Racist History of Handgun Bans in America

[44 AMP]

A casual look at world history will show few, if any nations that were not founded with (not ON) those principals being used.

No nation, no people in history, do not have someone that they have not treated as well as they might. The concept that people who are weaker than you should be treated fairly, because they are people the same as you and I, is fairly recent in world history, and far from widespread, even today.

The concept that "might makes right" is as old as mankind. And is still in use in much of the world today.

I think that it is important to know where we came from, to better understand where we are, and where we are going. But we should not automatically ascribe the injustices of the past to the present.

All of us did things as children that we later came to understand were wrong, and most of us feel a degree of shame for those things, and for not knowing better. So it is with nations.

The greatest achievement of our nation is not what we have done wrong, but what we have done right, and the fact that we can recognise the difference. And that we constantly strive to improve.

We have taken many false steps in the past. We will take many in the future. Sometimes we step in it. And it stinks. When the smell finially gets to our noses, we wipe our shoes and step onward.

Not everything in our past was good and right. Not everything was evil and wrong. How we got here matters. What matters more is where we go from here.

[HarrySchell]

There was a sort of carry permits by zip code in Los Angeles County (CA) that showed Beverly Hills and other such places to have the vast bulk of permits.

A sort of violent crime by zip code produced an inverse pattern.

A sort by race by zip code showed a pattern closer to the crime pattern than the distribution of carry permits.

I lost the cite, dullard that I am, but clearly the "may issue" power is being abused here.

[Dragon55]

well said

[Double Naught Spy]

Okay orchidhunter, you still haven't explained the reason why you are reposting an old topic with information not of your own. What was your point? So what if early US gun control laws were racist? What bearing does it have on today? Are you suggesting gun control laws continue to be racist in some manner or did you just feel the need to repost old information for some reason?

If you think there is a reason why we need to be retold of this, feel free to share.

[crashm1]

44 amp said it well. We can point to our current president as proof that we as a nation change. Most of us on here will and do disagree with some portion of the policies of our elected representatives if it's important enough we vote them out during our biennial revolutions.
We are making progress on showing the racist and classist roots of gun control but there are still an awful lot of people to convert. I am working on both my father and father in law and a couple other liberal friends. Ideally that will add 4 or 5 people to our ranks over time. If everyone does that pretty soon we get back to the original vision of the 2nd and maybe the fed monster shrinks a little too.

Unless of course Obama switches tack and starts giving away M-4s and unlimited supplies of ammo. There won't be any deficit shrinking then.

[HarrySchell]

00 Spy,
I am glad this post came up again as it is the first time I have seen it and it helps fill out my history of how gun control has been used by those who would oppress others, from the Klan to bad governments.

And 44 amp is right. What makes us heroes or chumps is what happens tomorrow, the day after and so on. Knowing the past is essential so that as we change in the future, we make change for the good. We have a baseline to measure from, a list of how-to's and don't do's. Don't do's we should try to avoid. It appears to me Mr. Obama and cadre have a bag full of them they want to try anew.

[trigger happy]

Good God! They still Have Slaves in Samelia Too! So what is your point?

learn how to spell Somalia and we'll try to take you seriously

[orchidhunter]

Double Naught Spy, See post #24. orchidhunter

[gc70]

So what if early US gun control laws were racist? What bearing does it have on today?

Many US gun control laws do have racist roots, but that is only the beginning of the story. After overt racism became less acceptable, many of the racially-based laws were changed to discretionary restrictions and prohibitions; the "authorities" entrusted with discretion under those laws "knew" who was acceptable and who was not. Over time, that discretion morphed from a racial basis to an elitist basis; if you were rich, or prominent, or otherwise well-connected, you were acceptable. In the last several decades, we are have made much progress in shifting gun control laws from a basis of arbitrary discretion to transparent and consistent standards.

[Double Naught Spy]

Double Naught Spy, See post #24. orchidhunter

Once again, I will ask YOU. Why did you post it? What is the point you are trying to make?

I fail to understand, as per post 24, what contribution you are making by reposting old information. You apparently want to make a point, so what is it?

