quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
The "bone" was gun-control, not the Second Amendment. Gun-control originated as a way to keep guns out of black hands.

quote:

Given that "Militia" in slave owning states was "Escaped Slave Patrol", I could see how ( for example, Virginia ) wouldn't get involved until their Police State was guaranteed.

I mean, if "Militias" were for repelling invasions, the brits wouldn't have gotten to DC in 1812, right?

quote:

ORIGINAL: muhly22222

quote:

Given that "Militia" in slave owning states was "Escaped Slave Patrol", I could see how ( for example, Virginia ) wouldn't get involved until their Police State was guaranteed.

I mean, if "Militias" were for repelling invasions, the brits wouldn't have gotten to DC in 1812, right?

In 1791 (when the 2nd Amendment was ratified and became part of the Constitution), the militia mentioned in the introductory clause of the 2nd Amendment was not simply a slave patrol. In every state that was a part of the United States at that time, the militia was formed by every able-bodied man within a certain age range (I'd have to look up exactly what the ages were). To get a good idea of what the picture was like at the time of the ratification of the Bill of Rights, read Akhil Reed Amar's book, The Bill of Rights.

If you're looking for bones that were thrown to the southern slave states (although don't forget that even in northern states in 1791, slavery was legal; New York alone had a significant number), why not look at the obvious ones -- the 3/5 Compromise, the provision that slavery couldn't be discussed for 20 years, and the requirement that fugitive slaves be returned.

quote:

The 3/5 clause was put in there to allay concerns that slave states would count their slave population and gain extra representatives to vote in slavery in perpetuity.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

This is an interesting topic and I like Kirata's take on it.

I wonder, if there isn't some basis in fact to a statement: "Gun control is racist"?

Based upon:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
An act for preventing Negroes Insurrections. WHEREAS the frequent meeting of considerable numbers of negroe slaves under pretence of feasts and burialls is judged of dangerous consequence; for prevention whereof for the future, Bee it enacted by the kings most excellent majestie by and with the consent of the generall assembly, and it is hereby enacted by the authority aforesaid, that from and after the publication of this law, it shall not be lawfull for any negroe or other slave to carry or arme himselfe with any club, staffe, gunn, sword or any other weapon of defence or offence ~Acts of the Commonwealth of Virginia, 1680

... it would certainly seem that at least once in history gun control was enacted in order to keep weapons out of the hands of certain people.

Now, before all the usual suspects start throwing the word "racist" at me, I haven't been pro gun control since I was 16 and stopped living in the Utopian construct world of my ignorant youth. On top of that, it would seem that another poster that's generally on the left of things has already suggested (much like this OP) that gun control is a racist idea. They did so here

So, I think it bears some scrutiny that gun control has at least some of its roots in racism. Does this mean that racism (by way of gun control) is a part of the Democratic platform or is it another case of "conveniently movable moral code"?



Peace and comfort,



Michael

quote:

ORIGINAL: TricklessMagic

The OP's post is kind of.... I don't understand the simple failure of researching history. The 2nd Amendment was made a part of the Bill of Rights to guarantee the states their rights to have their citizens be armed and have the right to form a militia, potentially against a federal government. Look up the Articles of Confederation. Madison and Washington had a hard sell on the whole federal government bit. The Constitution is a list of restraints on the federal government, as each state had its own constitution. It was all about preventing what has happened, a federal government with far too much power able to decide the entire living style of every citizen of the United States regardless of their state's take on liberty and freedom.

There was a time when we were; these United States, not The United States.

The founding fathers believed in the concept of divine liberty and an innate right to liberty. Was this always practiced, no. Was there slavery, yes. I'm all for starting all over again anytime someone says the 2nd Amendment is outdated. If we are going to destroy one amendment of the Bill of Rights, lets get rid of all of the amendments and start over. Lets tear down the federal government and let the states choose with whom they wish to be affiliated by union and the federal government they wish to power or not power. Whether or not there should be welfare for the useless unproductive masses that fill our prisons and vote for those who have no interest in abiding by their oath of office and loyalty to the Constitution.

