Is Traditional Muzzleloading "Elitist"

[renovato]

I think in general we're not very elitist. But like any sport, there can be some elitists among us. Personally, I love traditional muzzleloaders, but I love modern guns too. I have a strong dislike for inlines, but I also dispise Glocks. That's simply personal preference.

Now some of the thread counter types can be quite elitist, even if they don't realize it. I think those types annoy pretty much everyone else, except perhaps other thread counters.

I remember the very first rondy I went to. It was a small, informal gathering in New Mexico. My girlfriend at the time and I scrounged up some barely passable outfits and took a couple pieces of modern repro cast iron cookware. We had little knowledge or money, and didn't know of sources for more traditional materials and accountrements (I hadn't discovered this site yet). We had spent a miserable night under an old piece of canvas sailcloth set up on sticks as a lean-to, sleeping on surplus wool blankets.

We had barely finished breakfast when we were set upon by a "thread counter" telling us how this and that was wrong, out of place, didn't exist at the time, etc. To his credit, he was very nice about it. But he did it just the same. I made the problem worse by being polite and feigning interest, at which he blathered on about the most minute details, times, dates, names, etc. Stuff I couldn't care less about. That put a damper on what had started out to be a nice day, despite the uncomfortable night.

I think the fine line between interest and elitism is whether or not it's pushed upon others against their will.

This is where I think we can appear elitist to the modern "muzzleloader" shooters. Personally, I don't care what they hunt with as long as they are subject to the same limitations as I am during the season. If they want to hunt with their modern attrocity, fine with me as long as they use PRB or lead conicals and do it without optics. That levels the playing field.

I think a big part of elitism is thinking they're better than others. This is something I don't see in the traditional muzzleloading community. We are a special interest hobby with a rather narrow focus, but that doesn't make us elitists by any means. We do have our share of gun snobs, but that's normal in any aspect of the shooting community in general.

 

[Claude Mathis]

Speaking directly to your point Claude; I for one do have a preference for my own way of doing things and therefore think (for my own reasons) they are better, but I would only be an elitist in my view if I denied others the opportunity to do the same.

Exactly. It's all about your attitude.

 

[nw_hunter]

Depends on what is,is!

Knew a woman once, that was a vegetarian.
She divorced her husband because he came home late one night with hamburger on his breath!(JOKE)

I think she was an "Elitist"........ :surrender:

 

[roundball]

"...but individuals can see themselves as elitists. i.e. A lot of folks think they (or their activities) are better than others, for any number of reasons..."

And it works in the opposite direction as well...others also view those same people as elitists

 

[roundball]

Is Traditional Muzzleloading "Elitist"

I'd say no. It depends on the individual. But it also depends on how you define 'traditional'. If we're talking hunting, you've got sidelocks, whether percussion, flint, or earlier types, with real blackpowder and either patched balls or lead conicals, vs. modern muzzleloaders with modern optics and even electronic ignition now, blackpowder substitutes, and modern jacketed/hollow pointed/ballistic tipped/partitioned bullets in sabots. That would be traditional vs. modern. I don't have a problem with people who like modern muzzleloaders, but I think they belong in the general season. It's not a matter of being elitist, it's just a matter of being honest about what the muzzleloader season was intended for when it was created.

If you're talking reenacting, that's a whole different ball game. Those who are into that aspect of the game aren't elitist simply for striving for historical accuracy, although some of them can display an elitist attitude when being overly critical of others' efforts. I've been slammed plenty of times because of my fondness for Pedersoli guns, because although they're traditional type guns, they aren't period correct (on the other hand, I have no qualms about firing right back at someone, and have done so numerous times, over their criticism of my 'historically incorrect' choice; not because I disagree with their own choices, but simply because I despise arrogant people). But I'm not into reenacting, I just enjoy shooting the guns, so it shouldn't matter. But that hasn't stopped some people from criticising me in the past. I would call that an elitist attitude.

So I think this question has two answers, depending on whether you're talking about hunting or reenacting. If reenacting, the question of whether the hobby is elitist depends on the individual in question. Traditional muzzleloading/reenacting itself is not elitist, although there are elitists within it's ranks. But then, the same can be said of any hobby.

If you mean hunting, the problem is many people ignore the original purpose of muzzleloading seasons (usually justifying their position with general statements like "it still loads from the muzzle" :shake: ) so they can take advantage of what was not intended for them. And when the traditionalists try to defend it, they're all labeled 'elitists' and accused of "wanting all the deer for themselves" (guess where I got that quote from), and accused of causing divisions among shooters/hunters, when they aren't the source of the problem in the first place.

