Quote Originally Posted by Col. Colt View Post
Andrew, in 1936 EVERYTHING in much of the World was segregated - not just high schools......and I don't think the ROTC - or their rifles - was to blame for that. I am pretty sure those same high schools today use different language, too. But I don't think politics and ancient wrongs is the the proper direction for this thread to take.

Imagine, for a moment, a time in our parents time when our beloved rifles were Part of everyday life - even in high school. Here in Alaska we still have high schools with rifle ranges - but then we are not very PC, either.

As Cooper said "The Past is Another Country, they do things differently there."

History is not always pretty, but the triumph of right over wrong is an ongoing process - there are and were decent people in every age and at all times in history - or we would never have made any progress. Our system has flaws, but slavery was abolished here - and paid for with 600,000 lives - not so in Africa and elsewhere in the world, even today. Man is a failed creature, but for his cultivated moral sense - which seems to be in decline lately. But hope springs eternal, and God is not mocked. Virtue is eventually rewarded - and evil doers will get theirs, in life or in the end.

My point was - and is - that this rifle is tremendously interesting for being ISSUED TO A US HIGH SCHOOL - by the US government. And the students and staff of that time were trustworthy enough to do that. Respectfully, CC
CC,

My apologies, sometimes with written responses versus verbal/In-Person, a lot can easily be taken out of context as the majority of communication is non-verbal.

That being said, my response had nothing to do with pointing at anything about the segregation or the role of rifles in ROTC. And I don't disagree with your points but I think mine may have not been typed correctly.

I was merely expanding on the citation, that the actual paperwork denotes the inventory of arms for African American Washington DC schools and that the title of the paperwork used (although common for the time) is not considered "PC" today, is probably why Frank Mallory omitted that portion when he published his SRS list containing these numbers.

Just pointing out that the actual paperwork typically has interesting details that may be omitted from the citation.

If that makes sense.