Dave Hardy: Background On Adjudication Of The Second Amendment
BY Herschel Smith5 years, 2 months ago
As background for his paper, this makes good listening.
It couldn’t ever have been any other way, really. As I’ve pointed out before so many times, guns were ubiquitous in colonial America, a tool, a means to survive, a means of defense of home and hearth. The right was seen as God-given, because it is so.
In the colonies, availability of hunting and need for defense led to armament statues comparable to those of the early Saxon times. In 1623, Virginia forbade its colonists to travel unless they were “well armed”; in 1631 it required colonists to engage in target practice on Sunday and to “bring their peeces to church.” In 1658 it required every householder to have a functioning firearm within his house and in 1673 its laws provided that a citizen who claimed he was too poor to purchase a firearm would have one purchased for him by the government, which would then require him to pay a reasonable price when able to do so. In Massachusetts, the first session of the legislature ordered that not only freemen, but also indentured servants own firearms and in 1644 it imposed a stern 6 shilling fine upon any citizen who was not armed.
When the British government began to increase its military presence in the colonies in the mid-eighteenth century, Massachusetts responded by calling upon its citizens to arm themselves in defense. One colonial newspaper argued that it was impossible to complain that this act was illegal since they were “British subjects, to whom the privilege of possessing arms is expressly recognized by the Bill of Rights” while another argued that this “is a natural right which the people have reserved to themselves, confirmed by the Bill of Rights, to keep arms for their own defense”. The newspaper cited Blackstone’s commentaries on the laws of England, which had listed the “having and using arms for self preservation and defense” among the “absolute rights of individuals.” The colonists felt they had an absolute right at common law to own firearms.
Their laws about children and guns were strict: every family was required to own a gun, to carry it in public places (especially when going to church) and to train children in firearms proficiency. On the first Thanksgiving Day, in 1621, the colonists and the Indians joined together for target practice; the colonist Edward Winslow wrote back to England that “amongst other recreations we exercised our arms, many of the Indians coming amongst us.”
In fact, when congregants showed up to worship without weaponry, it was most often the pastor who collected the tax for going unarmed. The notion that the founders would have made sure to prohibit the FedGov from interfering with state militias and fail to incorporate that into protection of individuals is preposterous on its face.
In order to understand the second amendment, you must first understand the milieu in which it was written. An understanding of unvarnished and unbiased history is what most “scholars” today lack.
On September 25, 2019 at 12:57 am, Tom762 said:
Herschel, were you in Phoenix last weekend? If so, I am thoroughly bummed I did not get to meet you.
Tom762
On September 25, 2019 at 9:45 am, Herschel Smith said:
@Tom,
No, I found this on Dave’s web site. I hope you were able to make it up to the red rock around Sedona to visit for a while. I’m not fond of Phoenix, but I am of Sedona.
On September 25, 2019 at 11:40 am, MTHead said:
Justifiable paranoia of a overbearing federal government can also be found in the 3rd. amendment. (If one is looking for congressional intent), in the 2A.
But, then again. If your so brainwashed you read right over the “shall not be infringed” part. It’s a waste of time to argue with you.
There is no argument to be made against the 2A from a historical perspective. Anyone trying to do so shows only how ignorant they are.
On September 25, 2019 at 12:36 pm, June J said:
The communists aren’t ignorant..but the people they are trying to control through the indoctrination, I mean, education system, political system and media certainly can be considered to be ignorant.
On September 25, 2019 at 8:52 pm, MTHead said:
Stalin called them “useful Idiots”, June.