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

until their Police State was guaranteed.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

Actually DaddySatyr, it has less to do with color than it does to keep a group of people under control. I think it is a good example to show that weapons control (going as far back in history as you like) by a government has often led to a stronger control of the people by the government.

I do not think the 2nd amendment was a bone of any kind, but is one of the things that got the constitution approved by many states. Just because the Fed government has gone against the principle of the 2nd amendment so many times, does not invalidate the reason the states and their representatives, wanted it included in the Bill of Rights.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

BTW, I am all for people control. Those that purchase and carry firearms legally should have minimal training and periodic licensing. We do it with automobiles.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

Actually DaddySatyr, it has less to do with color than it does to keep a group of people under control. I think it is a good example to show that weapons control (going as far back in history as you like) by a government has often led to a stronger control of the people by the government.

I do not think the 2nd amendment was a bone of any kind, but is one of the things that got the constitution approved by many states. Just because the Fed government has gone against the principle of the 2nd amendment so many times, does not invalidate the reason the states and their representatives, wanted it included in the Bill of Rights.

I am well aware of this. I am the person who constantly quotes President Jefferson's letter where he calls for the right of the people to engage in revolution; indeed, he says it should happen every 20 years.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

BTW, I am all for people control. Those that purchase and carry firearms legally should have minimal training and periodic licensing. We do it with automobiles.

Were it not for the fact that the government has successfully infringed upon the rights and traditions of gun ownership, I would disagree with this statement.

Gone are the days when fathers taught their sons to respect and use firearms as a course of their life training. As a result, I have to agree that there should be some modicum of training if not to allow people to decide for themselves if owning/carrying a gun is the right thing to do.

"Is he talking about teaching this kind of crap, in school?" Why not with a trained instructor? We teach sex education in schools.



Peace and comfort,



Michael

quote:

I am formally announcing my intention to form the Free person's militia to protect the public from Starbucks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

This is an interesting topic and I like Kirata's take on it.

I wonder, if there isn't some basis in fact to a statement: "Gun control is racist"?

Based upon:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
An act for preventing Negroes Insurrections. WHEREAS the frequent meeting of considerable numbers of negroe slaves under pretence of feasts and burialls is judged of dangerous consequence; for prevention whereof for the future, Bee it enacted by the kings most excellent majestie by and with the consent of the generall assembly, and it is hereby enacted by the authority aforesaid, that from and after the publication of this law, it shall not be lawfull for any negroe or other slave to carry or arme himselfe with any club, staffe, gunn, sword or any other weapon of defence or offence ~Acts of the Commonwealth of Virginia, 1680

... it would certainly seem that at least once in history gun control was enacted in order to keep weapons out of the hands of certain people.

Now, before all the usual suspects start throwing the word "racist" at me, I haven't been pro gun control since I was 16 and stopped living in the Utopian construct world of my ignorant youth. On top of that, it would seem that another poster that's generally on the left of things has already suggested (much like this OP) that gun control is a racist idea. They did so here

So, I think it bears some scrutiny that gun control has at least some of its roots in racism. Does this mean that racism (by way of gun control) is a part of the Democratic platform or is it another case of "conveniently movable moral code"?



Peace and comfort,



Michael

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

Actually DaddySatyr, it has less to do with color than it does to keep a group of people under control. I think it is a good example to show that weapons control (going as far back in history as you like) by a government has often led to a stronger control of the people by the government.

I do not think the 2nd amendment was a bone of any kind, but is one of the things that got the constitution approved by many states. Just because the Fed government has gone against the principle of the 2nd amendment so many times, does not invalidate the reason the states and their representatives, wanted it included in the Bill of Rights.

BTW, I am all for people control. Those that purchase and carry firearms legally should have minimal training and periodic licensing. We do it with automobiles.