CDZ Two options...the European model of self defense, and the American model of Self defensse.

[otto105]

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....

Are military defensive gun uses really applicable to any argument about domestic violence?

You're desperate. Delicious.

You are an idiot......civilian defensive gun uses are the only ones the studies I posted examined.....military and police were kept out of those studies......

Do your studies include the racial aspect of slavery on the 2nd amendment?

If not, why?

You mean that gun control was one of the first sets of racist laws that we had, meant to keep blacks and indians from owning guns.....you that racial aspect of gun control and the 2nd Amendment?

That the Right to keep and Bear arms is the one thing that keeps people of all races free from a racist, oppressive government?

Very simple question...if you support the victims in Europe simply enduring the attacks......the rapes, beatings, knifings, robberies and murders........since you do not want civilians to have guns, only criminals and the government.....

What do you want the woman who was brutally beaten, stabbed and had two of her teeth pulled out by her ex-husband, who was already on a restraining order.....to do to stop the attack.....?

The woman who was violently gang raped by a group of men in the London park....what do you want her to do to keep from being violently gang raped again?

Please answer.....be brave.....

I have built a time machine....I offer you the opportunity to go back in time and to the scenes of the crimes I posted...the woman facing the 2 men who also had a baseball bat, who pulled out her gun and the two guys ran away.....and the woman who was attacked in the parking garage, who was stabbed repeatedly until she managed to get her gun and shoot him, stopping the attack and saving her life......

Now...with my time machine...you can sneak back and take those guns away from those women before the attacks...they will not have those guns.....

Will you take those guns away from those women.....before the attacks......or not?

The 2nd amendment was a concern to southern states not as a means for gun control as both Native-Americans and African-Americans were not allowed to own guns. The second amendment was for militias to put down any uprisings by either of those groups.

BTW the "right to bare" arms as we have now has only been around for about 10 years.

To answer your strawman question, it obviously the European solution since they wouldn't try to flood more guns on society to keep gun violence down. In the US we have had 240+ mass shooting events already this year. Every mass shooting is just another reason to increase guns and gun violence to no end.


How many have they had in England? Germany or France?

You know that that is a lie...right? That the 2nd Amendment was ...Muh Slavery....is a lie...right?

You left wingers will make up anything to get your way.......

We have not had 240 mass public shootings this year...that is a lie.....we had 1 in 2020, 10 in 2019, and 12 in 2018 using the actual definition of mass public shootings....

The 2nd Amendment, like the other Amendments were codified in the Bill of Rights specifically because the Founders knew that people like you would come along...many of the Founders didn't think we needed a Bill of Rights, since the Constitution itself limited the powers of the Federal Government....wiser members of the Founders understood human nature and human history, so they codified Existing Rights....Rights that were not created by the Constitution or Dependent on the Constitution for their existence.....all Americans were endowed with these Rights by God.....

So the 2nd Amendment predated slavery....as did the other 10


After the British attempted gun control at the beginning of the Revolutionary War, the wiser Founders realized they had to ensure the government could not take guns away from citizens...hence, they codified the existing Right, knowing people like you would come along and try to pretend it didn't exist....

If the right to bear arms was intended to preserve slavery, why did civil-rights leaders insist that black Americans should be armed to protect themselves?
---

This is wishful thinking. The Second is an attempt — much like the 1619 Project — to reimagine history in purely racial terms. The result is tendentious polemic that suffers not only from a paucity of historical evidence, but from a dishonest rendering of the facts we do know.
-----

Indeed, Anderson ignores the tradition of militias in English common law — codifying the “ancient and indubitable” right in the 1689 English Bill of Rights — which had nothing to do with chattel slavery. Anderson ignores the fact that nearly every intellectual, political, and military leader of the Founding generation — many of whom had no connection to slavery — stressed the importance of self-defense in entirely different contexts.

It was slavery skeptic John Adams, in his 1770 defense of Captain Thomas Preston, one of the soldiers responsible for the Boston Massacre, who argued that even British soldiers had an inherent right to defend themselves from mobs. “Here every private person is authorized to arm himself, and on the strength of this authority, I do not deny the inhabitants had a right to arm themselves,” he noted. When Pennsylvania became the first colony to explicitly guarantee the right to bear arms, it was Benjamin Franklin, by then an abolitionist, who presided over the conference. It was the anti-slavery Samuel Adams who proposed that the Constitution never be used to “authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.” In the writings and speeches of nearly all American Founders, the threat of disarmament was a casus belli.
----
Indeed, Anderson ignores the tradition of militias in English common law — codifying the “ancient and indubitable” right in the 1689 English Bill of Rights — which had nothing to do with chattel slavery. Anderson ignores the fact that nearly every intellectual, political, and military leader of the Founding generation — many of whom had no connection to slavery — stressed the importance of self-defense in entirely different contexts.
----
Many anti-Federalists believed that enshrining these rights on paper would lead to future abuses. Of course, Southerners didn’t need permission to suppress black slave revolts, anyway. They had done so on numerous occasions before the nation’s founding.
----
Yet, by 1791, of the four jurisdictions that had written their own Second Amendments, three of them — Vermont, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania — had already abolished slavery.

When Vermont authored its first constitution in 1777, in fact, it protected the right to keep and bear arms in the same document that it banned slavery.

The 1619 Project Comes for the Second Amendment | National Review

If the right to bear arms was intended to preserve slavery, why did civil-rights leaders insist that black Americans should be armed to protect themselves?

www.nationalreview.com

Your dishonesty is typical of anti-gun extremists....

This is how far anti-gun extremists will go to lie about our history and the 2nd Amendment...

But to make the claim that the Second Amendment was added to the Constitution to placate slave owners, Anderson is impelled to take numerous shortcuts. Take, for example, this pivotal sentence in the book:

“In short, James Madison, the Virginian, knew ‘that the militia’s prime function in his state, and throughout the south, was slave control.’”

The author frames the quote as if Madison, the author of the Bill of Rights, had said it himself — or, if we’re being generous, that it’s a fair representation of his views.

When you follow the book’s endnote, however, it leads to a 1998 paper titled “The Hidden History of the Second Amendment,” written by anti-gun activist Carl T. Bogus, who shares Anderson’s thesis.

It is his quote. Nowhere does Bogus offer any sample of Madison declaring, or even implying, that slave control was the impetus for the Second Amendment.

Then you have actual Blacks at the time and what they thought of the Right to keep and bear arms...

Civil-rights leaders of the 19th and early 20th centuries also lamented that the right to self-defense was denied them. Fredrick Douglass reacted to the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 by editorializing that the best remedy would be “a good revolver, a steady hand, and a determination to shoot down any man attempting to kidnap.”

The late-19th-century civil-rights leader Ida B. Wells argued that one of the lessons of the post–Civil War era, “which every Afro American should ponder well, is that a Winchester rifle should have a place of honor in every black home, and it should be used for that protection which the law refuses to give.” T. Thomas Fortune, another black civil-rights activist of the era, argued that it was with a Winchester that the black man could “defend his home and children and wife.”

Stop the blather and educate yourself.

Opinion | Was Slavery a Factor in the Second Amendment? (Published 2018)

 

[2aguy]

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....

Are military defensive gun uses really applicable to any argument about domestic violence?

You're desperate. Delicious.

You are an idiot......civilian defensive gun uses are the only ones the studies I posted examined.....military and police were kept out of those studies......

Do your studies include the racial aspect of slavery on the 2nd amendment?

If not, why?

You mean that gun control was one of the first sets of racist laws that we had, meant to keep blacks and indians from owning guns.....you that racial aspect of gun control and the 2nd Amendment?

That the Right to keep and Bear arms is the one thing that keeps people of all races free from a racist, oppressive government?

Very simple question...if you support the victims in Europe simply enduring the attacks......the rapes, beatings, knifings, robberies and murders........since you do not want civilians to have guns, only criminals and the government.....

What do you want the woman who was brutally beaten, stabbed and had two of her teeth pulled out by her ex-husband, who was already on a restraining order.....to do to stop the attack.....?

The woman who was violently gang raped by a group of men in the London park....what do you want her to do to keep from being violently gang raped again?

Please answer.....be brave.....

I have built a time machine....I offer you the opportunity to go back in time and to the scenes of the crimes I posted...the woman facing the 2 men who also had a baseball bat, who pulled out her gun and the two guys ran away.....and the woman who was attacked in the parking garage, who was stabbed repeatedly until she managed to get her gun and shoot him, stopping the attack and saving her life......

Now...with my time machine...you can sneak back and take those guns away from those women before the attacks...they will not have those guns.....

Will you take those guns away from those women.....before the attacks......or not?

The 2nd amendment was a concern to southern states not as a means for gun control as both Native-Americans and African-Americans were not allowed to own guns. The second amendment was for militias to put down any uprisings by either of those groups.

BTW the "right to bare" arms as we have now has only been around for about 10 years.

To answer your strawman question, it obviously the European solution since they wouldn't try to flood more guns on society to keep gun violence down. In the US we have had 240+ mass shooting events already this year. Every mass shooting is just another reason to increase guns and gun violence to no end.


How many have they had in England? Germany or France?

And more...

For 20 years now, a well-meaning law professor has been peddling the fiction that the Second Amendment – guaranteeing the right of Americans to keep and bear arms – was adopted to protect slavery. He first proposed this in a 1998 law review article and trotted it out again in a recent New York Times op-ed.

The trouble is: It’s untrue. Not a single one of America’s founders is known to have suggested such a purpose.

When the Redcoats came to disarm the colonists, the American patriots relied on the right to “have arms for their Defense,” as stated in the English Declaration of Rights of 1689.

In 1776, Pennsylvania declared: “That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves, and the state.” Vermont copied that language in its constitution, which explicitly abolished slavery. Massachusetts and North Carolina adopted their own versions.

When the states debated adoption of the Constitution without a bill of rights in 1787-88, Samuel Adams proposed the right to bear arms in Massachusetts’s ratification convention. The Dissent of the Minority did so in Pennsylvania, and the entire New Hampshire convention demanded recognition of the right.

There was no connection to slavery in any of these historical antecedents.

In his articles, Professor Carl T. Bogus of Roger Williams University speculates that George Mason’s and Patrick Henry’s demands in the Virginia ratification convention could have been motivated to protect slavery. Not so.

Mason recalled that “when the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised … to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”

And Patrick Henry implored: “The great object is, that every man be armed.” The ensuing debate concerned defense against tyranny and invasion – not slavery.

New York, North Carolina and Rhode Island joined in the demand for what became the Second Amendment. The right to bear arms had universal support.

It was the denial of the right of all “the people” to bear arms that supported slavery. The Supreme Court’s notorious Dred Scott decision held that African-Americans could not be regarded as citizens, for otherwise they could hold political meetings and “keep and carry arms wherever they went.” Frederick Douglass advocated Second Amendment rights for all, and Sojourner Truth carried guns in helping slaves to escape.

The Second Amendment had nothing to do with slavery

For 20 years now, a well-meaning law professor has been peddling the fiction that the Second Amendment – guaranteeing the right of Americans to keep and bear arms – was adopted to protect slavery.

www.foxnews.com

But....But....you said the Right to bear arms is only 10 years old.........