The way I see it, those are the two sources of the 'elitist' perception many have of traditional muzzleloading.

Jumpshot, extremely well said...the only change I'd have to make to your entire post would be substituting T/C Hawken for Pedersoli...
:hatsoff:

 

[pchwcf50110]

well there are definately what i call snobs in traditional ML'ing as well as traditional archery. they usually say things about how they care about the sport more than the unwashed masses. this is total nonsense to me.

 

[Claude Mathis]

"...but individuals can see themselves as elitists. i.e. A lot of folks think they (or their activities) are better than others, for any number of reasons..."

And it works in the opposite direction as well...others also view those same people as elitists

True, and we can't stop people from having opinions.

The question was, "Is Traditional Muzzleloading Elitist? From what I gather, the consensus is 'no'.

 

[tg]

There is not a universaly accepted definition of "traditional muzzleloading" so it is difficult to say whether it is or is not, my perception of traditional MLing would not be considered elitist
by my standards, the most PC/HC guy around would not be if he did not push his agenda where it was not asked for, nor would he be if he shared his views upon request, during a series of threads on a forum such as this he would often be called an elitist, just for responding to questions asked and offering thoughts on the next logical thing associated with the primary question, it happens all the time.

"Who cares if it's PC or not?"
"It's your gun do what you want"

Most all ellitist "slams" are uncalled for attempts to differ attention from the facts of an issue or to portray someone as a negative to validate the slammers own level of lack of knowledge. Same with the PC police comments I've never seen one of those unless they are part of a juried event and this is not the type the negative post are refering to.
traditional ML hunting/shooting is a hill that is climbed, some stop part way some strive to reach the top, many who do not like climbing but like the term "traditional" creates the difficulty in having a definition of traditional MLing, the large percentage of those "traditional" MLers are a combination of old and new because that is what is readily available, unfortunately in the world of ML hunting seasons this has made a mess of things.

 

[Many Klatch]

I'll take a whack at elitism.

Those of us that have been doing this for a long time are usually members of an extended group of friends that is very experienced, wears well worn period clothing, carries cool guns, has all the necessary accessories, shoots well and is full of wonderful stories of how they shot in the Eastern in '92. That group can be awfully intimidating to the newbee that has just bought his first used CVA and Amish Pants and showed up at his first event or shoot.

I try to keep an eye out for serious newbees and invite them to come in sit down and show me their gun. If I don't see them lurking around the edge of the campfire I may be thought to be ignoring them and therefore being elitist. If I see them on the range I try to help them if they seem to need it.

I have also been burned a couple of times by newbees that were aggressively stupid and knew everything there was to know about muzzleloaders, so I tend to steer clear of those. That just might be elitist and if it is it's OK by me.

I don't know but what elitist isn't a label hung on unsuspecting people by others that are afraid to come up and talk.

Many Klatch

 

[SimonKenton]

I'd say we're not elitist, just VERY particular about what we want to shoot with. :hmm:

-Ray

 

[jtmattison]

:2
Being "elitist" is an attitude or perception by an individual. The 'sport' of traditional muzzleloading (or any activity) cannot be elite, but individuals can see themselves as elitists. i.e. A lot of folks think they (or their activities) are better than others, for any number of reasons.

My thoughts exactly. The word "ego" comes to mind.

HD

 

[Vaino]

I just don't "grade" or label people {elitist or?}....sometimes doing so is a ruse to bolster one's ego. Afterall....somebody has to be on the bottom....right? I do my thing and many of my acquaintances and friends do their's and we all get along fine. If someone wants to shoot an inline it's no skin off my butt so why get all flustered over something you don't have any control over? I build and shoot flintlocks and caplocks and also own a few centerfires and enjoy all of them. What a person shoots, how they dress for either hunting, rendevouing or re-enacting is their choice and shouldn't be criticized even if we don't agree. This discussion wouldn't even be necessary if people kept their noses out of other peoples choices....Fred

 

[flaming canvas]

In answer to the question, I will say that in general we are not elitist. As mentioned in several posts you can find individuals who would have to be considered elitist, i.e. thread counters.
I have never gone to a juried rendezvous since there aren't any in this part of the country that I am aware of. I would have to go over some of my gear to fit in, but I think I could manage it. My elk hide shirt would be fine, but my cowhide pants might raise an eyebrow. I don't shoot my TC anymore because I have some other weapons that I prefer, especially the ones I built. In particular I have pretty much gone flint in the last year although the Santa Fe did come out of the scabbard for speed events at the last rondy I went to.


