If anyone wants to get all technical and historical.... the British had the Brown Bess Musket. A fine, reliable weapon for volley fire. Line a lot of cannon-fodder up in linear formations and fire off enough Brown Bess rounds and you might hit a few people or barn doors. More likely the latter.
The Colonials had a much higher-percentage of rifles. Not all of them. In fact, probably a minority. But the Colonials had grown up with their weapons. Most since 8 or 10. And in the wealthier suburbs of Boston, the kids had "Childrens Rifles" or muskets built for them as soon as they were 6 or 7. The British troops were levies. Draftees, is another word. Incompetent in the use of Arms. Utterly, amazingly competent in the rote drill of linear formations. They could load and volley fire and not retreat... in machine-like fashion.
The Colonials, on the other hand, were versed in the art of stalking. Camouflage. Shooting their personal arms... or they did not eat. They could shoot a musket 100 yards and hit a deer every time. They could shoot a rifle 300 yards and hit a deer... every time. A red-coated soldier with a pair of white bands across his uniform... was a big juicy target.
The Colonials did not have military-grade weapons. Military-grade weapons were inferior units that were "Private Proof" and fine for use in big lines of troops (linear formations) and would hit 1 in 50 targets.
Today... I'd argue that the balance is about the same WRT small arms. And in most cases, citizens are better shots than anyone but infantry, line and special units. But that's just my opinion. I'm probably wrong. ;-)
Cheers,
Sirhr