When slavery was abolished, the Southern states prohibited blacks from firearm possession. Congress countered with the Freedmen’s Bureau Act of 1866, which protected “the constitutional right to bear arms,” without distinction of color.

A major impetus for adoption of the 14th Amendment was to protect this right from state violation.

Next...you guys are going to say that the 1st Amendment protection of Freedom of Speech was created to support slavery...that the 5th Amendment was created to support slavery.....

Re-writing history is a talent that left wingers have...by destroying the truth of the past, they plan on controlling the future...

 

[2aguy]

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....

Are military defensive gun uses really applicable to any argument about domestic violence?

You're desperate. Delicious.

You are an idiot......civilian defensive gun uses are the only ones the studies I posted examined.....military and police were kept out of those studies......

Do your studies include the racial aspect of slavery on the 2nd amendment?

If not, why?

You mean that gun control was one of the first sets of racist laws that we had, meant to keep blacks and indians from owning guns.....you that racial aspect of gun control and the 2nd Amendment?

That the Right to keep and Bear arms is the one thing that keeps people of all races free from a racist, oppressive government?

Very simple question...if you support the victims in Europe simply enduring the attacks......the rapes, beatings, knifings, robberies and murders........since you do not want civilians to have guns, only criminals and the government.....

What do you want the woman who was brutally beaten, stabbed and had two of her teeth pulled out by her ex-husband, who was already on a restraining order.....to do to stop the attack.....?

The woman who was violently gang raped by a group of men in the London park....what do you want her to do to keep from being violently gang raped again?

Please answer.....be brave.....

I have built a time machine....I offer you the opportunity to go back in time and to the scenes of the crimes I posted...the woman facing the 2 men who also had a baseball bat, who pulled out her gun and the two guys ran away.....and the woman who was attacked in the parking garage, who was stabbed repeatedly until she managed to get her gun and shoot him, stopping the attack and saving her life......

Now...with my time machine...you can sneak back and take those guns away from those women before the attacks...they will not have those guns.....

Will you take those guns away from those women.....before the attacks......or not?

The 2nd amendment was a concern to southern states not as a means for gun control as both Native-Americans and African-Americans were not allowed to own guns. The second amendment was for militias to put down any uprisings by either of those groups.

BTW the "right to bare" arms as we have now has only been around for about 10 years.

To answer your strawman question, it obviously the European solution since they wouldn't try to flood more guns on society to keep gun violence down. In the US we have had 240+ mass shooting events already this year. Every mass shooting is just another reason to increase guns and gun violence to no end.


How many have they had in England? Germany or France?

You know that that is a lie...right? That the 2nd Amendment was ...Muh Slavery....is a lie...right?

You left wingers will make up anything to get your way.......

We have not had 240 mass public shootings this year...that is a lie.....we had 1 in 2020, 10 in 2019, and 12 in 2018 using the actual definition of mass public shootings....

The 2nd Amendment, like the other Amendments were codified in the Bill of Rights specifically because the Founders knew that people like you would come along...many of the Founders didn't think we needed a Bill of Rights, since the Constitution itself limited the powers of the Federal Government....wiser members of the Founders understood human nature and human history, so they codified Existing Rights....Rights that were not created by the Constitution or Dependent on the Constitution for their existence.....all Americans were endowed with these Rights by God.....

So the 2nd Amendment predated slavery....as did the other 10


After the British attempted gun control at the beginning of the Revolutionary War, the wiser Founders realized they had to ensure the government could not take guns away from citizens...hence, they codified the existing Right, knowing people like you would come along and try to pretend it didn't exist....

If the right to bear arms was intended to preserve slavery, why did civil-rights leaders insist that black Americans should be armed to protect themselves?
---

This is wishful thinking. The Second is an attempt — much like the 1619 Project — to reimagine history in purely racial terms. The result is tendentious polemic that suffers not only from a paucity of historical evidence, but from a dishonest rendering of the facts we do know.
-----

Indeed, Anderson ignores the tradition of militias in English common law — codifying the “ancient and indubitable” right in the 1689 English Bill of Rights — which had nothing to do with chattel slavery. Anderson ignores the fact that nearly every intellectual, political, and military leader of the Founding generation — many of whom had no connection to slavery — stressed the importance of self-defense in entirely different contexts.

It was slavery skeptic John Adams, in his 1770 defense of Captain Thomas Preston, one of the soldiers responsible for the Boston Massacre, who argued that even British soldiers had an inherent right to defend themselves from mobs. “Here every private person is authorized to arm himself, and on the strength of this authority, I do not deny the inhabitants had a right to arm themselves,” he noted. When Pennsylvania became the first colony to explicitly guarantee the right to bear arms, it was Benjamin Franklin, by then an abolitionist, who presided over the conference. It was the anti-slavery Samuel Adams who proposed that the Constitution never be used to “authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.” In the writings and speeches of nearly all American Founders, the threat of disarmament was a casus belli.
----
Indeed, Anderson ignores the tradition of militias in English common law — codifying the “ancient and indubitable” right in the 1689 English Bill of Rights — which had nothing to do with chattel slavery. Anderson ignores the fact that nearly every intellectual, political, and military leader of the Founding generation — many of whom had no connection to slavery — stressed the importance of self-defense in entirely different contexts.
----
Many anti-Federalists believed that enshrining these rights on paper would lead to future abuses. Of course, Southerners didn’t need permission to suppress black slave revolts, anyway. They had done so on numerous occasions before the nation’s founding.
----
Yet, by 1791, of the four jurisdictions that had written their own Second Amendments, three of them — Vermont, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania — had already abolished slavery.

When Vermont authored its first constitution in 1777, in fact, it protected the right to keep and bear arms in the same document that it banned slavery.

The 1619 Project Comes for the Second Amendment | National Review

If the right to bear arms was intended to preserve slavery, why did civil-rights leaders insist that black Americans should be armed to protect themselves?

www.nationalreview.com

Your dishonesty is typical of anti-gun extremists....

This is how far anti-gun extremists will go to lie about our history and the 2nd Amendment...

But to make the claim that the Second Amendment was added to the Constitution to placate slave owners, Anderson is impelled to take numerous shortcuts. Take, for example, this pivotal sentence in the book:

“In short, James Madison, the Virginian, knew ‘that the militia’s prime function in his state, and throughout the south, was slave control.’”

The author frames the quote as if Madison, the author of the Bill of Rights, had said it himself — or, if we’re being generous, that it’s a fair representation of his views.

When you follow the book’s endnote, however, it leads to a 1998 paper titled “The Hidden History of the Second Amendment,” written by anti-gun activist Carl T. Bogus, who shares Anderson’s thesis.

It is his quote. Nowhere does Bogus offer any sample of Madison declaring, or even implying, that slave control was the impetus for the Second Amendment.

Then you have actual Blacks at the time and what they thought of the Right to keep and bear arms...

Civil-rights leaders of the 19th and early 20th centuries also lamented that the right to self-defense was denied them. Fredrick Douglass reacted to the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 by editorializing that the best remedy would be “a good revolver, a steady hand, and a determination to shoot down any man attempting to kidnap.”

The late-19th-century civil-rights leader Ida B. Wells argued that one of the lessons of the post–Civil War era, “which every Afro American should ponder well, is that a Winchester rifle should have a place of honor in every black home, and it should be used for that protection which the law refuses to give.” T. Thomas Fortune, another black civil-rights activist of the era, argued that it was with a Winchester that the black man could “defend his home and children and wife.”

Stop the blather and educate yourself.

Opinion | Was Slavery a Factor in the Second Amendment? (Published 2018)

Yeah....an opinion not based in truth, facts or reality........you guys will do anything, say anything to take guns away from those you wish to control.

 

[otto105]

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....

Are military defensive gun uses really applicable to any argument about domestic violence?

You're desperate. Delicious.

You are an idiot......civilian defensive gun uses are the only ones the studies I posted examined.....military and police were kept out of those studies......

Do your studies include the racial aspect of slavery on the 2nd amendment?

If not, why?

You mean that gun control was one of the first sets of racist laws that we had, meant to keep blacks and indians from owning guns.....you that racial aspect of gun control and the 2nd Amendment?

That the Right to keep and Bear arms is the one thing that keeps people of all races free from a racist, oppressive government?

Very simple question...if you support the victims in Europe simply enduring the attacks......the rapes, beatings, knifings, robberies and murders........since you do not want civilians to have guns, only criminals and the government.....

What do you want the woman who was brutally beaten, stabbed and had two of her teeth pulled out by her ex-husband, who was already on a restraining order.....to do to stop the attack.....?

The woman who was violently gang raped by a group of men in the London park....what do you want her to do to keep from being violently gang raped again?

Please answer.....be brave.....

I have built a time machine....I offer you the opportunity to go back in time and to the scenes of the crimes I posted...the woman facing the 2 men who also had a baseball bat, who pulled out her gun and the two guys ran away.....and the woman who was attacked in the parking garage, who was stabbed repeatedly until she managed to get her gun and shoot him, stopping the attack and saving her life......

Now...with my time machine...you can sneak back and take those guns away from those women before the attacks...they will not have those guns.....

Will you take those guns away from those women.....before the attacks......or not?

The 2nd amendment was a concern to southern states not as a means for gun control as both Native-Americans and African-Americans were not allowed to own guns. The second amendment was for militias to put down any uprisings by either of those groups.

BTW the "right to bare" arms as we have now has only been around for about 10 years.

To answer your strawman question, it obviously the European solution since they wouldn't try to flood more guns on society to keep gun violence down. In the US we have had 240+ mass shooting events already this year. Every mass shooting is just another reason to increase guns and gun violence to no end.


How many have they had in England? Germany or France?

And more...

For 20 years now, a well-meaning law professor has been peddling the fiction that the Second Amendment – guaranteeing the right of Americans to keep and bear arms – was adopted to protect slavery. He first proposed this in a 1998 law review article and trotted it out again in a recent New York Times op-ed.

The trouble is: It’s untrue. Not a single one of America’s founders is known to have suggested such a purpose.

When the Redcoats came to disarm the colonists, the American patriots relied on the right to “have arms for their Defense,” as stated in the English Declaration of Rights of 1689.

In 1776, Pennsylvania declared: “That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves, and the state.” Vermont copied that language in its constitution, which explicitly abolished slavery. Massachusetts and North Carolina adopted their own versions.

When the states debated adoption of the Constitution without a bill of rights in 1787-88, Samuel Adams proposed the right to bear arms in Massachusetts’s ratification convention. The Dissent of the Minority did so in Pennsylvania, and the entire New Hampshire convention demanded recognition of the right.

There was no connection to slavery in any of these historical antecedents.

In his articles, Professor Carl T. Bogus of Roger Williams University speculates that George Mason’s and Patrick Henry’s demands in the Virginia ratification convention could have been motivated to protect slavery. Not so.

Mason recalled that “when the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised … to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”

And Patrick Henry implored: “The great object is, that every man be armed.” The ensuing debate concerned defense against tyranny and invasion – not slavery.

New York, North Carolina and Rhode Island joined in the demand for what became the Second Amendment. The right to bear arms had universal support.

