Military weapons in civilian hands

[Electric Miner]

Not sure where to put this, so I'll post this here, and it can be moved to wherever it is appropriate.


Historically, how often did military muskets/pistols end up in the hands of civilians?

And how soon after the issue of the weapon would it be reasonable to see a civilian with a military weapon. As an example, could a Springfield 1842 have ended up in civilian hands, and when would that be reasonable without the government getting upset, if ever?

I would imagine that the government would have some sort of issue with stolen weapons and the people who had them, but how much?

 

[Artificer]

EVERY type of U.S. Military Small Arm legally wound up in the hands of the State's Organized Militia's (I.E. Civilians, though something like our modern National Guard, from whence they came.) within months or a couple of years from the time the production began. It all depended on how quickly the National Armories had to update all the Armed Forces and/or how soon civilian contractors started making them - and of course when the individual States purchased some from the National Armories of civilian contractors.

"The US M-1842 percussion musket went into production at the Springfield Arsenal in 1844, with 2,956 guns being delivered into stores that year. Production did not commence at Harper’s Ferry until 1845, and that armory delivered 2,225 arms into store in 1845. The muskets remained in production until 1855, with Springfield Armory producing 165,970 and Harpers Ferry producing 106,629, making the total production for the M-1842 musket 272,599."

Asa Waters and Benjamin Flagg were the only contractors to produce the M1842, but I do not have their production dates and numbers available.

So it is entirely feasible that many civilians in State Militia's had them right after the Mexican War and possibly some had them during the War, especially those who came on active duty to fight.

HUGE numbers of them were surplus sold after the WBTS and thus many more civilians had them, often converting them to cheap shotguns.

Gus

 

[Artificer]

Sorry, typo correction to first paragraph:

"It all depended on how quickly the National Armories had to update all the Armed Forces and/or how soon civilian contractors started making them - and of course when the individual States purchased some from the National Armories or civilian contractors."

Gus

 

[Artificer]

Addendum to my first post.

Since they started so late in rifling the M1842's and not many were modified prior to the WBTS, I would bet none of the rifled versions got into the hands of civilians until after the WBTS. However, I do not have documentation for that.

Gus

 

[Grenadier1758]

My great grandfather had two of the smoothbored versions in percussion.

 

[SgtErv]

Washington was appalled at the amount of military muskets the Continentals took home after their enlistments were up, but his concern stemmed from the shortages his army faced. They needed weapons that could accept a bayonet.

State militias siezed lots of surplus Brown Bess' (or King's Musket, Tower Musket) when the Revolution broke out. Royal authorities were sorta upset

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Historically, how often did military muskets/pistols end up in the hands of civilians?

That's a rather generic question, and covers a huge amount of time and geography. :grin:

For the European nations a military weapon that was called a "musket" or a "carbine" could mount a bayonet....but sometimes they bought rifles...so were these what we'd call "military arms" and where did the rifles end up???

For another example, PA didn't have a militia system as the other colonies did prior to the AWI. Men volunteered to be part of associators, but the colony didn't have military arms to disburse to them.

On the other hand, Maryland had colony owned stockpiles of muskets and bayonets, cartridge boxes, pistols, carbines, swords, and halberds (even drums) as early as the 17th century....and would arm small groups of volunteers from time to time. Maryland had mounted rangers along the Potomac River (or the Potamack as they often spelled it) looking for stray cattle and guarding against Indian incursions in the 1600's.

During the F&I Maryland Rangers patrolled around Fort Frederick.....now were the 17th century "rangers" and the men raised to do "ranging duty" near Fort Frederick in the F&I War, were they civilian volunteers/militia or were they colonial soldiers???

As for the arms, Maryland held onto her LLP Bess muskets for decades prior to the AWI. Decades. While the colony often armed volunteers..., they had to return the arms when their mission was done, or when released from duty.

Things are further confused as records for just the colony of Maryland AFTER it becomes a state..., they use the term "musket" BUT they don't say if they are still talking about the old British muskets, OR did the state dump those into civilian hands and the muskets referred to say after 1790 are they surplus French muskets???

THEN you have private contractors. Robert Rogers contracted for muskets to be made for him with British funds, which were proofed by the British Regular Artillery during the F&I..., so how close were these to "military weapons"? Sources don't say what happened to these when the F&I ended.

What about deserters? Some ads list deserters who took with them "the colony's arms". You don't find updates on the deserters though, no ads that say, "Found, Pvt. Parts, who was advertised as having deserted from Captain John Doe's Continental Company was taken into custody with his colony's musket". So some could have deserted and kept their arms.

How about soldiers who "mustered out" while in colonies? Some were allowed to take their King's Musket as part of their gear (no bayonet though).

So yes, some civilians probably had some surplus military arms, but when and where are big factors. They were probably pretty well used, and not at all top-of-the-line, but using a modern example..., you wouldn't be that "outgunned" if you bought a surplus M1 Garand made in 1945 (made 60 years ago) compared to a guy carrying an M4 made last year, no?

LD

 

[54ball]

According to the sources I have read, The rifles and Muskets from the Lewis and Clark expedition were auctioned off on their return to St. Louis. I know that's kind of early for your time period but I think it's notable.

 

[desi23]

There were a number of ways military guns of the time ended up in civilian hands, often very quickly after issue too.

First, of course was theft, deserters would sometimes take their weapon with them. Some might keep it but others would sell it. I have also seen old reports of soldiers being prosecuted for selling a weapon or trading it (sometimes for cash, sometimes for whiskey!).

Second the military would sometimes supply certain groups or local militia directly when they felt a need (times of crisis, Indian troubles, local unrest, etc).

Third would be State Militia units. Some states continued to allow unit members to take their issue weapon home. The member was responsible for it but some were lost, stolen etc. The unit member might use his musket for hunting and if the urge to head west hit him he might just take it with him.

Whether stored at home or maintained in armories the states had problems keeping track of the weapons they had. Some years ago one of the arms collecting journals I read published a well researched article on Ohio issued weapons. One of the most interesting parts was that state records (from the 1850's if my memory is right) showed that only a fraction of weapons the state had purchased or received from the federal government could be accounted for. There was a bit of a stink over the results of the inventory and insistence that tighter control should be maintained over the issuance of state owned property and people held responsible if they couldn't produce a weapon they were supposedly issued. Certainly some of those just walked off, unaccounted for, in civilian hands.

 

[Col. Batguano]

...., but using a modern example..., you wouldn't be that "outgunned" if you bought a surplus M1 Garand made in 1945 (made 60 years ago) compared to a guy carrying an M4 made last year, no?

LD

For shots 1-8, not terribly. Arguably even an antique ML'er is on a par with modern guns for shot # 1 if the range isn't too great. Beyond that, the tables decidedly turn in favor of the modern stuff! :wink:

 

[sooter76]

...., but using a modern example..., you wouldn't be that "outgunned" if you bought a surplus M1 Garand made in 1945 (made 60 years ago) compared to a guy carrying an M4 made last year, no?

LD

For shots 1-8, not terribly. Arguably even an antique ML'er is on a par with modern guns for shot # 1 if the range isn't too great. Beyond that, the tables decidedly turn in favor of the modern stuff! :wink:

I disagree... Modern RDS, Holo sights, and scopes make a HUGE difference over iron sights. If for faster target acquisition if nothing else.

 

[Zonie]

This is a muzzleloading site.

Let's keep talk about modern suppository guns out of the discussion.