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. AnonymousMay 25, 2022 at 9:49 AM

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

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

  On Saturday, I was looking at Facebook and a person I was friends with, in fact, someone I went to High School with, posted something I knew was wrong. The post claimed that four lawmakers in Colorado decided jail time shouldn’t be mandatory for people who committed sexual assault of children. She claimed they were pedophile protectors. I opened up Perplexity and asked about the situation, and this is the reply I got back: You’re referring to a recent controversy in Colorado over a proposed bill that would change sentencing rules for certain sex crimes. Here are the verified facts to clarify what’s actually happening: • In early 2026, the Colorado House Judiciary Committee held a vote on a sentencing reform bill that aimed to give judges more discretion in certain felony cases. • Some lawmakers voted against an amendment that would have made mandatory prison sentences apply to all sex crimes, including child sexual assault, preferring instead to let judges determine sentences...
2 comments
Read more
  Dove or hawk? Donald Trump ran for President promising to end “endless wars”, avoid new ones, and put American families first. He cast himself as an outsider who would bring peace – the only candidate who wouldn’t drag America into another conflict. The message worked because let's face it, after so many years in Iraq and Afghanistan, America was tired of war. As a country, we were all tired of War. The country wanted stability, not another generation of men and women sent into danger. But once in office, he governed very differently. He governed like a Hawk, quick to threaten, quick to escalate, and willing to use both bombs and tariffs as weapons. What was missing wasn’t just consistency. It was an honor: the sense of responsibility and restraint that should come with the power to risk other people's sons and daughters. This isn’t about ideology. It's about whether someone who promised peace, but repeatedly chooses confrontation, can still claim to be a “dove”. A core...
2 comments
Read more
  The hidden tax. Tariffs cause a hidden tax that never really goes away. I hope that Americans are tired of being told fairy tales about why everything costs more. Our elected officials point fingers. Corporations blame supply chains. Commentators blame inflation. The truth is much simpler and infuriating: tariffs are a tax on ordinary people, and the pain does not stop when the policy ends. It sticks. It lingers. It rarely delivers what we were promised. This is the mess we are in now because of the tariffs imposed by the current administration. Tariffs are sold as strength, as toughness – a way to punish governments and to bring back manufacturing jobs. That pitch works on conservatives who want control, moderates who want fairness, progressives who want domestic industry, and politicians trying to get elected. It is a message built to unite. The policy itself does the opposite. It drains the wallets of the very people that it claims to protect. Here is how it actually works. ...
1 comment
Read more