I rather suspect that most of us started out with equipment that wasn't PC and some of us still use it. Nothing wrong with that. Myself, I have seen it as a process of growing into the sport as I gained experience and wanted to get more PC. It is probably a pure fantasy on my part, but it gives me satisfaction and a way to escape from the pressures I see daily.

I am happy to share my experience with newbies and I go out of my way to let spectators shoot my guns at our monthly matches. Maybe one of them will catch the fever and come out again. If the camp next to mine at a rondy was a guy with a pair of painters pants and a Jukar rifle I would invite him to my fire and make sure the jug went his way. Make him welcome, make him comfortable, let him be himself. Therein lies the future of our sport. It took my wife and I at least 5 years to get close to primitive and we still make a change now and then after 12 years, why should I expect it to be any different for anyone else?

 

[paulvallandigham]

When you consider the wide range of people who participate in MLing, their varied forms, and level of education, their jobs, their other interests, married and single, its pretty hard to call this sport " elitist". Because I am my club's lawyer- donated time, of course--- some guys are " afraid " to talk to me. I have never understood that. We have had working police officers as members of the club, and these same guys don't have any reluctance to talk to the officers, but they shun me. I try not to let that get started, and approach old and new members alike, introduce myself, ask them about their guns or equipment, and invite them to my camp to share my food and drink. Once they take the time to talk to me, they find I am just ' folk ", and that one of the reasons I joined the club was so I could be with friends who didn't treat me differently because of what I do for a living.

Have I met snobs in this support? Heck, Yeah! And they always seem to be people with the fewest reasons to crow about anything they have or do! I meet a lot of shy people, however, and they should not be confused with the few snobs. The snobs rarely are the best shots, although I know a few who are. The ones I have met seem to be always in competitive mode, and never seem to relax and just enjoy being with people who happen to love the same sport. Its their loss, of course. I absolutely refuse to allow them to make their problem mine! :thumbsup:

 

[Billnpatti]

If we allow "them", whomever "them" is, define Elitist in negative terms, we will continue to expend our energy trying to dodge that bullet. Why not simply embrace the term and make it ours and subject to our intrepretation rather than theirs. The term "Elitist" need not, of necessity, be a negative term to be avoided. Is not any organization or group that practices some sort of exclusivity Elitist? Could you not say that to belong to The Rotary Club is elitist because the Rotary practices some sort of exclusivity? Or the Masons, or the Lions, or the Kinghts of Columbus or any number of organizations. Yet, we know these organizations to be good orgainzations. Isn't it time that we quit letting others attach a term to us and tell us that they have the unique right to define whether that term is negative or positive? If prefering traditional style muzzleloaders over modern inline muzzleloaders makes me an elitist, then so be it but I shall take the inititative to define elitist as a positive thing. Let those who prefer inline muzzleloaders shoot them, I shall stick to the ones that I prefer regardless of whether those on the "other side of the room" see that as a negative thing. If that makes me elitist, then I shall wear the term proudly.

 

[paulvallandigham]

Sorry, Bill: I don't agree. I was excluded from Membership in " Rotary " because they already had too many lawyers! There are organizations that are Exclusive- like country clubs, and even some gun clubs- and then there are others that are INCLUSIVE.

I don't want Traditional Muzzleloading to Exclude Anyone, provided they understand what Traditional Muzzleloading means. We are talking, 15th through mid 19th century gun designs, and not the modern zip guns. That is NOT being Elitist. It is being true to a concept that represents a huge amount of this country's heritage in firearms. NO one forces these Yahoos to buy the zip guns. They buy them to steal a few extra days of deer hunting. That is all. You don't see them joining ML gunclubs, and showing up to shoot every month with the sip guns. ( The ammo is too expensive, and the guys can't hit the broad side of a barn, without a scope sight!) Most clubs prohibit the use of any kind of sight other than open sights in their matches.

If the States would simply prohibit Scopes on ML rifles, for their primitive seasons, most of the current manufacturers of zip guns would go out of business.