It was the denial of the right of all “the people” to bear arms that supported slavery. The Supreme Court’s notorious Dred Scott decision held that African-Americans could not be regarded as citizens, for otherwise they could hold political meetings and “keep and carry arms wherever they went.” Frederick Douglass advocated Second Amendment rights for all, and Sojourner Truth carried guns in helping slaves to escape.

The Second Amendment had nothing to do with slavery

For 20 years now, a well-meaning law professor has been peddling the fiction that the Second Amendment – guaranteeing the right of Americans to keep and bear arms – was adopted to protect slavery.

www.foxnews.com

But....But....you said the Right to bear arms is only 10 years old.........

When slavery was abolished, the Southern states prohibited blacks from firearm possession. Congress countered with the Freedmen’s Bureau Act of 1866, which protected “the constitutional right to bear arms,” without distinction of color.

A major impetus for adoption of the 14th Amendment was to protect this right from state violation.

Next...you guys are going to say that the 1st Amendment protection of Freedom of Speech was created to support slavery...that the 5th Amendment was created to support slavery.....

Re-writing history is a talent that left wingers have...by destroying the truth of the past, they plan on controlling the future...

The Continental Army won our revolution with help from the French Navy.

A question for you, did southern states send their militia's to fight for our break from Britain?

 

[2aguy]

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....

Are military defensive gun uses really applicable to any argument about domestic violence?

You're desperate. Delicious.

You are an idiot......civilian defensive gun uses are the only ones the studies I posted examined.....military and police were kept out of those studies......

Do your studies include the racial aspect of slavery on the 2nd amendment?

If not, why?

You mean that gun control was one of the first sets of racist laws that we had, meant to keep blacks and indians from owning guns.....you that racial aspect of gun control and the 2nd Amendment?

That the Right to keep and Bear arms is the one thing that keeps people of all races free from a racist, oppressive government?

Very simple question...if you support the victims in Europe simply enduring the attacks......the rapes, beatings, knifings, robberies and murders........since you do not want civilians to have guns, only criminals and the government.....

What do you want the woman who was brutally beaten, stabbed and had two of her teeth pulled out by her ex-husband, who was already on a restraining order.....to do to stop the attack.....?

The woman who was violently gang raped by a group of men in the London park....what do you want her to do to keep from being violently gang raped again?

Please answer.....be brave.....

I have built a time machine....I offer you the opportunity to go back in time and to the scenes of the crimes I posted...the woman facing the 2 men who also had a baseball bat, who pulled out her gun and the two guys ran away.....and the woman who was attacked in the parking garage, who was stabbed repeatedly until she managed to get her gun and shoot him, stopping the attack and saving her life......

Now...with my time machine...you can sneak back and take those guns away from those women before the attacks...they will not have those guns.....

Will you take those guns away from those women.....before the attacks......or not?

The 2nd amendment was a concern to southern states not as a means for gun control as both Native-Americans and African-Americans were not allowed to own guns. The second amendment was for militias to put down any uprisings by either of those groups.

BTW the "right to bare" arms as we have now has only been around for about 10 years.

To answer your strawman question, it obviously the European solution since they wouldn't try to flood more guns on society to keep gun violence down. In the US we have had 240+ mass shooting events already this year. Every mass shooting is just another reason to increase guns and gun violence to no end.


How many have they had in England? Germany or France?

You know that that is a lie...right? That the 2nd Amendment was ...Muh Slavery....is a lie...right?

You left wingers will make up anything to get your way.......

We have not had 240 mass public shootings this year...that is a lie.....we had 1 in 2020, 10 in 2019, and 12 in 2018 using the actual definition of mass public shootings....

The 2nd Amendment, like the other Amendments were codified in the Bill of Rights specifically because the Founders knew that people like you would come along...many of the Founders didn't think we needed a Bill of Rights, since the Constitution itself limited the powers of the Federal Government....wiser members of the Founders understood human nature and human history, so they codified Existing Rights....Rights that were not created by the Constitution or Dependent on the Constitution for their existence.....all Americans were endowed with these Rights by God.....

So the 2nd Amendment predated slavery....as did the other 10


After the British attempted gun control at the beginning of the Revolutionary War, the wiser Founders realized they had to ensure the government could not take guns away from citizens...hence, they codified the existing Right, knowing people like you would come along and try to pretend it didn't exist....

If the right to bear arms was intended to preserve slavery, why did civil-rights leaders insist that black Americans should be armed to protect themselves?
---

This is wishful thinking. The Second is an attempt — much like the 1619 Project — to reimagine history in purely racial terms. The result is tendentious polemic that suffers not only from a paucity of historical evidence, but from a dishonest rendering of the facts we do know.
-----

Indeed, Anderson ignores the tradition of militias in English common law — codifying the “ancient and indubitable” right in the 1689 English Bill of Rights — which had nothing to do with chattel slavery. Anderson ignores the fact that nearly every intellectual, political, and military leader of the Founding generation — many of whom had no connection to slavery — stressed the importance of self-defense in entirely different contexts.

It was slavery skeptic John Adams, in his 1770 defense of Captain Thomas Preston, one of the soldiers responsible for the Boston Massacre, who argued that even British soldiers had an inherent right to defend themselves from mobs. “Here every private person is authorized to arm himself, and on the strength of this authority, I do not deny the inhabitants had a right to arm themselves,” he noted. When Pennsylvania became the first colony to explicitly guarantee the right to bear arms, it was Benjamin Franklin, by then an abolitionist, who presided over the conference. It was the anti-slavery Samuel Adams who proposed that the Constitution never be used to “authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.” In the writings and speeches of nearly all American Founders, the threat of disarmament was a casus belli.
----
Indeed, Anderson ignores the tradition of militias in English common law — codifying the “ancient and indubitable” right in the 1689 English Bill of Rights — which had nothing to do with chattel slavery. Anderson ignores the fact that nearly every intellectual, political, and military leader of the Founding generation — many of whom had no connection to slavery — stressed the importance of self-defense in entirely different contexts.
----
Many anti-Federalists believed that enshrining these rights on paper would lead to future abuses. Of course, Southerners didn’t need permission to suppress black slave revolts, anyway. They had done so on numerous occasions before the nation’s founding.
----
Yet, by 1791, of the four jurisdictions that had written their own Second Amendments, three of them — Vermont, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania — had already abolished slavery.

When Vermont authored its first constitution in 1777, in fact, it protected the right to keep and bear arms in the same document that it banned slavery.

The 1619 Project Comes for the Second Amendment | National Review

If the right to bear arms was intended to preserve slavery, why did civil-rights leaders insist that black Americans should be armed to protect themselves?

www.nationalreview.com

Your dishonesty is typical of anti-gun extremists....

This is how far anti-gun extremists will go to lie about our history and the 2nd Amendment...

But to make the claim that the Second Amendment was added to the Constitution to placate slave owners, Anderson is impelled to take numerous shortcuts. Take, for example, this pivotal sentence in the book:

“In short, James Madison, the Virginian, knew ‘that the militia’s prime function in his state, and throughout the south, was slave control.’”

The author frames the quote as if Madison, the author of the Bill of Rights, had said it himself — or, if we’re being generous, that it’s a fair representation of his views.

When you follow the book’s endnote, however, it leads to a 1998 paper titled “The Hidden History of the Second Amendment,” written by anti-gun activist Carl T. Bogus, who shares Anderson’s thesis.

It is his quote. Nowhere does Bogus offer any sample of Madison declaring, or even implying, that slave control was the impetus for the Second Amendment.

Then you have actual Blacks at the time and what they thought of the Right to keep and bear arms...

Civil-rights leaders of the 19th and early 20th centuries also lamented that the right to self-defense was denied them. Fredrick Douglass reacted to the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 by editorializing that the best remedy would be “a good revolver, a steady hand, and a determination to shoot down any man attempting to kidnap.”

The late-19th-century civil-rights leader Ida B. Wells argued that one of the lessons of the post–Civil War era, “which every Afro American should ponder well, is that a Winchester rifle should have a place of honor in every black home, and it should be used for that protection which the law refuses to give.” T. Thomas Fortune, another black civil-rights activist of the era, argued that it was with a Winchester that the black man could “defend his home and children and wife.”

Stop the blather and educate yourself.

Opinion | Was Slavery a Factor in the Second Amendment? (Published 2018)

Gun control laws are at their root, racist..........you guys spin the Right to Keep and Bear arms as racist.....while saying that gun control...which actually was used as a tool of racism....is not racist....

Gun control was used to take guns away from blacks, indians, Jews....and in each case, those groups suffered ........

 

[2aguy]

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....

Are military defensive gun uses really applicable to any argument about domestic violence?

You're desperate. Delicious.

You are an idiot......civilian defensive gun uses are the only ones the studies I posted examined.....military and police were kept out of those studies......

Do your studies include the racial aspect of slavery on the 2nd amendment?

If not, why?

You mean that gun control was one of the first sets of racist laws that we had, meant to keep blacks and indians from owning guns.....you that racial aspect of gun control and the 2nd Amendment?

That the Right to keep and Bear arms is the one thing that keeps people of all races free from a racist, oppressive government?

Very simple question...if you support the victims in Europe simply enduring the attacks......the rapes, beatings, knifings, robberies and murders........since you do not want civilians to have guns, only criminals and the government.....

What do you want the woman who was brutally beaten, stabbed and had two of her teeth pulled out by her ex-husband, who was already on a restraining order.....to do to stop the attack.....?

The woman who was violently gang raped by a group of men in the London park....what do you want her to do to keep from being violently gang raped again?

Please answer.....be brave.....

I have built a time machine....I offer you the opportunity to go back in time and to the scenes of the crimes I posted...the woman facing the 2 men who also had a baseball bat, who pulled out her gun and the two guys ran away.....and the woman who was attacked in the parking garage, who was stabbed repeatedly until she managed to get her gun and shoot him, stopping the attack and saving her life......

Now...with my time machine...you can sneak back and take those guns away from those women before the attacks...they will not have those guns.....

Will you take those guns away from those women.....before the attacks......or not?

The 2nd amendment was a concern to southern states not as a means for gun control as both Native-Americans and African-Americans were not allowed to own guns. The second amendment was for militias to put down any uprisings by either of those groups.

BTW the "right to bare" arms as we have now has only been around for about 10 years.

To answer your strawman question, it obviously the European solution since they wouldn't try to flood more guns on society to keep gun violence down. In the US we have had 240+ mass shooting events already this year. Every mass shooting is just another reason to increase guns and gun violence to no end.


How many have they had in England? Germany or France?

And more...

For 20 years now, a well-meaning law professor has been peddling the fiction that the Second Amendment – guaranteeing the right of Americans to keep and bear arms – was adopted to protect slavery. He first proposed this in a 1998 law review article and trotted it out again in a recent New York Times op-ed.

The trouble is: It’s untrue. Not a single one of America’s founders is known to have suggested such a purpose.

When the Redcoats came to disarm the colonists, the American patriots relied on the right to “have arms for their Defense,” as stated in the English Declaration of Rights of 1689.

In 1776, Pennsylvania declared: “That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves, and the state.” Vermont copied that language in its constitution, which explicitly abolished slavery. Massachusetts and North Carolina adopted their own versions.

