sophisticated bands of warring gangsters, submachineguns (the Thompson was invented in 1918), high speed and armored cars, and a rapid change of culture coming out of the Roaring Twenties.

But as to assessing all or most of the blame of the current insane gun control arguments that we fight now, I am a little hesitant to lay that mess at the feet of the NRA. Just like I can't paint with such a broad brush as to blame the authors of our Constitution and its Amendments because they failed to clarify even further that the freedom of religion does not mean that our schools must comply with demands for a special prayer room covered by prayer rugs because one or two students belong to a religion that embodies that practice.

Nor would I fault our nation's founders because they failed to clarify that freedom of religion does not mean that if somebody is offended by prayer to Our Maker, that members of our institutions should be stifled - or else face possible local or Federal sanctions.

Nor more to the point, do I blame Thomas Jefferson and others because they failed to add the words "defense of family, home and hearth" as an additional reason that we should have the right to bear arms.

As with our nation's forefathers, the actions and decisions of our early NRA representatives were no doubt fraught with imperfections just as they are today, but I think it is safe to say that on balance, they did not have a crystal ball.

I guess we could argue that more on another thread.

Perfectly said.

[sore shoulder]

I've heard the argument before concerning the gangsters. It's pretty hollow. If you read the NRA presidents remarks, he stated clearly that he hadn't considered how this was affected by the Second Amendment when asked directly by a senator, and he also stated he didn't approve of the general practice of carrying a pistol for self defense. Not exactly in the same league of unintended consequences of lack of clarification, or not being able to see the future by our Founders. These were deliberate actions in direct opposition to "shall not be infringed" and are in fact the basis for the insane gun laws we fight today that had it been any other organization than the NRA would be met with ire and indignation.

But as you say, maybe best left for another thread. My apologies for applying the misnomer of database for your collection of articles.

[Blaine]

I've heard the argument before concerning the gangsters. It's pretty hollow. If you read the NRA presidents remarks, he stated clearly that he hadn't considered how this was affected by the Second Amendment when asked directly by a senator, and he also stated he didn't approve of the general practice of carrying a pistol for self defense. Not exactly in the same league of unintended consequences of lack of clarification, or not being able to see the future by our Founders. These were deliberate actions in direct opposition to "shall not be infringed" and are in fact the basis for the insane gun laws we fight today that had it been any other organization than the NRA would be met with ire and indignation.

But as you say, maybe best left for another thread. My apologies for applying the misnomer of database for your collection of articles.

'Crats hate us (NRA), and believe us to be evil. OhBummer knows we're in his way. I'll take it. Can't change the past.

The Second Amendment Foundation actually takes more cases to court (I think), but you never hear the Left excoriate them. Everybody's heard of the NRA, so it's a convenient target for the Left. NOT sayin' you're the Left, Frank....You have legit logic.

I'm a Life Member of both.

[sore shoulder]

I'm an NRA member again after a long hiatus Blaine. The NRA has recently shown an indication of joining the other groups in not just defending the 2A, but going on the offensive and taking back ground. I've been a member of GOA, SAF and RMGO for a long time now. I don't expect an apology from the NRA, but I do expect them to actually join the assault on gun control, not sit in the rear with the gear.

[JohndeFresno]

...If you read the NRA presidents remarks, he stated clearly that he hadn't considered how this was affected by the Second Amendment when asked directly by a senator, and he also stated he didn't approve of the general practice of carrying a pistol for self defense...

OK, did not delve fully into that yet; absorbed by the old guns part. Thanks for the education!

I don't agree with O'Reilly's stance on gun registration, either - or for that matter, his insistence for so many years that our Prez is a well-meaning but misguided patriot. But that clearly is another thread.

[Griff]

Is there such a thing as an "Excellent Anti-Gun" article from a pro-gun stance? Article shows that these Anti-Gun types don't change their spots... They continue to rail against that which they think hinders their plans... When in fact, it's simply freedom loving people that hinder their plans.

A friend of mine that lives overseas sent me an article that appeared on-line that sez... well, read it for yourself:
Constitutional Crisis, Movement to Undermine President-elect Donald Trump’s Accession to the White House?

Is there no limit to the depth these folks will stoop?

[JohndeFresno]

Is there such a thing as an "Excellent Anti-Gun" article from a pro-gun stance?

Yeh - after I read the topic title, I realized that I could have worded it much better.

I meant that it was an excellent article outlining the Anti-Gun movement that started way back in the 20's or 30's.

Bad thread title.