[orchidhunter]

Double Naught Spy, Yes, this subject has been discussed before.

But just because it's been discussed once or twice or whatever DOESN'T MEAN THAT EVERYONE, EVERY NEW MEMBER, EVERY NEW ADVOCATE OF THE SHOOTING SPORTS, EVERY NEW GUNOWNER, IS FAMILIAR WITH IT

[pendennis]

We have to remember that slavery was/is not a racial issue. Slavery is about power and economics; the power of one group of people over another. Israelites, Hittites, Eqyptians, Greeks, Romans, Persians all practiced slavery in one form or another; and each of these civilizations was, in turn, enslaved.

African slaves got from the interior of Africa courtesy of tribal warfare. The traders also realized that European traders were interested in cheap labor in the Caribbean islands, and Central and South America.

So, to lay blame to the founding of the United States is disengenuous. Not until slaves were freed in the mid-nineteenth century, did overt racism rear its head. People considered negroes ingnorant and uneducable, because that was their baseline of knowledge. What else would one expect, when the knowledge of Africa was limited to the ocean shores until the mid-19th century?

This discussion is being held in the light of late 20th and early 21st century perspectives. That is a far more egregious sin, than what and how people believed in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. Since none of us were around in 1776, we can't be the judge of those who were.

Only in the last four hundred years has mankind moved toward science and technology societies. In fact, we weren't aware of the origins of the universe until the mid-20th century. Mankind has been around for about 3.5-to-4.5 million years. That's a long time to discover the human genome, viruses, the rocket, and oh yes, the gun.

[Al Norris]

First there is this thread (What is the history of Gun Control in the US ? from April of 1999 - Fully ten years ago.

Then there is this thread ( Racism and the RKBA ... what connection?) from June of 2000.

All the way to this thread (The Racist Origins Of The Current Concealed Carry Gun Laws In California) from June of 2008.

Over all, this topic has been discussed a minimum of once each and every year TFL has been around. So why aren't you posting links to Clayton Cramers compelling work: The Racist Roots of Gun Control (an early abstract is here). Or how about Jim March? He's a member here and has written some excellent articles on the subject.

I guess what I'm trying to say, orchidhunter, is do the research and present the facts, if what you want to do is to help educate our newer members. What you presented in the OP, was good, but... Where were the factual links to substantiate what you were trying to say? Added to this, you left out a whole lot of history and got some of it completely wrong.

The name of the game is Reasoned and Rational Discussion.

[Double Naught Spy]

I'll just default to Antipitas comment.

[Catfishman]

That really shouldn't be too surprising considering what this country was founded upon. Racism, tyranny, genocide and class warfare.

This is a pretty offensive statement. There may be a little truth to it but the offensive part is the phrase "was founded upon". If the ancient history of every country was known-racism, tyranny, genocide, and class warfare could be found everywhere. We live in a free country were anyone has the opportunity to better themselves.
There are historical examples of Americans not having these opportunities. But they aren't what our country was founded on though. Our country was founded on positive things such as majority rule but individual have rights. When I think of America I think of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not Racism, Tyranny and Genocide. This isn't because of ignorance. It's because when I look around I see much more good than bad. I hope the country as a whole isn't shifting to such a negative view of our origins.

BTW-Great post Orchidhunter. Very educational. You can't hold down an armed people for long. Condy Rice has said that she believes that guns protected her family from Clan violence when she was a child.
This is just another angle on the idea that an armed populace will be treated better than an unarmed populace.

[apr1775]

Thank you Catfishman, well said.

If the topic keeps coming up, would the moderators consider making it a sticky?

I think the importance of the whole topic is to illustrate how those in power use disarmament as a way to subjugate those they feel threatened by. Ever notice how "may issue" permits are issued?

[Double Naught Spy]

This is a pretty offensive statement. There may be a little truth to it but the offensive part is the phrase "was founded upon". If the ancient history of every country was known-racism, tyranny, genocide, and class warfare could be found everywhere. We live in a free country were anyone has the opportunity to better themselves.

