Gun Shows on C-SPAN 3

[DaleA]

Seems C-SPAN 3 is getting into guns tonight. Here's there schedule:
8:00PM EST-History of Gun Rights in America
9:03PM EST-U.S. Gun Rights & Regulations
10:04PM EST-NRA Origins & 1930s Politics
10:21PM EST-American Artifacts National Firearms Museum
11:14PM EST-History Bookshelf Adam Winkler, "Gunfight"
11:58PM EST-Lectures in History First & Second Amendment Court Cases

Note that "Lectures in History First & Second Amendment Court Cases" is almost entirely about the 1st Amendment.

In discussing the 2nd Amendment the lecturer seemed to be somewhat outraged about a case in Florida where a mom had taken her sons guns away because she thought he was unbalanced. (the picture the lecturer painted indicated that the mom was in the right morally if not legally).

The thing that irritated me was the lecturer was upset because the guy had been arrested many times for gun related crimes but was still allowed to own guns because the arrests had failed to result in any convictions.

Uhmmm, yeah, IMhO if you aren't convicted of a crime you shouldn't go to jail or lose your rights. You know, innocent until proven guilty. Just being arrested for something doesn't mean you did it.

Another show, I think it was "History of Gun Rights in America" had author Patrick J. Charles (Armed in America). I believe he puts forth the idea that no one in history ever thought the 2nd Amendment applied to individuals until the Heller decision. (sigh)

I'm interested in what the NRA show will be like and also interested in Firearms Museum show to see if they will talk about any neat stuff.

I do wonder why C-SPAN 3 is doing a solid block of shows on guns. I'll certainly admit it's a controversial topic and maybe they're doing it just to bring in viewers.

[DaleA]

I should have realized you don't have to watch this on TV it's available on line:

https://www.c-span.org/series/?ahtv

[5whiskey]

Another show, I think it was "History of Gun Rights in America" had author Patrick J. Charles (Armed in America). I believe he puts forth the idea that no one in history ever thought the 2nd Amendment applied to individuals until the Heller decision. (sigh)

What I took from what he said is that pro gun rights groups tend to imply that it was unanimous throughout American history that the 2nd amendment afforded an individual right, when that isn’t exactly true. While I would argue he is partly right, in that it was not completely unanimous through American history, I would say that he greatly exaggerated historical support for restricting private ownership of firearms prior to the 20th century. One of his arguments went back toward concealed carry, where many Eastern states had laws against concealed carry that are nearly as old as the country. The problem with that logic is a law against concealed carry, and a law against firearms ownership, are two completely different creatures. He purposefully conflated the two a couple of times.

In all I was impressed, generally, by the scholar who countered Patrick Charles. While I don’t think he would he would agree with our views on 2nd Amendment rights, he also is pretty adamant that extreme gun control measures probably won’t be constitutional.