When the states debated adoption of the Constitution without a bill of rights in 1787-88, Samuel Adams proposed the right to bear arms in Massachusetts’s ratification convention. The Dissent of the Minority did so in Pennsylvania, and the entire New Hampshire convention demanded recognition of the right.

There was no connection to slavery in any of these historical antecedents.

In his articles, Professor Carl T. Bogus of Roger Williams University speculates that George Mason’s and Patrick Henry’s demands in the Virginia ratification convention could have been motivated to protect slavery. Not so.

Mason recalled that “when the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised … to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”

And Patrick Henry implored: “The great object is, that every man be armed.” The ensuing debate concerned defense against tyranny and invasion – not slavery.

New York, North Carolina and Rhode Island joined in the demand for what became the Second Amendment. The right to bear arms had universal support.

It was the denial of the right of all “the people” to bear arms that supported slavery. The Supreme Court’s notorious Dred Scott decision held that African-Americans could not be regarded as citizens, for otherwise they could hold political meetings and “keep and carry arms wherever they went.” Frederick Douglass advocated Second Amendment rights for all, and Sojourner Truth carried guns in helping slaves to escape.

The Second Amendment had nothing to do with slavery

For 20 years now, a well-meaning law professor has been peddling the fiction that the Second Amendment – guaranteeing the right of Americans to keep and bear arms – was adopted to protect slavery.

www.foxnews.com

But....But....you said the Right to bear arms is only 10 years old.........

When slavery was abolished, the Southern states prohibited blacks from firearm possession. Congress countered with the Freedmen’s Bureau Act of 1866, which protected “the constitutional right to bear arms,” without distinction of color.

A major impetus for adoption of the 14th Amendment was to protect this right from state violation.

Next...you guys are going to say that the 1st Amendment protection of Freedom of Speech was created to support slavery...that the 5th Amendment was created to support slavery.....

Re-writing history is a talent that left wingers have...by destroying the truth of the past, they plan on controlling the future...

The Continental Army won our revolution with help from the French Navy.

A question for you, did southern states send their militia's to fight for our break from Britain?

Nope.....the other states did........the other states that wanted the 2nd Amendment, like the Southern States, because the British tried to disarm Americans at the start of the war.....

What you need to say is that militias and gun control in the south were racist..........you cant' say that because you support the racism that is at the root of gun control...

 

[2aguy]

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....

Are military defensive gun uses really applicable to any argument about domestic violence?

You're desperate. Delicious.

You are an idiot......civilian defensive gun uses are the only ones the studies I posted examined.....military and police were kept out of those studies......

Do your studies include the racial aspect of slavery on the 2nd amendment?

If not, why?

You mean that gun control was one of the first sets of racist laws that we had, meant to keep blacks and indians from owning guns.....you that racial aspect of gun control and the 2nd Amendment?

That the Right to keep and Bear arms is the one thing that keeps people of all races free from a racist, oppressive government?

Very simple question...if you support the victims in Europe simply enduring the attacks......the rapes, beatings, knifings, robberies and murders........since you do not want civilians to have guns, only criminals and the government.....

What do you want the woman who was brutally beaten, stabbed and had two of her teeth pulled out by her ex-husband, who was already on a restraining order.....to do to stop the attack.....?

The woman who was violently gang raped by a group of men in the London park....what do you want her to do to keep from being violently gang raped again?

Please answer.....be brave.....

I have built a time machine....I offer you the opportunity to go back in time and to the scenes of the crimes I posted...the woman facing the 2 men who also had a baseball bat, who pulled out her gun and the two guys ran away.....and the woman who was attacked in the parking garage, who was stabbed repeatedly until she managed to get her gun and shoot him, stopping the attack and saving her life......

Now...with my time machine...you can sneak back and take those guns away from those women before the attacks...they will not have those guns.....

Will you take those guns away from those women.....before the attacks......or not?

The 2nd amendment was a concern to southern states not as a means for gun control as both Native-Americans and African-Americans were not allowed to own guns. The second amendment was for militias to put down any uprisings by either of those groups.

BTW the "right to bare" arms as we have now has only been around for about 10 years.

To answer your strawman question, it obviously the European solution since they wouldn't try to flood more guns on society to keep gun violence down. In the US we have had 240+ mass shooting events already this year. Every mass shooting is just another reason to increase guns and gun violence to no end.


How many have they had in England? Germany or France?

And more...

For 20 years now, a well-meaning law professor has been peddling the fiction that the Second Amendment – guaranteeing the right of Americans to keep and bear arms – was adopted to protect slavery. He first proposed this in a 1998 law review article and trotted it out again in a recent New York Times op-ed.

The trouble is: It’s untrue. Not a single one of America’s founders is known to have suggested such a purpose.

When the Redcoats came to disarm the colonists, the American patriots relied on the right to “have arms for their Defense,” as stated in the English Declaration of Rights of 1689.

In 1776, Pennsylvania declared: “That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves, and the state.” Vermont copied that language in its constitution, which explicitly abolished slavery. Massachusetts and North Carolina adopted their own versions.

When the states debated adoption of the Constitution without a bill of rights in 1787-88, Samuel Adams proposed the right to bear arms in Massachusetts’s ratification convention. The Dissent of the Minority did so in Pennsylvania, and the entire New Hampshire convention demanded recognition of the right.

There was no connection to slavery in any of these historical antecedents.

In his articles, Professor Carl T. Bogus of Roger Williams University speculates that George Mason’s and Patrick Henry’s demands in the Virginia ratification convention could have been motivated to protect slavery. Not so.

Mason recalled that “when the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised … to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”

And Patrick Henry implored: “The great object is, that every man be armed.” The ensuing debate concerned defense against tyranny and invasion – not slavery.

New York, North Carolina and Rhode Island joined in the demand for what became the Second Amendment. The right to bear arms had universal support.

It was the denial of the right of all “the people” to bear arms that supported slavery. The Supreme Court’s notorious Dred Scott decision held that African-Americans could not be regarded as citizens, for otherwise they could hold political meetings and “keep and carry arms wherever they went.” Frederick Douglass advocated Second Amendment rights for all, and Sojourner Truth carried guns in helping slaves to escape.

The Second Amendment had nothing to do with slavery

For 20 years now, a well-meaning law professor has been peddling the fiction that the Second Amendment – guaranteeing the right of Americans to keep and bear arms – was adopted to protect slavery.

www.foxnews.com

But....But....you said the Right to bear arms is only 10 years old.........

When slavery was abolished, the Southern states prohibited blacks from firearm possession. Congress countered with the Freedmen’s Bureau Act of 1866, which protected “the constitutional right to bear arms,” without distinction of color.

A major impetus for adoption of the 14th Amendment was to protect this right from state violation.

Next...you guys are going to say that the 1st Amendment protection of Freedom of Speech was created to support slavery...that the 5th Amendment was created to support slavery.....

Re-writing history is a talent that left wingers have...by destroying the truth of the past, they plan on controlling the future...

The Continental Army won our revolution with help from the French Navy.

A question for you, did southern states send their militia's to fight for our break from Britain?

When slavery was abolished, the Southern states prohibited blacks from firearm possession. Congress countered with the Freedmen’s Bureau Act of 1866, which protected “the constitutional right to bear arms,” without distinction of color.

Gun Control is racist......and has been used by mass murdering governments since the creation of firearms.......slaves don't get to own guns........this is why the left wants to get rid of guns..

 

[2aguy]

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....

Are military defensive gun uses really applicable to any argument about domestic violence?

You're desperate. Delicious.

You are an idiot......civilian defensive gun uses are the only ones the studies I posted examined.....military and police were kept out of those studies......

Do your studies include the racial aspect of slavery on the 2nd amendment?

If not, why?

You mean that gun control was one of the first sets of racist laws that we had, meant to keep blacks and indians from owning guns.....you that racial aspect of gun control and the 2nd Amendment?

That the Right to keep and Bear arms is the one thing that keeps people of all races free from a racist, oppressive government?

Very simple question...if you support the victims in Europe simply enduring the attacks......the rapes, beatings, knifings, robberies and murders........since you do not want civilians to have guns, only criminals and the government.....

What do you want the woman who was brutally beaten, stabbed and had two of her teeth pulled out by her ex-husband, who was already on a restraining order.....to do to stop the attack.....?

The woman who was violently gang raped by a group of men in the London park....what do you want her to do to keep from being violently gang raped again?

Please answer.....be brave.....

I have built a time machine....I offer you the opportunity to go back in time and to the scenes of the crimes I posted...the woman facing the 2 men who also had a baseball bat, who pulled out her gun and the two guys ran away.....and the woman who was attacked in the parking garage, who was stabbed repeatedly until she managed to get her gun and shoot him, stopping the attack and saving her life......

Now...with my time machine...you can sneak back and take those guns away from those women before the attacks...they will not have those guns.....

Will you take those guns away from those women.....before the attacks......or not?

The 2nd amendment was a concern to southern states not as a means for gun control as both Native-Americans and African-Americans were not allowed to own guns. The second amendment was for militias to put down any uprisings by either of those groups.

BTW the "right to bare" arms as we have now has only been around for about 10 years.

To answer your strawman question, it obviously the European solution since they wouldn't try to flood more guns on society to keep gun violence down. In the US we have had 240+ mass shooting events already this year. Every mass shooting is just another reason to increase guns and gun violence to no end.


How many have they had in England? Germany or France?

And more...

For 20 years now, a well-meaning law professor has been peddling the fiction that the Second Amendment – guaranteeing the right of Americans to keep and bear arms – was adopted to protect slavery. He first proposed this in a 1998 law review article and trotted it out again in a recent New York Times op-ed.

The trouble is: It’s untrue. Not a single one of America’s founders is known to have suggested such a purpose.

When the Redcoats came to disarm the colonists, the American patriots relied on the right to “have arms for their Defense,” as stated in the English Declaration of Rights of 1689.

In 1776, Pennsylvania declared: “That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves, and the state.” Vermont copied that language in its constitution, which explicitly abolished slavery. Massachusetts and North Carolina adopted their own versions.

When the states debated adoption of the Constitution without a bill of rights in 1787-88, Samuel Adams proposed the right to bear arms in Massachusetts’s ratification convention. The Dissent of the Minority did so in Pennsylvania, and the entire New Hampshire convention demanded recognition of the right.

There was no connection to slavery in any of these historical antecedents.

In his articles, Professor Carl T. Bogus of Roger Williams University speculates that George Mason’s and Patrick Henry’s demands in the Virginia ratification convention could have been motivated to protect slavery. Not so.

Mason recalled that “when the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised … to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”

And Patrick Henry implored: “The great object is, that every man be armed.” The ensuing debate concerned defense against tyranny and invasion – not slavery.

New York, North Carolina and Rhode Island joined in the demand for what became the Second Amendment. The right to bear arms had universal support.

It was the denial of the right of all “the people” to bear arms that supported slavery. The Supreme Court’s notorious Dred Scott decision held that African-Americans could not be regarded as citizens, for otherwise they could hold political meetings and “keep and carry arms wherever they went.” Frederick Douglass advocated Second Amendment rights for all, and Sojourner Truth carried guns in helping slaves to escape.