The progression of the zip guns over the past years indicates that they are NOTHING more than " cheaters"- gun designed specifically to skirt rules. Because of the pressure from auto insurance companies, the politicians have seen the decline in hunting license and sales( due almost entirely to all the Anti-gun regulations, and gun bans imposed over the past 20 years that have scared people away from sport shooting and hunting, a fact that was predicted and they were warned about when these stupid laws were passed), and decided that the cure for the increased car/deer accidents problems is to sell more tags. The easiest way to do that is to give into the " cheaters" and let them hunt during the primitive firearms season with their zip guns.

When Illinois first opened its deer season, a lot of concern was shown by the politicians for the possibility of innocent people being shot during deer season. They required only shotguns, shooting shotgun slugs be used, because of the short range of the projectiles. Later, they allowed MLers, but only if we used the PRB. Now, Sabots in shotgun barrels, and Rifled Shotgun barrels are allowed, and of course, the writing was on the wall. Next, we saw the same thing happen with how they defined MLers, and the requirement to use the PRB was dropped. Since very few hunters every put a scope sight on a shotgun, or a mler, the regulations never regulated their use. So, the " cheaters" were there encouraging use of zip guns with scope sights, saboted pistol bullets, and smokeless powder. Now we see ads claiming you can shoot these guns flat out to beyond 200 yds, and kill a deer.

I have to wonder where all the concern on public safety went along the way.

I too have seen these guys at the range, with their packaged ammo, trying to sight in a scope. At the end of the day, they still have not put a round on paper. Of course, it doesn't help when they begin the process at the 100 yard range! And that is what is now roaming the woods, shooting at any deer, or anything that looks like a deer, as far as they can see. My experience is not unique.

My brother lives in Florida and is at his club range several days a week. He reports the same appearances and events occurring there. He is shooting traditional muzzleloaders, and hitting his targets, but the zip gun " cheaters" don't dare walk down the line to ask about the guns, or watch to see how my brother loads and fires his guns with open sights and does so much better than they do. He offers help when asked, but he is so discouraged about the attitude of these guys that he no longer walks down to offer that help himself.

He feels like he is helping burglars learn how to break into houses faster.

I think most of us share that feeling about these guys. I had the same feeling years ago when I was an Assistant Public Defender, representing all kinds of criminals. They are so dumb its pathetic. They enjoy "bragging" about their crimes to their court appointed lawyers, even though they are sitting in the county jail for that crime! Being arrested is not seen as a failure for most of them. I have intereviewed crime families- literally every member of the household old enough to commit crimes did so, and had an arrest record to prove it-- where parents decried the fact that victims identified their sons in Armed Robbery cases. One mother didn't know what to do, or could be done.

I wryly commented," that it might have helped if her son had thought to wear a mask during the robbery! But it would have helped even more if his Mother taught him not to be a criminal in the first place! "

I got an extremely dirty look from the woman, but she knew what I was saying was correct. Believe it or not, that was the last Armed Robbery committed by that family, and her sons had done dozens of them, most without being caught. Her son got an 8-20 year sentence for that one.

I don't believe that objecting to zip guns, or protesting their use during MLing seasons, which were suppose to have been only primitive, traditional MLers when we lobbied to get a special season, is being " ELITIST". I understand Colorado still prohits the use of Scopes duing their MLer season. And at least one state out east still limits their special season to only Flintlocks. Good for them, and any other states that maintain restrictions.

If the states want more deer killed, then they can:

1. offer " free " tags to successful hunters so they can go out and shoot more;

2. do a better job of opening private lands to deer hunting, that is being closed by anti-hunters. Its one thing to prohibit hunting without permission within a certain distance of any occupied dwelling, but quite another to allow land owners to close down huge tracts of land to hunters, even for the purpose of retrieving deer that were shot on adjoining properties, or to unarmed drivers to move the deer off these " sanctuaries" so that the herds can be thinned on adjoining properties where land owners do allow hunting;

3. encourage young people with school programs to learn to shoot, and hunt, and become future hunters;

4.grant special permits to senior citizens, and other groups to encourage more people to participate in deer hunting seasons;

5 lengthen the special seasons, to give hunters more time to located and shoot a deer;

6. change the dates when the special seasons take place, for instance, moving them back to October, before the typical firearms seasons occur, rather then scheduling them in Late December, or even In January, when deer tend to yard up, and the cold weather becomes a major deterrent for hunters getting out in the field, or getting deer they kill back in;

7. instead of issuing only doe permits, they can issue "either ***" permits during those seasons, to give hunters a better opportunity to take a deer;

8. sell permits over the counter, or allow them to be used in more than one county during firearms season, instead of requiring hunters to apply for licenses in a Lottery and wait months to find out if they were successful in getting a tag for the county they have permission from a land owner to hunt. The lottery system discourages hunters by burdening them with filing deadlines, and forms to fill out, and requiring them to plan a hunt, and find a place to hunt months before hunting season begins.