It is that way now, but it wasn't for the first 150 years. As I recall from my history, the issue of slavery was part of the Constitutional debate of our founding fathers and the decision was made to not make slavery unconstitutional. You may not consider the country as being founded on a racist past, but it really was, by elitist wealthy males who depended on slavery for their standard of living. They considered slavery to be a positive ideal and part of their pursuit of happiness. It was racist and tyrannical. Manifest destiny, while not part of the founding of the country, was a big part of the growth of the county and certainly was racist, tyrranical, and resulted in genocide.

The history of the country may have racist roots like gun laws, but do those really apply today? Nope. So what's the point of making a sticky?

[44 AMP]

the country as being founded on a racist past

Lots of us find that statement offensive, and biased. It represents a specific political view, and one I do not share. Change a single letter, and it changes the statement into something I believe is factual and historically accurate. Our country was not founded on a racist past. Our country was founded in a racist past.

by elitist wealthy males

I never saw this point of view in any of the history texts when I was in school. But that was quite some time ago. Apparently things are viewed differently now?

Yes, many of them were wealthy, but not all. And those elitists risked all they had, and ever would have, in order to create a system based on "all men are created equal", etc. Hardly seems an elitist ideal, that.

It has become fashionable (recently) to denigrate the Founding Fathers, because in their personal lives they were men of their era. The are called racists because some of them owned slaves. Elitists because of,.. I don't really understand why, because they were rich? or because they didn't include a particular group? or ? Focus on males, because women had no public part, implying they were excluded, (anyone who doesn't think the wives of the Founders didn't have any influence has never been married or had a serious relationship.)

They slap these pejoratives on our Founders, because they are only looking at what the Founders did not accomplish, and not at what the did do.

Racist is a fine word. And so popular in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Looking at history, one clearly sees that mankind has been racist from day one. Primitive tribal groups are intensely "racist", except that generally skin color doesn't matter all that much. Other tribes are enemies, because they compete for the same resources. The root word for "stranger" and "enemy" is the same in many old languages.

Tribes became nations, and nations still acted the same way. But the underlying beliefs remained largely unchanged. "those guys on the other side of the hill are different from us. They look different. They talk different. They think different. Heck, the smell different! They are not our friends. They will take from us, kill us if they can. We need to do them first!"

This was (and to some degree still is) the established order of things. One people don't dominate/exterminate another just because they are of different colors, hey do it because one is weaker in numbers, or technology, because they have something the first group wants, and because they can!

Blacks weren't enslaved because they were black, Native Americans weren't driven off their land and killed because they were "redskins". It was done because they were weaker and socially different from those who did it. Claiming it was done because of their skin color ignores the fact that the same things were done to other peoples, by people of the same skin color, in the past. It makes a convenient excuse, and one used by the individuals doing the oppressing, that "they are only ......" and so it was right and proper in their eyes, since their group was superior, that obviously meant that they were "better". The weaker group was only "ignorant pagan savages", and they were "God's chosen" or some variation on that theme.

We have come a long, long way from those days, and we still have a ways to go. Disparaging the Founding Fathers because the were not able to correct all the worlds woes in one fell swoop is just wrong. They were, after all, merely men. To imply that those concepts that they fought, bled, and died for, are somehow less than worthy because those men were not able to implement them completely and instantly is disingenuous.

Nations, like individuals, begin as infants. We learn and grow with time. Pointing out repeatedly how we crapped in our diapers ignores where we are today. Knowing where we came from is important, but where we are is what counts, and where we are going is what matters!

[w_houle]

I think it is rather funny that one of the earlier gun bans was an attempt to remove the cheaper pistols from civilian hands and to try to have people buy the Army and Navy pistols of the day, but yet are currently trying to ban people from using guns used by the Army and Navy.
If someone could help with citation on this, it would be greatly appreciated!

[#18indycolts]

I never saw this point of view in any of the history texts when I was in school.