The Second Amendment had nothing to do with slavery

For 20 years now, a well-meaning law professor has been peddling the fiction that the Second Amendment – guaranteeing the right of Americans to keep and bear arms – was adopted to protect slavery.

www.foxnews.com

But....But....you said the Right to bear arms is only 10 years old.........

When slavery was abolished, the Southern states prohibited blacks from firearm possession. Congress countered with the Freedmen’s Bureau Act of 1866, which protected “the constitutional right to bear arms,” without distinction of color.

A major impetus for adoption of the 14th Amendment was to protect this right from state violation.

Next...you guys are going to say that the 1st Amendment protection of Freedom of Speech was created to support slavery...that the 5th Amendment was created to support slavery.....

Re-writing history is a talent that left wingers have...by destroying the truth of the past, they plan on controlling the future...

The Continental Army won our revolution with help from the French Navy.

A question for you, did southern states send their militia's to fight for our break from Britain?

When slavery was abolished, the Southern states prohibited blacks from firearm possession. Congress countered with the Freedmen’s Bureau Act of 1866, which protected “the constitutional right to bear arms,” without distinction of color.

Gun Control is racist......and has been used by mass murdering governments since the creation of firearms.......slaves don't get to own guns........this is why the left wants to get rid of guns..

What that quote should actually say......to be even more accurate...

The democrat party, in control of the Southern states, used gun control to keep blacks from owning guns...so that when the kkk, created by members of the democrat party, attacked freed blacks, they would not be able to defend themselves.....

Gun control in America is racist......it was a tool of the democrat party to murder and opress freed blacks....

 

[2aguy]

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....

Are military defensive gun uses really applicable to any argument about domestic violence?

You're desperate. Delicious.

You are an idiot......civilian defensive gun uses are the only ones the studies I posted examined.....military and police were kept out of those studies......

Do your studies include the racial aspect of slavery on the 2nd amendment?

If not, why?

You mean that gun control was one of the first sets of racist laws that we had, meant to keep blacks and indians from owning guns.....you that racial aspect of gun control and the 2nd Amendment?

That the Right to keep and Bear arms is the one thing that keeps people of all races free from a racist, oppressive government?

Very simple question...if you support the victims in Europe simply enduring the attacks......the rapes, beatings, knifings, robberies and murders........since you do not want civilians to have guns, only criminals and the government.....

What do you want the woman who was brutally beaten, stabbed and had two of her teeth pulled out by her ex-husband, who was already on a restraining order.....to do to stop the attack.....?

The woman who was violently gang raped by a group of men in the London park....what do you want her to do to keep from being violently gang raped again?

Please answer.....be brave.....

I have built a time machine....I offer you the opportunity to go back in time and to the scenes of the crimes I posted...the woman facing the 2 men who also had a baseball bat, who pulled out her gun and the two guys ran away.....and the woman who was attacked in the parking garage, who was stabbed repeatedly until she managed to get her gun and shoot him, stopping the attack and saving her life......

Now...with my time machine...you can sneak back and take those guns away from those women before the attacks...they will not have those guns.....

Will you take those guns away from those women.....before the attacks......or not?

The 2nd amendment was a concern to southern states not as a means for gun control as both Native-Americans and African-Americans were not allowed to own guns. The second amendment was for militias to put down any uprisings by either of those groups.

BTW the "right to bare" arms as we have now has only been around for about 10 years.

To answer your strawman question, it obviously the European solution since they wouldn't try to flood more guns on society to keep gun violence down. In the US we have had 240+ mass shooting events already this year. Every mass shooting is just another reason to increase guns and gun violence to no end.


How many have they had in England? Germany or France?

And more...

For 20 years now, a well-meaning law professor has been peddling the fiction that the Second Amendment – guaranteeing the right of Americans to keep and bear arms – was adopted to protect slavery. He first proposed this in a 1998 law review article and trotted it out again in a recent New York Times op-ed.

The trouble is: It’s untrue. Not a single one of America’s founders is known to have suggested such a purpose.

When the Redcoats came to disarm the colonists, the American patriots relied on the right to “have arms for their Defense,” as stated in the English Declaration of Rights of 1689.

In 1776, Pennsylvania declared: “That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves, and the state.” Vermont copied that language in its constitution, which explicitly abolished slavery. Massachusetts and North Carolina adopted their own versions.

When the states debated adoption of the Constitution without a bill of rights in 1787-88, Samuel Adams proposed the right to bear arms in Massachusetts’s ratification convention. The Dissent of the Minority did so in Pennsylvania, and the entire New Hampshire convention demanded recognition of the right.

There was no connection to slavery in any of these historical antecedents.

In his articles, Professor Carl T. Bogus of Roger Williams University speculates that George Mason’s and Patrick Henry’s demands in the Virginia ratification convention could have been motivated to protect slavery. Not so.

Mason recalled that “when the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised … to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”

And Patrick Henry implored: “The great object is, that every man be armed.” The ensuing debate concerned defense against tyranny and invasion – not slavery.

New York, North Carolina and Rhode Island joined in the demand for what became the Second Amendment. The right to bear arms had universal support.

It was the denial of the right of all “the people” to bear arms that supported slavery. The Supreme Court’s notorious Dred Scott decision held that African-Americans could not be regarded as citizens, for otherwise they could hold political meetings and “keep and carry arms wherever they went.” Frederick Douglass advocated Second Amendment rights for all, and Sojourner Truth carried guns in helping slaves to escape.

The Second Amendment had nothing to do with slavery

For 20 years now, a well-meaning law professor has been peddling the fiction that the Second Amendment – guaranteeing the right of Americans to keep and bear arms – was adopted to protect slavery.

www.foxnews.com

But....But....you said the Right to bear arms is only 10 years old.........

When slavery was abolished, the Southern states prohibited blacks from firearm possession. Congress countered with the Freedmen’s Bureau Act of 1866, which protected “the constitutional right to bear arms,” without distinction of color.

A major impetus for adoption of the 14th Amendment was to protect this right from state violation.

Next...you guys are going to say that the 1st Amendment protection of Freedom of Speech was created to support slavery...that the 5th Amendment was created to support slavery.....

Re-writing history is a talent that left wingers have...by destroying the truth of the past, they plan on controlling the future...

The Continental Army won our revolution with help from the French Navy.

A question for you, did southern states send their militia's to fight for our break from Britain?

A little more history......on why the Americans wanted to codify the Right to Keep and Bear arms in the New Constitution...

The first acts of gun confiscation in America....

Fearing war, Massachusetts military Gov. Thomas Gage started seizing arms from militias. On Sept. 1, 1774, his men seized gunpowder in Somerville. In February 1775, he sent Colonel Leslie with the 64th Regiment to seize arms in Salem. This nearly started the war, but cooler heads prevailed; Leslie left empty-handed.

But the third attempt to seize arms didn’t go so smoothly. The night of April 18, 1775, Gage sent a 700-man army to seize arms at Concord. Paul Revere and others rode to give warning. While Dr. Prescott made it to Concord, Paul got caught just past Lexington and spent his night listening to redcoats call him “rebel” between threats to “blow (his) brains out.” By 4:30 a.m., over 60 colonial militiamen awaited the approaching army on Lexington’s Green. “Stand your ground; don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they want a war, let it begin here,” militia Capt. John Parker hollered. The redcoats then arrived. “Ye rebels, disperse!” called out a British officer. Then — boom. A gun went off. Redcoat misfire? Nervous Lexington militiaman? We’ll never know, but the spooked redcoats unleashed a deadly volley before continuing their march to Concord — to seize arms.

Op-ed: The Second Amendment was not about preserving slavery

Celebrities and former Utah state Sen. Robert C. Steiner have asserted that the Second Amendment’s purpose was to enable slave-state militias to maintain slavery. It wasn’t.

www.deseret.com

 

[2aguy]

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....

Are military defensive gun uses really applicable to any argument about domestic violence?

You're desperate. Delicious.

You are an idiot......civilian defensive gun uses are the only ones the studies I posted examined.....military and police were kept out of those studies......

Do your studies include the racial aspect of slavery on the 2nd amendment?

If not, why?

You mean that gun control was one of the first sets of racist laws that we had, meant to keep blacks and indians from owning guns.....you that racial aspect of gun control and the 2nd Amendment?

That the Right to keep and Bear arms is the one thing that keeps people of all races free from a racist, oppressive government?

Very simple question...if you support the victims in Europe simply enduring the attacks......the rapes, beatings, knifings, robberies and murders........since you do not want civilians to have guns, only criminals and the government.....

What do you want the woman who was brutally beaten, stabbed and had two of her teeth pulled out by her ex-husband, who was already on a restraining order.....to do to stop the attack.....?

The woman who was violently gang raped by a group of men in the London park....what do you want her to do to keep from being violently gang raped again?

Please answer.....be brave.....

I have built a time machine....I offer you the opportunity to go back in time and to the scenes of the crimes I posted...the woman facing the 2 men who also had a baseball bat, who pulled out her gun and the two guys ran away.....and the woman who was attacked in the parking garage, who was stabbed repeatedly until she managed to get her gun and shoot him, stopping the attack and saving her life......

Now...with my time machine...you can sneak back and take those guns away from those women before the attacks...they will not have those guns.....

Will you take those guns away from those women.....before the attacks......or not?

The 2nd amendment was a concern to southern states not as a means for gun control as both Native-Americans and African-Americans were not allowed to own guns. The second amendment was for militias to put down any uprisings by either of those groups.

BTW the "right to bare" arms as we have now has only been around for about 10 years.

To answer your strawman question, it obviously the European solution since they wouldn't try to flood more guns on society to keep gun violence down. In the US we have had 240+ mass shooting events already this year. Every mass shooting is just another reason to increase guns and gun violence to no end.


How many have they had in England? Germany or France?

You know that that is a lie...right? That the 2nd Amendment was ...Muh Slavery....is a lie...right?

You left wingers will make up anything to get your way.......

We have not had 240 mass public shootings this year...that is a lie.....we had 1 in 2020, 10 in 2019, and 12 in 2018 using the actual definition of mass public shootings....

The 2nd Amendment, like the other Amendments were codified in the Bill of Rights specifically because the Founders knew that people like you would come along...many of the Founders didn't think we needed a Bill of Rights, since the Constitution itself limited the powers of the Federal Government....wiser members of the Founders understood human nature and human history, so they codified Existing Rights....Rights that were not created by the Constitution or Dependent on the Constitution for their existence.....all Americans were endowed with these Rights by God.....

So the 2nd Amendment predated slavery....as did the other 10


After the British attempted gun control at the beginning of the Revolutionary War, the wiser Founders realized they had to ensure the government could not take guns away from citizens...hence, they codified the existing Right, knowing people like you would come along and try to pretend it didn't exist....

If the right to bear arms was intended to preserve slavery, why did civil-rights leaders insist that black Americans should be armed to protect themselves?
---

This is wishful thinking. The Second is an attempt — much like the 1619 Project — to reimagine history in purely racial terms. The result is tendentious polemic that suffers not only from a paucity of historical evidence, but from a dishonest rendering of the facts we do know.
-----

Indeed, Anderson ignores the tradition of militias in English common law — codifying the “ancient and indubitable” right in the 1689 English Bill of Rights — which had nothing to do with chattel slavery. Anderson ignores the fact that nearly every intellectual, political, and military leader of the Founding generation — many of whom had no connection to slavery — stressed the importance of self-defense in entirely different contexts.

