Dad Builds 700 Pound Cannon for Son's Birthday 410
Hugh Pickens writes "The Charleston Daily Mail reports that machinist Mike Daugherty built his son a working cannon for his birthday — not a model — a real working cannon. 'It looks like something right out of the battle at Gettysburg,' says Daugherty. The 700 pound cast iron and steel howitzer, designed to use comparatively small explosive charges to propel projectiles at relatively high trajectories with a steep angle of descent, has a 4-inch gun barrel that is 36 inches long mounted on a wooden gun carriage with two 36- inch diameter wheels and took Daugherty about two weeks to build at a cost of about $6,000. 'I've always been interested in the Civil War and cannons, so I thought it would be a good gift,' says Daugherty's 11-year old son Logan. Daugherty said he is not worried about the federal government coming to get his son's cannon because he spoke to the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and found it is legal to own such a cannon because it does not use a firing pin and is muzzle loaded so the government does not consider the weapon a threat. Two days after the family celebrated Logan's 11th birthday, father and son offered a field demonstration of the new cannon on top of a grassy hill overlooking Fairmont, West Virginia and on the third try, the blank inside the barrel went boom and a cannon was born. For a followup they popped a golf ball into the gun barrel, lit the fuse, and watched the golf ball split the sky and land about 600 yards away. 'Any rebels charging up this hill would be in trouble with a cannon like this at the top,' Logan says."
Not a threat (Score:2, Insightful)
So we can only have stuff as long as the government doesn't find it threatening?
Oh, I see this guy's on the Union side. Maybe they're worried about him pointing it at Baltimore's civilians and making demands, as the Union army did.
Re:Safety first? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Wow, news for nerds (Score:3, Insightful)
This is totally OT.
Not necessarily. It's just geared more towards history, or even engineering, nerds than computer nerds. I'm willing to bet any 11 year old kid who's a civil war buff gets picked on as much as the rest of us did in school. At least until he gets a 700lb cannon...
Re:You'll shoot your eye out, kid (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would he need clearance from the NSA?
Because the American government has known, probably since Reagan, that its' constituents have genuine grounds for overthrowing it, and that it is therefore reasonably possible that they could someday try...and that they must therefore be prevented from trying at all costs. ;)
Famous last words in the article (Score:5, Insightful)
"He's a good kid. One thing about my son he has a great respect for guns and weapons, so he will not be firing this anytime soon without an adult present."
I'm sure that's all true. Unlike Mr. Daugherty, I actually do remember being 11 years old. I also remember not doing a very good job of thinking of the consequences of my actions. So we'll all wait for the day when 1 or 2 years from now when this "good kid" and his friends fire this cannon at other people or nearby property and cause damage that they are held accountable for.
Re:That's Interesting... (Score:3, Insightful)
Wait until a cannonball punches through your roof into your living room and then get back to us.
NSA??? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm calling "bullshit" on the NSA bit. The NSA is a bunch of spys and technology geeks. They would have little interest in a Civil War-era black powder cannon. From the NSA web site "The NSA/CSS core missions are to protect U.S. national security systems and to produce foreign signals intelligence information."[http://www.nsa.gov/about/mission/index.shtml]
Re:Perfectly Legal (Score:3, Insightful)
i know you ment this as a joke here(i thoguht it funny), but seriously it does annoy me that people try to legitimize owning a long arm for hunting .
the second amendment has 0 relevance to hunting, and 100% to having the ability to arm one self as an independent force separator from the federal government.
A arm is a weapon not food gathering device(though it may be used that way). and is something every American has the right and in some capacities the duties to exercise.
Liar (Score:2, Insightful)
'I've always been interested in the Civil War and cannons, so I thought it would be a good gift,'
Translation"
'I've always been interested in the Civil War and cannons, so I really got it for myself even though I won't know it until my son drops his interest in it.'
Re:traitor (Score:3, Insightful)
Why not? It's *West Virginia*. WV got carved out of Virginia for the express purpose of having the natives shoot at rebels.
Re:Famous last words in the article (Score:5, Insightful)
I had a compound bow at the age of 7 and was using it without supervision within 6 months.
At no point between the age of 7 and now have I ever used a projectile weapon irresponsibly.
I think it is completely possible for this 11 year old to be responsible enough to own and use a cannon.
Do I think this is the norm? No not at all, I didn't trust most of my friends to use my bow without supervision until I was maybe 12, but to just write this kid off because of your own irresponsibility is not fair.
Re:Legal? (Score:3, Insightful)
A cannon just seems dangerous, but mostly it's just a heavy piece of cast iron that sits there.
Re:Famous last words in the article (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:True cannon story. (Score:3, Insightful)
Someone please mod parent +1 for using the term "apropos of nothing" correctly, and another point for correct spelling of same. (light applause)
Re:traitor (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Wow, news for nerds (Score:4, Insightful)
If you don't understand what an awesome nerd accomplishment building your own Civil War cannon is ... you really don't have any business calling yourself a nerd.
Re:Safety first? (Score:3, Insightful)
They will not get far.
If there is one thing I have learned - never, ever, underestimate the ingenuity of a group of kids who really want to get something accomplished. If they want to move a cannon, they'll move a cannon.
Re:traitor (Score:4, Insightful)
But, er, didn't the West Virginians *refuse* to secede? To put it another way, your comment would be accurate if the WVs had seceded *and formed their own country*. But they didn't. They essentially just stayed with the union.
- AJ
Re:Wow, news for nerds (Score:3, Insightful)
I couldn't disagree with you more. There are plenty of gun nerds.
Also: What was the first thing you thought when you saw the article?
Chances are it involved having one of these yourself, firing it, or possibly analyzing it. If so, then this article did indeed interest you. I, for one, welcome my beowulf cluster of muzzle loading cannon overlords, possibly running Linux...
A battery (Score:4, Insightful)
Succession isn't the issue (Score:3, Insightful)
Slavery is profoundly wrong and no action taken to promote or sustain it can be considered moral.
Succeeding or not succeeding is not essential moral issue. How else did the US or Texas come about if not for succession?
But the Civil War was only about states' rights insofar as that meant their right to join a new country when a president was elected from a newly formed abolitionist party who threatened to infringe on the state "right" of slavery.
Re:Safety first? (Score:3, Insightful)