Nothing stops the zip gun shooters from using those guns during the regular firearms season. I have never applied for the ML only season, because Illinois required I make a choice between getting a tag for that season, or for the regular firearms season, but NOT BOTH.( That has now changed, I am told.) The Regular season is now a split, 7 full day season in November and December, while the MLer season is later in December, and is limited to only 3 days.

I considered the choice to be a no-brainer! So I hunted with my MLer during the normal firearms season. I get lots of looks from the other hunters, walking out of a camp area carrying a Flintlock. The looks on their faces when I was successful in killing my deer were PRICELESS!

There is a difference between taking PRIDE in your use of a traditional MLer to hunt, and shoot, and being an ELITIST about it.

The two should never be confused.

As far as I am concerned, anyone can be a traditional MLer shooter, and hunter, and share the Pride of living history. That is NOT Elitism.

:hatsoff:

 

2. do a better job of opening private lands to deer hunting, that is being closed by anti-hunters. Its one thing to prohibit hunting without permission within a certain distance of any occupied dwelling, but quite another to allow land owners to close down huge tracts of land to hunters, even for the purpose of retrieving deer that were shot on adjoining properties, or to unarmed drivers to move the deer off these " sanctuaries" so that the herds can be thinned on adjoining properties where land owners do allow hunting;

So you would swap the rights of the landowner for the rights of the hunter?
My land is closed to outsiders hunting it, because we hunt it, who am I to tell another person what they should be allowed to do on their property.

My second statement is directed to this whole thread in general, asking are we elitist on a pro-traditional M/L forum is akin to billionaires setting around asking each other if they think they are snobs? If you want to to know how a person or group is viewed you have to ask someone outside the group.

C

 

[XXX]

.
... asking are we elitist on a pro-traditional M/L forum is akin to billionaires setting around asking each other if they think they are snobs? If you want to to know how a person or group is viewed you have to ask someone outside the group.

C

What is it about billionaires that makes them all automatic snobs?

One is either something or one is not. All that is required to answer the question is honesty. The external view may or may not be accurate and it is just as likely to be biased as the internal view. My interst in starting the thread was to discuss whether or not the charge of elitism had any merit or not. It looks to me like you assume either that we cannot be honest with ourselves or that the charge is accurate simply because we associate here in mutual interest in traditional muzzleloading.

It is important to the future of the sport to know how we are viewed by other sub-groups and by the general public. It is also important to first establish if there is a legitimate elitist movement within the sport that is alienating us from our fellow sportsmen.

 

[Jumpshot]

If you want to to know how a person or group is viewed you have to ask someone outside the group.

If you do that, the only answer you'll get is how the group is viewed from the outside. A one-sided point of view will produce nothing but a one-sided conclusion. You also need to hear the point of view of the accused before you can arrive at any sort of conclusion resembling the truth.

 

[Black Hand]

If you want to to know how a person or group is viewed you have to ask someone outside the group.

If you do that, the only answer you'll get is how the group is viewed from the outside. A one-sided point of view will produce nothing but a one-sided conclusion. You also need to hear the point of view of the accused before you can arrive at any sort of conclusion resembling the truth.

I've had long hair for my entire adult life, and I can personally attest to the difference in opinion and perception. I have had to endure prejudice from people who know nothing about me, but merely went with the "outside" view. My close friends can tell you that these outsiders are completely wrong about me. However, my friends (merely aquaintances at the time) actually talked to me rather than assuming they knew everything about me.....

I see the same thing happen with respect to this hobby. Just because I try to go the extra mile to improve myself, I am shunned by the majority and accepted by the minority. I try not to comment on anothers kit/camp/gun/etc, and when I am asked to do so will always ask if they are sure they want my input. If they answer "yes", then I give them the UNVARNISHED truth without any coddling. I also offer to help them in any way I can.

But as in many things, often the perception is what is accepted, and the truth is ignored......