It was slavery skeptic John Adams, in his 1770 defense of Captain Thomas Preston, one of the soldiers responsible for the Boston Massacre, who argued that even British soldiers had an inherent right to defend themselves from mobs. “Here every private person is authorized to arm himself, and on the strength of this authority, I do not deny the inhabitants had a right to arm themselves,” he noted. When Pennsylvania became the first colony to explicitly guarantee the right to bear arms, it was Benjamin Franklin, by then an abolitionist, who presided over the conference. It was the anti-slavery Samuel Adams who proposed that the Constitution never be used to “authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.” In the writings and speeches of nearly all American Founders, the threat of disarmament was a casus belli.
----
Indeed, Anderson ignores the tradition of militias in English common law — codifying the “ancient and indubitable” right in the 1689 English Bill of Rights — which had nothing to do with chattel slavery. Anderson ignores the fact that nearly every intellectual, political, and military leader of the Founding generation — many of whom had no connection to slavery — stressed the importance of self-defense in entirely different contexts.
----
Many anti-Federalists believed that enshrining these rights on paper would lead to future abuses. Of course, Southerners didn’t need permission to suppress black slave revolts, anyway. They had done so on numerous occasions before the nation’s founding.
----
Yet, by 1791, of the four jurisdictions that had written their own Second Amendments, three of them — Vermont, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania — had already abolished slavery.

When Vermont authored its first constitution in 1777, in fact, it protected the right to keep and bear arms in the same document that it banned slavery.

The 1619 Project Comes for the Second Amendment | National Review

If the right to bear arms was intended to preserve slavery, why did civil-rights leaders insist that black Americans should be armed to protect themselves?

www.nationalreview.com

Your dishonesty is typical of anti-gun extremists....

This is how far anti-gun extremists will go to lie about our history and the 2nd Amendment...

But to make the claim that the Second Amendment was added to the Constitution to placate slave owners, Anderson is impelled to take numerous shortcuts. Take, for example, this pivotal sentence in the book:

“In short, James Madison, the Virginian, knew ‘that the militia’s prime function in his state, and throughout the south, was slave control.’”

The author frames the quote as if Madison, the author of the Bill of Rights, had said it himself — or, if we’re being generous, that it’s a fair representation of his views.

When you follow the book’s endnote, however, it leads to a 1998 paper titled “The Hidden History of the Second Amendment,” written by anti-gun activist Carl T. Bogus, who shares Anderson’s thesis.

It is his quote. Nowhere does Bogus offer any sample of Madison declaring, or even implying, that slave control was the impetus for the Second Amendment.

Then you have actual Blacks at the time and what they thought of the Right to keep and bear arms...

Civil-rights leaders of the 19th and early 20th centuries also lamented that the right to self-defense was denied them. Fredrick Douglass reacted to the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 by editorializing that the best remedy would be “a good revolver, a steady hand, and a determination to shoot down any man attempting to kidnap.”

The late-19th-century civil-rights leader Ida B. Wells argued that one of the lessons of the post–Civil War era, “which every Afro American should ponder well, is that a Winchester rifle should have a place of honor in every black home, and it should be used for that protection which the law refuses to give.” T. Thomas Fortune, another black civil-rights activist of the era, argued that it was with a Winchester that the black man could “defend his home and children and wife.”

Stop the blather and educate yourself.

Opinion | Was Slavery a Factor in the Second Amendment? (Published 2018)

The 2nd Amendment....prohibits slavery, it does not protect slavery....

Is the text of the Second Amendment contrary to slavery? So argued the great abolitionist Lysander Spooner in his 1845 book The Unconstitutionality of Slavery. When the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1866-68, the Amendment's supporters agreed with Spooner that if the Second Amendment were enforced, slavery would be impossible.

Author of important books and pamphlets on scores of subjects, Lysander Spooner's greatest passion was antislavery. A radical theorist, Spooner was a hero to many antislavery activists, including John Brown, whose raid on Harper's Ferry was inspired by reading Spooner. He was "pre-eminent in the group of abolitionists who developed the constitutional law now incorporated in the Fourteenth Amendment." C. Shively, Introduction to 4 Lysander Spooner, Collected Works 11 (1971). For more, see Randy E. Barnett, Whence Comes Section One? The Abolitionist Origins of the Fourteenth Amendment, 3 J. Legal Analysis 165 (2011).
-----

Spooner used the Second Amendment to argue that slavery was unconstitutional. Since a slave is a person who is (or can be) forbidden to possess arms, and the Second Amendment guarantees that all persons can possess arms, no person in the United States can be a slave.
------
The right of a man "to keep and bear arms," is a right palpably inconsistent with the idea of his being a slave. Yet the right is secured as effectually to those whom the States presume to call slaves, as to any whom the States condescend to acknowledge free.

Under this provision any man has a right either to give or sell arms to those persons whom the States call slaves; and there is no constitutional power, in either the national or State governments, that can punish him for so doing; or that can take those arms from the slaves; or that can make it criminal for the slaves to use them, if, from the inefficiency of the laws, it should become necessary for them to do so, in defence of their own lives or liberties; for this constitutional right to keep arms implies the constitutional right to use them, if need be, for the defence of one's liberty or life. (Id. at 97-98.)

Does the Second Amendment prohibit slavery?

Is the text of the Second Amendment contrary to slavery? So argued the great abolitionist Lysander Spooner in his 1845 book The Unconstitutionality of

reason.com

As anyone with a speck of common sense can see....the 2nd Amendment.....which guarantees to all citizens the Right to keep and bear arms is a Right that does not support slavery, it is a Right that prevents it..

But in "New Speak," where War is Peace, Peace is War....The Right to own weapons is a Right to keep slaves.....

Madness....

 

[otto105]

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....

Are military defensive gun uses really applicable to any argument about domestic violence?

You're desperate. Delicious.

You are an idiot......civilian defensive gun uses are the only ones the studies I posted examined.....military and police were kept out of those studies......

Do your studies include the racial aspect of slavery on the 2nd amendment?

If not, why?

You mean that gun control was one of the first sets of racist laws that we had, meant to keep blacks and indians from owning guns.....you that racial aspect of gun control and the 2nd Amendment?

That the Right to keep and Bear arms is the one thing that keeps people of all races free from a racist, oppressive government?

Very simple question...if you support the victims in Europe simply enduring the attacks......the rapes, beatings, knifings, robberies and murders........since you do not want civilians to have guns, only criminals and the government.....

What do you want the woman who was brutally beaten, stabbed and had two of her teeth pulled out by her ex-husband, who was already on a restraining order.....to do to stop the attack.....?

The woman who was violently gang raped by a group of men in the London park....what do you want her to do to keep from being violently gang raped again?

Please answer.....be brave.....

I have built a time machine....I offer you the opportunity to go back in time and to the scenes of the crimes I posted...the woman facing the 2 men who also had a baseball bat, who pulled out her gun and the two guys ran away.....and the woman who was attacked in the parking garage, who was stabbed repeatedly until she managed to get her gun and shoot him, stopping the attack and saving her life......

Now...with my time machine...you can sneak back and take those guns away from those women before the attacks...they will not have those guns.....

Will you take those guns away from those women.....before the attacks......or not?

The 2nd amendment was a concern to southern states not as a means for gun control as both Native-Americans and African-Americans were not allowed to own guns. The second amendment was for militias to put down any uprisings by either of those groups.

BTW the "right to bare" arms as we have now has only been around for about 10 years.

To answer your strawman question, it obviously the European solution since they wouldn't try to flood more guns on society to keep gun violence down. In the US we have had 240+ mass shooting events already this year. Every mass shooting is just another reason to increase guns and gun violence to no end.


How many have they had in England? Germany or France?

You know that that is a lie...right? That the 2nd Amendment was ...Muh Slavery....is a lie...right?

You left wingers will make up anything to get your way.......

We have not had 240 mass public shootings this year...that is a lie.....we had 1 in 2020, 10 in 2019, and 12 in 2018 using the actual definition of mass public shootings....

The 2nd Amendment, like the other Amendments were codified in the Bill of Rights specifically because the Founders knew that people like you would come along...many of the Founders didn't think we needed a Bill of Rights, since the Constitution itself limited the powers of the Federal Government....wiser members of the Founders understood human nature and human history, so they codified Existing Rights....Rights that were not created by the Constitution or Dependent on the Constitution for their existence.....all Americans were endowed with these Rights by God.....

So the 2nd Amendment predated slavery....as did the other 10


After the British attempted gun control at the beginning of the Revolutionary War, the wiser Founders realized they had to ensure the government could not take guns away from citizens...hence, they codified the existing Right, knowing people like you would come along and try to pretend it didn't exist....

If the right to bear arms was intended to preserve slavery, why did civil-rights leaders insist that black Americans should be armed to protect themselves?
---

This is wishful thinking. The Second is an attempt — much like the 1619 Project — to reimagine history in purely racial terms. The result is tendentious polemic that suffers not only from a paucity of historical evidence, but from a dishonest rendering of the facts we do know.
-----

Indeed, Anderson ignores the tradition of militias in English common law — codifying the “ancient and indubitable” right in the 1689 English Bill of Rights — which had nothing to do with chattel slavery. Anderson ignores the fact that nearly every intellectual, political, and military leader of the Founding generation — many of whom had no connection to slavery — stressed the importance of self-defense in entirely different contexts.

It was slavery skeptic John Adams, in his 1770 defense of Captain Thomas Preston, one of the soldiers responsible for the Boston Massacre, who argued that even British soldiers had an inherent right to defend themselves from mobs. “Here every private person is authorized to arm himself, and on the strength of this authority, I do not deny the inhabitants had a right to arm themselves,” he noted. When Pennsylvania became the first colony to explicitly guarantee the right to bear arms, it was Benjamin Franklin, by then an abolitionist, who presided over the conference. It was the anti-slavery Samuel Adams who proposed that the Constitution never be used to “authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.” In the writings and speeches of nearly all American Founders, the threat of disarmament was a casus belli.
----
Indeed, Anderson ignores the tradition of militias in English common law — codifying the “ancient and indubitable” right in the 1689 English Bill of Rights — which had nothing to do with chattel slavery. Anderson ignores the fact that nearly every intellectual, political, and military leader of the Founding generation — many of whom had no connection to slavery — stressed the importance of self-defense in entirely different contexts.
----
Many anti-Federalists believed that enshrining these rights on paper would lead to future abuses. Of course, Southerners didn’t need permission to suppress black slave revolts, anyway. They had done so on numerous occasions before the nation’s founding.
----
Yet, by 1791, of the four jurisdictions that had written their own Second Amendments, three of them — Vermont, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania — had already abolished slavery.

When Vermont authored its first constitution in 1777, in fact, it protected the right to keep and bear arms in the same document that it banned slavery.

The 1619 Project Comes for the Second Amendment | National Review

If the right to bear arms was intended to preserve slavery, why did civil-rights leaders insist that black Americans should be armed to protect themselves?

www.nationalreview.com

Your dishonesty is typical of anti-gun extremists....

