The article is more an op-ed than a well-researched historical piece, so take with a huge grain of salt-peter. He's also incorrect in assigning American victory in the AWI to long rifles or any other claimed firearm superiority. While the rifle had certain advantages in accuracy, it took longer to load, and in fact the vast majority of Patriot troops used muskets essentially identical to the British. In the end, the rifle helped, but was hardly decisive or even a significant reason for American victory. (And his description of King's Mountain is, to put it gently, overly simplistic.)
Unfortunately, the article is more likely to trigger a needless political debate here than actually serve as informative.
As a side note, his photo of the pepperbox pistol is clearly a much later design, likely used with percussion caps. It resembles one my grandfather had on his mantle, inherited from somewhere way back when. In any case, the trigger on that one both rotated the barrel and caused the firing hammer to strike the percussion cap— but a new cap would have to be put in place after each shot, so it wouldn't have been all that fast a gun to use. Better than reloading, but nothing like the advent of the actual revolver.
...
