Skip to main content

 

 I have stated many times that the Second Amendment to the Constitution is the most twisted sentence in the Constitution. It is just one sentence. Most people call it “the right to bear arms”. Well, it does say that but that is not all that it says.  But, most people including many in our courts just skip over the first part of the sentence and pretend it does not exist.   The Amendment reads “ A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”. You see just one sentence that has been twisted into what we have today. It is such a big topic that this will probably take a couple of postings to cover.

Why are the Bill of Rights amendments, as they are called, added to the Constitution and not in the main document? They are put there as a series of compromises to the original Constitution so it would be ratified by all the States. To say that the founding fathers put it there is a false statement in my opinion. The writers of the Constitution did not include it in the original document. Five States ratified the  Constitution without any amendments. I know that there are many people that say it was put there so States could rebel against the tyrannical federal government. I have seen  there are historians that do believe that and what were they protecting themselves, from the tyrannical government imposing? James Madison wrote that a militia could stand up to the Federal  Army. They had just created the government so I can’t believe that it was to destroy what they just created. What was James Madison and slave owner afraid of what the federal government would do?  What issue divided the nation even back then that some States would be afraid would force them to do away with? Could that issue have been slavery?

At the time of the writing of the Constitution the country was divided by the major issue of slavery. Do you know that when the Preamble to the Constitution was written many of the framers of the Constitution did not believe that slaves were people so when they wrote “We The People” so boldly they are not talking about Black people. Black people were property not people. Even free Blacks were not considered free people. “We the People” really did mean we the White people. The Constitution  established a Federal Army but did not mention anything on the State level. Before the establishment of a Continental Army during the Revolution we only had militias. To defeat the British we needed to create an actual army that was regulated and trained,  not just a bunch of farmers running around with guns. So the Constitution established that. A militia was not very good for the general defense of an opposing trained army. Do you know what militias were good at? They were good at enforcing slavery. As I have researched this I have come across  militias that were called Slave Patrol Militias. They were very common among the slave states and in a few of them they are mandatory. Google that and see what you come up with. Patrick Henry stated very bluntly that a State militia was needed to stop an insurrection of slaves. He did not believe that Congress would come to their aid if there was a slave revolt.

In 1780 there were more slaves in South Carolina than White people. It is hard to fathom that that over half the population was made up of slaves. The population of all the blacks in the slave states was between 30 and 40 percent during the first 5 censuses from 1780 to 1820. The only ways to control that many people had to have been by force and I am sure it was. These Slave Patrol Militias did regular inspections of all the plantations so they could put down a disturbance before one even started.  There were no police force, what they were dependant on was a local militia sanctioned by the State to put down an insurrection of slaves. Slave Patrol Militias were like the first police force of the south. Were there insurrections by slaves, the answer would be yes. One was Virginia in 1831 led by a slave named Nat Turner. To think that blacks were just willing slaves is well, just a lie. I have put a link to American Slave Insurrections that documents many of them.

So far in my research I see that the Second  Amendment was more meant for a well regulated local militia than it is was for people to carry arms. It has also reinforced my attitude that it really is a very racist amendment to the Constitution. Could the Slave Patrol Militias be the early version of what will become our Police Departments? I would bet that would vary from one section of the country to another. It is a very interesting debate. I will continue this with my next post.

I have posted some links to articles that I found interesting on the subject.

 

 

 

Second Amendment

Second Amendment Annotated

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The Second Amendment Was Ratified to Preserve Slavery (truthout.org)

Slave-patrols and the Second Amendment: How Fears of Abolition empowered the idea of an armed militia | The Milwaukee Independent

Slave, Free Black, and White Population, 1780-1830 (umbc.edu)

Slave Insurrections - Gateway Arch National Park (U.S. National Park Service) (nps.gov)

American Slave Insurrections - American Renaissance (amren.com)

History of Police in the US: How Policing Has Evolved Since the 1600s (insider.com)

The Origins of Policing in the United States | Snopes.com

Comments

  1. Indeed. I hope it is ok for me to quote you...will give credit

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

  In 1776 we declared our independence against a Monarch that was above the law. I wonder what John Adams would think about what the Supreme Court just ruled. I believe, what the Supreme Court just ruled is contrary to what the intention of the men that wrote and approved our Declaration of Independence.   This Fourth of July it would be a good idea if everyone would start out by reading the Declaration of Independence. The words that always have always stuck with me are “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Do those words still hold true? The three branches of the Government get their just powers from the people. Not the rich people. Not the Republicans. Not the Democrats. It is...
This is my continued search on whether Trump has the Character to be President. A person I know stated “His character matters bc it is in the character I believe he has the leadership, knowledge, wisdom, experience, compassion, integrity that will lead us on the path towards a more safe, secure, healthy, prosperous, free world than the direction we are headed.” My last blog looked at his character as integrity from a legal standpoint before he even was elected President. From a legal standpoint there is no way I would have thought he had the integrity to be President. Now I will look at some of his Moral Integrity and Compassion that should be there from the man that sits in the White House.  I have to say something about Donald Trump, he sure is a believer in the institution of marriage. He likes marriage so much that he has said “I do” three times. What his problem with marriage is the actual vow that he has to take. You know that love, honor, and cherish until death do us part. ...
  It is a new game but it is still being played just like the old one. Biden has chosen not to run for a 2 nd term and it looks like Kamala Harris will get the Democratic nomination. This drastically changes what the election will look like. Instead of two old white guys facing one another we will have a woman that is 19 years younger than the Republican nominee Donald Trump. Donald Trump went from saying Biden was too old and senile even though he was only three years younger than Biden to the old guy that appears to be too old and senile. Since Biden’s debate performance he had been under a considerable amount of pressure to drop out of the race. I have admitted in a past post when Biden came on stage he looked frail and in the beginning of the debate Trump’s tactics really confused Biden. He did get better as the debate went on but it was too late for that. The first 5 minutes was all that anyone remembered. Trump used a debating technique that is called “Gish Gallop” where a...