This is how far anti-gun extremists will go to lie about our history and the 2nd Amendment...

But to make the claim that the Second Amendment was added to the Constitution to placate slave owners, Anderson is impelled to take numerous shortcuts. Take, for example, this pivotal sentence in the book:

“In short, James Madison, the Virginian, knew ‘that the militia’s prime function in his state, and throughout the south, was slave control.’”

The author frames the quote as if Madison, the author of the Bill of Rights, had said it himself — or, if we’re being generous, that it’s a fair representation of his views.

When you follow the book’s endnote, however, it leads to a 1998 paper titled “The Hidden History of the Second Amendment,” written by anti-gun activist Carl T. Bogus, who shares Anderson’s thesis.

It is his quote. Nowhere does Bogus offer any sample of Madison declaring, or even implying, that slave control was the impetus for the Second Amendment.

Then you have actual Blacks at the time and what they thought of the Right to keep and bear arms...

Civil-rights leaders of the 19th and early 20th centuries also lamented that the right to self-defense was denied them. Fredrick Douglass reacted to the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 by editorializing that the best remedy would be “a good revolver, a steady hand, and a determination to shoot down any man attempting to kidnap.”

The late-19th-century civil-rights leader Ida B. Wells argued that one of the lessons of the post–Civil War era, “which every Afro American should ponder well, is that a Winchester rifle should have a place of honor in every black home, and it should be used for that protection which the law refuses to give.” T. Thomas Fortune, another black civil-rights activist of the era, argued that it was with a Winchester that the black man could “defend his home and children and wife.”

Stop the blather and educate yourself.

Opinion | Was Slavery a Factor in the Second Amendment? (Published 2018)

The 2nd Amendment....prohibits slavery, it does not protect slavery....

Is the text of the Second Amendment contrary to slavery? So argued the great abolitionist Lysander Spooner in his 1845 book The Unconstitutionality of Slavery. When the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1866-68, the Amendment's supporters agreed with Spooner that if the Second Amendment were enforced, slavery would be impossible.

Author of important books and pamphlets on scores of subjects, Lysander Spooner's greatest passion was antislavery. A radical theorist, Spooner was a hero to many antislavery activists, including John Brown, whose raid on Harper's Ferry was inspired by reading Spooner. He was "pre-eminent in the group of abolitionists who developed the constitutional law now incorporated in the Fourteenth Amendment." C. Shively, Introduction to 4 Lysander Spooner, Collected Works 11 (1971). For more, see Randy E. Barnett, Whence Comes Section One? The Abolitionist Origins of the Fourteenth Amendment, 3 J. Legal Analysis 165 (2011).
-----

Spooner used the Second Amendment to argue that slavery was unconstitutional. Since a slave is a person who is (or can be) forbidden to possess arms, and the Second Amendment guarantees that all persons can possess arms, no person in the United States can be a slave.
------
The right of a man "to keep and bear arms," is a right palpably inconsistent with the idea of his being a slave. Yet the right is secured as effectually to those whom the States presume to call slaves, as to any whom the States condescend to acknowledge free.

Under this provision any man has a right either to give or sell arms to those persons whom the States call slaves; and there is no constitutional power, in either the national or State governments, that can punish him for so doing; or that can take those arms from the slaves; or that can make it criminal for the slaves to use them, if, from the inefficiency of the laws, it should become necessary for them to do so, in defence of their own lives or liberties; for this constitutional right to keep arms implies the constitutional right to use them, if need be, for the defence of one's liberty or life. (Id. at 97-98.)

Does the Second Amendment prohibit slavery?

Is the text of the Second Amendment contrary to slavery? So argued the great abolitionist Lysander Spooner in his 1845 book The Unconstitutionality of

reason.com

As anyone with a speck of common sense can see....the 2nd Amendment.....which guarantees to all citizens the Right to keep and bear arms is a Right that does not support slavery, it is a Right that prevents it..

But in "New Speak," where War is Peace, Peace is War....The Right to own weapons is a Right to keep slaves.....

Madness....

....as part of a well regulated militia....to keep slave revolts down... the right to bare that arm ....

 

[2aguy]

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....

Are military defensive gun uses really applicable to any argument about domestic violence?

You're desperate. Delicious.

You are an idiot......civilian defensive gun uses are the only ones the studies I posted examined.....military and police were kept out of those studies......

Do your studies include the racial aspect of slavery on the 2nd amendment?

If not, why?

You mean that gun control was one of the first sets of racist laws that we had, meant to keep blacks and indians from owning guns.....you that racial aspect of gun control and the 2nd Amendment?

That the Right to keep and Bear arms is the one thing that keeps people of all races free from a racist, oppressive government?

Very simple question...if you support the victims in Europe simply enduring the attacks......the rapes, beatings, knifings, robberies and murders........since you do not want civilians to have guns, only criminals and the government.....

What do you want the woman who was brutally beaten, stabbed and had two of her teeth pulled out by her ex-husband, who was already on a restraining order.....to do to stop the attack.....?

The woman who was violently gang raped by a group of men in the London park....what do you want her to do to keep from being violently gang raped again?

Please answer.....be brave.....

I have built a time machine....I offer you the opportunity to go back in time and to the scenes of the crimes I posted...the woman facing the 2 men who also had a baseball bat, who pulled out her gun and the two guys ran away.....and the woman who was attacked in the parking garage, who was stabbed repeatedly until she managed to get her gun and shoot him, stopping the attack and saving her life......

Now...with my time machine...you can sneak back and take those guns away from those women before the attacks...they will not have those guns.....

Will you take those guns away from those women.....before the attacks......or not?

The 2nd amendment was a concern to southern states not as a means for gun control as both Native-Americans and African-Americans were not allowed to own guns. The second amendment was for militias to put down any uprisings by either of those groups.

BTW the "right to bare" arms as we have now has only been around for about 10 years.

To answer your strawman question, it obviously the European solution since they wouldn't try to flood more guns on society to keep gun violence down. In the US we have had 240+ mass shooting events already this year. Every mass shooting is just another reason to increase guns and gun violence to no end.


How many have they had in England? Germany or France?

You know that that is a lie...right? That the 2nd Amendment was ...Muh Slavery....is a lie...right?

You left wingers will make up anything to get your way.......

We have not had 240 mass public shootings this year...that is a lie.....we had 1 in 2020, 10 in 2019, and 12 in 2018 using the actual definition of mass public shootings....

The 2nd Amendment, like the other Amendments were codified in the Bill of Rights specifically because the Founders knew that people like you would come along...many of the Founders didn't think we needed a Bill of Rights, since the Constitution itself limited the powers of the Federal Government....wiser members of the Founders understood human nature and human history, so they codified Existing Rights....Rights that were not created by the Constitution or Dependent on the Constitution for their existence.....all Americans were endowed with these Rights by God.....

So the 2nd Amendment predated slavery....as did the other 10


After the British attempted gun control at the beginning of the Revolutionary War, the wiser Founders realized they had to ensure the government could not take guns away from citizens...hence, they codified the existing Right, knowing people like you would come along and try to pretend it didn't exist....

If the right to bear arms was intended to preserve slavery, why did civil-rights leaders insist that black Americans should be armed to protect themselves?
---

This is wishful thinking. The Second is an attempt — much like the 1619 Project — to reimagine history in purely racial terms. The result is tendentious polemic that suffers not only from a paucity of historical evidence, but from a dishonest rendering of the facts we do know.
-----

Indeed, Anderson ignores the tradition of militias in English common law — codifying the “ancient and indubitable” right in the 1689 English Bill of Rights — which had nothing to do with chattel slavery. Anderson ignores the fact that nearly every intellectual, political, and military leader of the Founding generation — many of whom had no connection to slavery — stressed the importance of self-defense in entirely different contexts.

It was slavery skeptic John Adams, in his 1770 defense of Captain Thomas Preston, one of the soldiers responsible for the Boston Massacre, who argued that even British soldiers had an inherent right to defend themselves from mobs. “Here every private person is authorized to arm himself, and on the strength of this authority, I do not deny the inhabitants had a right to arm themselves,” he noted. When Pennsylvania became the first colony to explicitly guarantee the right to bear arms, it was Benjamin Franklin, by then an abolitionist, who presided over the conference. It was the anti-slavery Samuel Adams who proposed that the Constitution never be used to “authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.” In the writings and speeches of nearly all American Founders, the threat of disarmament was a casus belli.
----
Indeed, Anderson ignores the tradition of militias in English common law — codifying the “ancient and indubitable” right in the 1689 English Bill of Rights — which had nothing to do with chattel slavery. Anderson ignores the fact that nearly every intellectual, political, and military leader of the Founding generation — many of whom had no connection to slavery — stressed the importance of self-defense in entirely different contexts.
----
Many anti-Federalists believed that enshrining these rights on paper would lead to future abuses. Of course, Southerners didn’t need permission to suppress black slave revolts, anyway. They had done so on numerous occasions before the nation’s founding.
----
Yet, by 1791, of the four jurisdictions that had written their own Second Amendments, three of them — Vermont, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania — had already abolished slavery.

When Vermont authored its first constitution in 1777, in fact, it protected the right to keep and bear arms in the same document that it banned slavery.

The 1619 Project Comes for the Second Amendment | National Review

If the right to bear arms was intended to preserve slavery, why did civil-rights leaders insist that black Americans should be armed to protect themselves?

www.nationalreview.com

Your dishonesty is typical of anti-gun extremists....

This is how far anti-gun extremists will go to lie about our history and the 2nd Amendment...

But to make the claim that the Second Amendment was added to the Constitution to placate slave owners, Anderson is impelled to take numerous shortcuts. Take, for example, this pivotal sentence in the book:

“In short, James Madison, the Virginian, knew ‘that the militia’s prime function in his state, and throughout the south, was slave control.’”

The author frames the quote as if Madison, the author of the Bill of Rights, had said it himself — or, if we’re being generous, that it’s a fair representation of his views.

When you follow the book’s endnote, however, it leads to a 1998 paper titled “The Hidden History of the Second Amendment,” written by anti-gun activist Carl T. Bogus, who shares Anderson’s thesis.

It is his quote. Nowhere does Bogus offer any sample of Madison declaring, or even implying, that slave control was the impetus for the Second Amendment.

Then you have actual Blacks at the time and what they thought of the Right to keep and bear arms...

Civil-rights leaders of the 19th and early 20th centuries also lamented that the right to self-defense was denied them. Fredrick Douglass reacted to the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 by editorializing that the best remedy would be “a good revolver, a steady hand, and a determination to shoot down any man attempting to kidnap.”

The late-19th-century civil-rights leader Ida B. Wells argued that one of the lessons of the post–Civil War era, “which every Afro American should ponder well, is that a Winchester rifle should have a place of honor in every black home, and it should be used for that protection which the law refuses to give.” T. Thomas Fortune, another black civil-rights activist of the era, argued that it was with a Winchester that the black man could “defend his home and children and wife.”

Stop the blather and educate yourself.

Opinion | Was Slavery a Factor in the Second Amendment? (Published 2018)

The 2nd Amendment....prohibits slavery, it does not protect slavery....