Exactly, and there is a reason for that. Because american history books are typically written by the winners, not the losers. They want us to be patriotic, and support everything the government does because it's always for the good. Nobody really cares about dead civilians during war, they think its all ok cuz they say its part of war and "civilian casualties are at a minimum." The books in school are ONE sided, its meant to be that way. Dissidence has always been frowned upon, they don't want the general population to have a different view. They want us to believe what they tell us.
Look at a key figure in history. Columbus is portrayed as a hero, even his own holiday. You don't learn in school that he and his men murdered hundreds of thousands of native americans, and enslaved thousands more. Reading books that were written by the oppressed (the blacks, native americans, women, the poor..etc) are fascinating. The history is radically different than what we were taught in school. I forget who said these quotes, but they stick in my mind. "We don't want to hear the words of the people in the white house, we want to hear the words of the people that are picketing the white house." "Democracy is in dissent, democracy is in resistance, it doesn't come from the top, it comes from the bottom.

[Dragon55]

Big Difference in 'in' and 'on'. To say it was founded on racist principles troubles me.

[a7mmnut]

Is this crap still going on? Every tyrannical leader since before Christ has taken up arms against some minority of people--caucasian, middle eastern, Asian, Indian, islanders, African tribes........................


The only difference is most all of them have failed to continually whine about it for hundreds of years.:barf:

-7-

[Double Naught Spy]

I never saw this point of view in any of the history texts when I was in school. But that was quite some time ago. Apparently things are viewed differently now?

Yes, many of them were wealthy, but not all. And those elitists risked all they had, and ever would have, in order to create a system based on "all men are created equal", etc. Hardly seems an elitist ideal, that.

No, the weren't all wealthy, but the vast majority were. In fact, I am having trouble tracking down any who weren't. Holy cow, some even came from nobility. By the time they were participating in the signing of the Declaration of Independence and Consitution, they certainly weren't commoners any longer.

I am glad you decided to refute the racism issue and interject with the "all men are created equal" business, but that slavery and taking land from Native Americans was because the were, what did you say, oh here it is, ...

It was done because they were weaker and socially different from those who did it.

So much for being created equal. Slavery was allowed not because all men were created equal. The government pushed for expansion not because of being gracious liberators of the land, but because they figured they could take what they wanted so long as it fit with their goals. Expansion of the country was not done with any sort of respectful consideration of Native Americans whose land was being taken.

Yeah, y'all can be offended that I don't see the founding of our country through the rose colored glasses of patriotism. I do recognize that our elitist white forefathers, most of whom were quite wealthy, land owners often with considerable holdings, did risk it all, but not everything they did was because they wanted a better country for everybody, otherwise they would not have allowed slavery to continue.

What they did might have eventually turned out pretty good, but it certainly wasn't pretty for millions of people for an extended period of time. You think the founding fathers risked it all for this country? What of the slaves and Native Americans who were forced into compliance at the end of a muzzle, whip, and sword?

Y'all act like your church going mom has been insulted. Just because she goes to church now doesn't mean she didn't raise hell earlier in her life.

[Mike Irwin]

"No, the weren't all wealthy, but the vast majority were. In fact, I am having trouble tracking down any who weren't."

Roger Sherman wasn't particularly wealthy, nor was the Rev. John Witherspoon.

Caesar Rodney I'm not so sure about.

Samuel Adams was by no stretch of the imagination wealthy. When he was elected to Congress his friends pitched together to buy him new clothes so that he presented a good image to the rest of the delegates.

John Morton of Pennsylvania wasn't particuarly wealth, either, I don't think.

Obviously most of these men were considered to be at least prosperous. At that time the entry way into politics at virtually every level was to own land, and to own land meant that you at least had some property. Even Sam Adams owned some property, but mainly through his family and his wife.

[Catfishman]

I completely agree with 44Amp and the only thing I agree with #18IndyColts about is his favorite football player.

We don't want to hear the words of the people in the white house, we want to hear the words of the people that are picketing the white house." "Democracy is in dissent, democracy is in resistance, it doesn't come from the top, it comes from the bottom.

Few people trust powerful politicians less than me. But remember there are lying, cheating, ignorant fools at the top and the bottom of society. Just because someone pickets and questions power doesn't make them wise.

Nations, like individuals, begin as infants. We learn and grow with time. Pointing out repeatedly how we crapped in our diapers ignores where we are today. Knowing where we came from is important, but where we are is what counts, and where we are going is what matters!

Extremely well put.