Is the text of the Second Amendment contrary to slavery? So argued the great abolitionist Lysander Spooner in his 1845 book The Unconstitutionality of Slavery. When the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1866-68, the Amendment's supporters agreed with Spooner that if the Second Amendment were enforced, slavery would be impossible.

Author of important books and pamphlets on scores of subjects, Lysander Spooner's greatest passion was antislavery. A radical theorist, Spooner was a hero to many antislavery activists, including John Brown, whose raid on Harper's Ferry was inspired by reading Spooner. He was "pre-eminent in the group of abolitionists who developed the constitutional law now incorporated in the Fourteenth Amendment." C. Shively, Introduction to 4 Lysander Spooner, Collected Works 11 (1971). For more, see Randy E. Barnett, Whence Comes Section One? The Abolitionist Origins of the Fourteenth Amendment, 3 J. Legal Analysis 165 (2011).
-----

Spooner used the Second Amendment to argue that slavery was unconstitutional. Since a slave is a person who is (or can be) forbidden to possess arms, and the Second Amendment guarantees that all persons can possess arms, no person in the United States can be a slave.
------
The right of a man "to keep and bear arms," is a right palpably inconsistent with the idea of his being a slave. Yet the right is secured as effectually to those whom the States presume to call slaves, as to any whom the States condescend to acknowledge free.

Under this provision any man has a right either to give or sell arms to those persons whom the States call slaves; and there is no constitutional power, in either the national or State governments, that can punish him for so doing; or that can take those arms from the slaves; or that can make it criminal for the slaves to use them, if, from the inefficiency of the laws, it should become necessary for them to do so, in defence of their own lives or liberties; for this constitutional right to keep arms implies the constitutional right to use them, if need be, for the defence of one's liberty or life. (Id. at 97-98.)

Does the Second Amendment prohibit slavery?

Is the text of the Second Amendment contrary to slavery? So argued the great abolitionist Lysander Spooner in his 1845 book The Unconstitutionality of

reason.com

As anyone with a speck of common sense can see....the 2nd Amendment.....which guarantees to all citizens the Right to keep and bear arms is a Right that does not support slavery, it is a Right that prevents it..

But in "New Speak," where War is Peace, Peace is War....The Right to own weapons is a Right to keep slaves.....

Madness....

....as part of a well regulated militia....to keep slave revolts down... the right to bare that arm ....

You guys will do anything...

 

[candycorn]

Somehow me along with everyone I know have never used a gun in self defense--along with everyone they know as well. Allegedly, the 50,000,0000+ defensive gun uses have not taken place anywhere near me in my "democrat controlled cities". The OP herself says that they know of nobody who has used a gun to defend themselves during the alleged 30M+ gun uses that have happened during their time on the rock.

The case that you "need a gun to defend yourself" is weak.

 

[2aguy]

Somehow me along with everyone I know have never used a gun in self defense--along with everyone they know as well. Allegedly, the 50,000,0000+ defensive gun uses have not taken place anywhere near me in my "democrat controlled cities". The OP herself says that they know of nobody who has used a gun to defend themselves during the alleged 30M+ gun uses that have happened during their time on the rock.

The case that you "need a gun to defend yourself" is weak.

Except for the actual research.....

What do you want the woman who was brutally beaten, stabbed and had two of her teeth pulled out by her ex-husband, who was already on a restraining order.....to do to stop the attack.....? Her ex-husband gets out of jail in 4 years....

What should she do.......?

The woman who was violently gang raped by a group of men in the London park....what do you want her to do to keep from being violently gang raped again?

Please answer.....be brave.....

I have built a time machine....I offer you the opportunity to go back in time and to the scenes of the crimes I posted...the woman facing the 2 men who also had a baseball bat, who pulled out her gun and the two guys ran away.....and the woman who was attacked in the parking garage, who was stabbed repeatedly until she managed to get her gun and shoot him, stopping the attack and saving her life......

Now...with my time machine...you can sneak back and take those guns away from those women before the attacks...they will not have those guns.....

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....

Are military defensive gun uses really applicable to any argument about domestic violence?

You're desperate. Delicious.

You are an idiot......civilian defensive gun uses are the only ones the studies I posted examined.....military and police were kept out of those studies......

Do your studies include the racial aspect of slavery on the 2nd amendment?

If not, why?

You mean that gun control was one of the first sets of racist laws that we had, meant to keep blacks and indians from owning guns.....you that racial aspect of gun control and the 2nd Amendment?

That the Right to keep and Bear arms is the one thing that keeps people of all races free from a racist, oppressive government?

Very simple question...if you support the victims in Europe simply enduring the attacks......the rapes, beatings, knifings, robberies and murders........since you do not want civilians to have guns, only criminals and the government.....

What do you want the woman who was brutally beaten, stabbed and had two of her teeth pulled out by her ex-husband, who was already on a restraining order.....to do to stop the attack.....?

The woman who was violently gang raped by a group of men in the London park....what do you want her to do to keep from being violently gang raped again?

Please answer.....be brave.....

I have built a time machine....I offer you the opportunity to go back in time and to the scenes of the crimes I posted...the woman facing the 2 men who also had a baseball bat, who pulled out her gun and the two guys ran away.....and the woman who was attacked in the parking garage, who was stabbed repeatedly until she managed to get her gun and shoot him, stopping the attack and saving her life......

Now...with my time machine...you can sneak back and take those guns away from those women before the attacks...they will not have those guns.....

Will you take those guns away from those women.....before the attacks......or not?

The 2nd amendment was a concern to southern states not as a means for gun control as both Native-Americans and African-Americans were not allowed to own guns. The second amendment was for militias to put down any uprisings by either of those groups.

BTW the "right to bare" arms as we have now has only been around for about 10 years.

To answer your strawman question, it obviously the European solution since they wouldn't try to flood more guns on society to keep gun violence down. In the US we have had 240+ mass shooting events already this year. Every mass shooting is just another reason to increase guns and gun violence to no end.


How many have they had in England? Germany or France?

And more...

For 20 years now, a well-meaning law professor has been peddling the fiction that the Second Amendment – guaranteeing the right of Americans to keep and bear arms – was adopted to protect slavery. He first proposed this in a 1998 law review article and trotted it out again in a recent New York Times op-ed.

The trouble is: It’s untrue. Not a single one of America’s founders is known to have suggested such a purpose.

When the Redcoats came to disarm the colonists, the American patriots relied on the right to “have arms for their Defense,” as stated in the English Declaration of Rights of 1689.

In 1776, Pennsylvania declared: “That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves, and the state.” Vermont copied that language in its constitution, which explicitly abolished slavery. Massachusetts and North Carolina adopted their own versions.

When the states debated adoption of the Constitution without a bill of rights in 1787-88, Samuel Adams proposed the right to bear arms in Massachusetts’s ratification convention. The Dissent of the Minority did so in Pennsylvania, and the entire New Hampshire convention demanded recognition of the right.

There was no connection to slavery in any of these historical antecedents.

In his articles, Professor Carl T. Bogus of Roger Williams University speculates that George Mason’s and Patrick Henry’s demands in the Virginia ratification convention could have been motivated to protect slavery. Not so.

Mason recalled that “when the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised … to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”

And Patrick Henry implored: “The great object is, that every man be armed.” The ensuing debate concerned defense against tyranny and invasion – not slavery.

New York, North Carolina and Rhode Island joined in the demand for what became the Second Amendment. The right to bear arms had universal support.

It was the denial of the right of all “the people” to bear arms that supported slavery. The Supreme Court’s notorious Dred Scott decision held that African-Americans could not be regarded as citizens, for otherwise they could hold political meetings and “keep and carry arms wherever they went.” Frederick Douglass advocated Second Amendment rights for all, and Sojourner Truth carried guns in helping slaves to escape.

The Second Amendment had nothing to do with slavery

For 20 years now, a well-meaning law professor has been peddling the fiction that the Second Amendment – guaranteeing the right of Americans to keep and bear arms – was adopted to protect slavery.

www.foxnews.com

But....But....you said the Right to bear arms is only 10 years old.........

When slavery was abolished, the Southern states prohibited blacks from firearm possession. Congress countered with the Freedmen’s Bureau Act of 1866, which protected “the constitutional right to bear arms,” without distinction of color.

A major impetus for adoption of the 14th Amendment was to protect this right from state violation.

Next...you guys are going to say that the 1st Amendment protection of Freedom of Speech was created to support slavery...that the 5th Amendment was created to support slavery.....

Re-writing history is a talent that left wingers have...by destroying the truth of the past, they plan on controlling the future...

The Continental Army won our revolution with help from the French Navy.

A question for you, did southern states send their militia's to fight for our break from Britain?

yes every hear of swamp fox?

 

[2aguy]

So....what are these women supposed to do to keep from being raped...again?

Ministers have apologised unreservedly to rape victims, saying they are “deeply ashamed” that thousands of survivors have been failed on the government’s watch, as they pledged an overhaul of the criminal justice system.

A long-awaited government review into a precipitous decline in rape prosecutions promises sweeping reform of how cases are handled in England and Wales, including targets for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and police to increase the number of prosecutions, and plans to shift the focus of investigations from the victim’s credibility to the perpetrator.



But while charities and victim groups welcomed the apology, they said the measures lacked urgency and were underfunded.

Ministers apologise to rape victims and promise overhaul of system

Charities welcome apology but say plans to reform rape prosecutions in England and Wales lack urgency

www.theguardian.com

 

[2aguy]

What does this woman do, if her rapist decides to rape her again?

Can Candycorn or any of the others who refuse to answer basic questions in their defense of defenseless women answer this question?

A woman who claims she was raped in her own home has said she ‘felt lost, furious and worthless’ when her ‘slam dunk’ case was quietly dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).

Kat Araniello, 44, said one officer was so convinced her alleged attacker would be convicted that she told her ‘she would hand her badge in’ if he walked free. But the prosecution was discontinued three months later after the CPS decided Ms Araniello ‘did not look distressed enough’ in her police interview – hours after the second of two alleged attacks.

Ms Araniello, who has waived her right to anonymity, said: ‘I felt empty when the case was dropped – lost, furious, worthless. I was scared, I didn’t want to go home, I was having nightmares, I was worried about my safety.



‘Nobody prepared me for this being a possibility – I was told he was going to get convicted. I was prepared to give evidence at trial if necessary. So, I left feeling there was no justice in this world.’

Woman 'raped in own home' felt 'lost and worthless' when case was dropped

Kat Araniello said she was told her case was a 'slam dunk' before it was discontinued.

metro.co.uk

Can any of the anti-gunners explain what options this woman has if the rapist decides to return and rape her again?

Since he wasn't convicted the first time?

Any takers?

Please.....explain what she should do next....

 

[Staidhup]

Regardless, as a vet, I have no faith in our local police response time and choose to remain armed. I have a CCP and only carry when appropriate, which is seldom, furthermore maintain two hand guns in our home for defense, and a 12 gauge shotgun in the closet.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You need to provide sources for these numbers

You just asked the King of Links to provide a link!

 

[justinacolmena]

adult males with criminal backgrounds

There's a hooker on the train with a derringer in her purse and she's used it before.